We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: DEBATE: Second Chamber of Parliament?
Details
Submitted by[?]: Union Hosienne-Démocrate (UHD)
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This bill is a resolution. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: October 4326
Description[?]:
| OOC: There was an abortive attempt at doing this in Dorvik (where I was last) and I would like to bring it back considering that we have more RP here than they did at the time. I think that a consulting body could be RP'd as the Second Chamber of the parliament (we can call it whatever we want). My thoughts are that this is not to be your typical, boring second chamber, but instead, something really unique. So, several suggestions: 1. Since it would be a "consulting body", why not make it like the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference wherein "The organisation consists of delegates from a range of political parties and organisations, as well as independent members. The proportion of representation of the various parties is determined by established convention, negotiated between the parties." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_People%27s_Political_Consultative_Conference) - this could be local governments choosing who is there, which leaves the door open for independents but it provides some change over time. This is somewhat similar to what you speak of only a bit more "representative" than just 'whoever got the most seats', after all, consultative would see rather apolitical. 2. Or, how about "functional constituencies" as they have Hong Kong & Macao wherein "professional or special interest groups involved in the electoral process. Eligible voters in a functional constituency may include natural persons as well as other designated legal entities such as organisations and corporations." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_constituency_(Hong_Kong) ) ... this could mean that the big corporations are represented there, or whole industries (i.e. Hotels, Insurance, transport, fisheries & agriculture, etc), urban areas and rural areas, charities, professional organizations (i.e. American Medical Association, National Association of Realtors, National Bar Association (lawyers, not saloons)), unions, Democratic Workers Councils & cooperatives, higher education, university students, ethnic groups, etc. 3. Or, a consultative council that is similar to those seen in the Middle East. Wherein "members appear to be chosen from different provinces, representing three significant groups: (A)religious establishment, (B)bureaucracy and the (C)business groups. They seem to be followers of both conservative and liberal ideologies, and are usually highly educated and experienced people who are regarded as experts in their fields. Mostly academics, retired senior officers, ex-civil servants and businessmen have been chosen as the members of the council." 4. Another alternative way of determining Functional Constituency used in Ireland for their Senate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vocational_Panel 5. What about making it a group that meets every 4 or 5 years or so, like the National People's Congress in PRChina. It could be voted through an electoral college system, or a tiered electoral system (i.e. a multi-party Soviet-style), or appointed by state or county legislatures, etc. It's job could be to give a 'grade' to the current government or federal legislature and propose subjects that need to be addressed and so forth. Does any of this sound interesting? For now I'll just leave it here and wait for your response. |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 08:18:34, July 13, 2017 CET | From |  Grand Parti Libertaire de Kanjor | To | Debating the DEBATE: Second Chamber of Parliament? |
| Message | I'd be very supportive of this. I too tried to introduce an upper chamber to my last nation (Lourenne), but that was also pushed aside. I really like the idea of a slightly different format, but I guess my only qualm is how this will work in game. Also, I am planning to introduce RP for State Governments. I think this would be interesting because then the states could determine policy on issues designated "local governments decide...". |
| Date | 11:40:03, July 13, 2017 CET | From | Parti Socialist | To | Debating the DEBATE: Second Chamber of Parliament? |
| Message | OOC sorry but can someone tell me what RP means? My mother language ain't English. But I try my best |
| Date | 15:01:40, July 13, 2017 CET | From | Union Hosienne-Démocrate (UHD) | To | Debating the DEBATE: Second Chamber of Parliament? |
| Message | OOC: "Role Play" ... you basically already do this through the newspapers, etc. |
| Date | 15:15:06, July 13, 2017 CET | From | Union Hosienne-Démocrate (UHD) | To | Debating the DEBATE: Second Chamber of Parliament? |
| Message | OOC: "... my only qualm is how this will work in game." Well, we will have to hammer that out. Since the Second Chamber would just be consultative (in other words, it is a collection of interest groups), it doesn't matter at all what we say or do. But the idea is that you could take a character representing something and use it to "advise" the Senate. I like the idea of having it every few years so that way the RP is at one time and it doesn't muddle things up the rest of the time. I am inspired by your "Manifesto" of what you wish to accomplish. The Second Chamber could "advise" your team on this, some groups supporting and others opposing. In my Three-Year Plan mentions "pillarisation" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pillarisation / https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proporz), I think that this Second Chamber would be a good way to engage in that although it wouldn't be necessary. Alternatively, the Second Chamber could be a place where politics are left aside and it is solely focused on what Kanjor needs. We will have to discuss it all. |
| Date | 15:49:37, July 13, 2017 CET | From | Parti Socialist | To | Debating the DEBATE: Second Chamber of Parliament? |
| Message | And how is this going to work practically? |
| Date | 23:15:40, July 13, 2017 CET | From | Social Canrialliaise Unity Front | To | Debating the DEBATE: Second Chamber of Parliament? |
| Message | OOC: I like the consultative alternative better than "what Kanjor needs". It fits better into parliamentarism than the latter one which reminds me a bit about technocracy. |
| Date | 10:20:54, July 15, 2017 CET | From | Grand Parti Libertaire de Kanjor | To | Debating the DEBATE: Second Chamber of Parliament? |
| Message | I think that the best plan would be to follow the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, but rather than negotiating, the number of seats available is already worked out in advance. I.e. the largest party would always get x amount of seats, the second largest y amount of seats, and so on and so forth. The only time these figures would change is if another party entered the country. We could also reserve some of these seats for independents. So if we decided to have the same amount of seats in the upper chamber as well (150), they could say hold 25 of them, leaving the other 125 to be split between the political parties. I think by doing this we can guarantee that cross party support is required in the Upper Chamber, which will reduce the amount of political play in return for a more cooperative House. Obviously I am still only brainstorming, but I think a possible configuration of the set out seats in advance could be: 1st Party: 50 2nd Party: 30 3rd Party: 20 4th Party: 15 5th Party: 10 Independents: 25 Total: 150 |
| Date | 21:26:40, September 26, 2017 CET | From |   Moderation | To | Debating the DEBATE: Second Chamber of Parliament? |
| Message | OOC: Moved to vote for archiving purposes. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |
| yes | Total Seats: 0 | |
| no | Total Seats: 650 | |
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: "Kubrk" is a Jelbic word that has the colloquial meaning "old man" or "geezer". |
| Random quote: "It depends upon what the meaning of the word 'is' is." - Bill Clinton |