Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: June 5461
Next month in: 00:05:52
Server time: 15:54:07, March 29, 2024 CET
Currently online (2): Caoimhean | SE33 | Record: 63 on 23:13:00, July 26, 2019 CET

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: The Protectorate Policy on Purchases

Details

Submitted by[?]: Protectorate Party

Status[?]: passed

Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.

Voting deadline: April 2195

Description[?]:

Our regulations are constraining our system and imposing the wrong morals on our people.

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date22:44:38, March 02, 2006 CET
FromMalivianese Militarist Party
ToDebating the The Protectorate Policy on Purchases
MessageWe agree with all but Article 1.

Sometimes, standards are necessary in regards to advertising.

Date23:20:20, March 02, 2006 CET
FromSocial Democrat League
ToDebating the The Protectorate Policy on Purchases
Message1) Acceptable.
2) Licensed sale outlets are easier to control, alcohol is still a dangerous substance.
3) We made our opinion on this proposal clear in the Health Reform Act.
4) When we changed this law, the restrictions were stated as being warnings on the packets and general quality control of the products. Why change this?

Date18:27:38, March 03, 2006 CET
FromMalivianese Militarist Party
ToDebating the The Protectorate Policy on Purchases
MessageIn response to the SDL on Article 4, that is a blatant lie. It was changed by the IRP and they never gave any reasons. Please recall that we had debated about what these "restrictions" would entail; however, they were never given before vote.

It was only until after a vote that the IRP messages us privately in response to our inquiry and they said:
-----------------------------------------------------
Message Details
Date 03:49:38, February 21, 2006 CET
From Imperial Republican Party
To Malivianese Militarist Party
Message Malivianese Militarist Party:

What does the IRP intend with regard to restrictions of the sale of tobacco?

Just like a some proof of being an adult and such.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date21:30:31, March 03, 2006 CET
FromSocial Democrat League
ToDebating the The Protectorate Policy on Purchases
MessageDuring the debate:

SDL: "I guess they are restrictions on the tobacco companies themselves, fe only a certain amount of a certain harmful product is allowed in tobacco products, health warnings on the packets, etc."

MMP: "If they are just health warnings on the packets, we can agree."

Doesn't this count then?

Date21:57:24, March 03, 2006 CET
From Protectorate Party
ToDebating the The Protectorate Policy on Purchases
MessageIf the SDP will support the bill otherwise we will remove this provision, we simply wished not to impose laws on who or where they could be sold.
These packaging and content are acceptable.

Date22:24:42, March 03, 2006 CET
FromSocial Democrat League
ToDebating the The Protectorate Policy on Purchases
MessageWe'll support it if article 4 is removed, yes. If what we said the restrictions were, are true. Otherwise we don't see the difference between the current law and the new one, the IRP said it was just identification of adulthood, but that's the law anyway.

Date02:39:51, March 04, 2006 CET
FromMalivianese Militarist Party
ToDebating the The Protectorate Policy on Purchases
MessageNo! Whatever parties say the law says is NOT admissible in court as they were never part of the actual wording of the law duly passed by the Assembly.

Date10:14:37, March 04, 2006 CET
FromMalivia Democratic Party
ToDebating the The Protectorate Policy on Purchases
MessageAgree with some of the articles don't with some but will vote for because I can always propose to change the others I want fixed back.

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
      

Total Seats: 187

no
 

Total Seats: 36

abstain
  

Total Seats: 36


Random fact: Moderation will not implement nation renaming requests where the proposed name does not comply with the requirements set out in the Nation Renaming Guide: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=6364

Random quote: "Idealism is fine; but as it approaches reality, the cost becomes prohibitive." - William F. Buckley, Jr.

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 79