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: Agricultural Reform
Details
Submitted by[?]: Protectorate Party
Status[?]: defeated
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: June 2198
Description[?]:
| In an effort to reduce large scale distribution needs of agribusiness and provide a more ecofriendly impact of our farms, we propose a localized agricultural policy. The goals are to have large numbers of small farms which distribute to the local area. The increase in farms provides a competitive market, to aid in diversity and market forces. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government agricultural and farming subsidies policy.
Old value:: The government allows local governments to craft agricultural subsidy policy.
Current: The government subsidises the operations of low-income farming families.
Proposed: Agricultural crops which are considered beneficial to the enviroment or to the continued ecological safety of the state are subsidized.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning farm size.
Old value:: Farm size regulations are determined by local governments.
Current: Farm size is not regulated.
Proposed: Farms that grow too large are broken up and the land redistributed.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 18:17:32, March 08, 2006 CET | From | Social Democrat League | To | Debating the Agricultural Reform |
| Message | 1) Support. 2) As our nation becomes more and more educated, a decline in rural farmers is apparent. If large farming companies become the only way to provide Malivians with enough local products, why not? One company won't be able to conquer the entire farming market, so there will still be plenty of competition. |
| Date | 22:12:41, March 08, 2006 CET | From | Malivianese Militarist Party | To | Debating the Agricultural Reform |
| Message | We believe local governments know agricultural policy the best. Why do we as the national government get to decide what is beneficial in Washibar or Walkunia? While we agree, farms should not grow too large, we trust the local governments to maintain this balance of power so that it can not be abused at the national level. |
| Date | 23:37:11, March 08, 2006 CET | From |  Protectorate Party | To | Debating the Agricultural Reform |
| Message | And how could it be abused at a national level? We see it easier to abuse locally, exceptions for those who contribute to a campaign, or have friends in the right places. A national program will receive more attention and thus be harder to manipulate. Our issue is to reduce the dependancy on a distribution network for food which is both fragile and wasteful. Disruptions would cause massive famine as one area is feeding most of our nation. It is better to distribute the agriculture to many locations to prevent these issues, and should there be some failures or shortages, there are many other areas to draw from which would make it easier to overcome. |
| Date | 01:01:34, March 09, 2006 CET | From | Malivia Democratic Party | To | Debating the Agricultural Reform |
| Message | 1 Against 2 Definitely against sounds like a communist move |
| Date | 03:58:00, March 09, 2006 CET | From | Protectorate Party | To | Debating the Agricultural Reform |
| Message | communism places the farms in government hands, we leave it in private hands. |
| Date | 11:10:56, March 09, 2006 CET | From | Malivia Democratic Party | To | Debating the Agricultural Reform |
| Message | Proposed: Farms that grow too large are broken up and the land redistributed. Thats not private hands. That means the government steps in and redistributes the land if the farm gets too big. |
| Date | 12:07:18, March 09, 2006 CET | From | Free Progress Alliance | To | Debating the Agricultural Reform |
| Message | Just to note, communism does not put the farms in government hands, that would be state socialism. Communism effectively has no state to take ownership on the farms and instead the farm would be owned collectively by the labourers. That all said, we will not vote in favour of this bill as we see this as an unnecessary intervention on behalf of the government. Apart from the fact that competition laws and local government policy prevent a monopoly from assuming control of agriculture, we must also recognise that some farms need to take into account the advantage of economies of scale; large farms typically have greater productivity, marketing and general prosperity than smaller farms. |
| Date | 16:32:43, March 09, 2006 CET | From | Social Democrat League | To | Debating the Agricultural Reform |
| Message | I'm not sure the Protectorates see Article 2 the same way we do. We think it means that farms that are too large are broken up in to smaller farms and given to different workers. You seem to think we would simply make the farm smaller and place more farms somewhere else. |
| Date | 17:15:23, March 09, 2006 CET | From | Malivianese Militarist Party | To | Debating the Agricultural Reform |
| Message | There is more room for national corruption as there are fewer people involved in national politics. Furthermore, there is also more authority. So the national government can favor one group over another without really seeing any repercussion as national politics is harder to get into than local politics. The Protectorates are disillusioned with privatism and land reform in this instance will prove only detrimental to the delicate balance of small farms vs. big farms and Federal vs. Local authority. |
| Date | 17:57:48, March 10, 2006 CET | From | Free Progress Alliance | To | Debating the Agricultural Reform |
| Message | We are all for article 1, but the forced break-up of large farms is too impractical to secure our vote. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 80 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 221 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: When your party holds the foreign affairs department, you can create new treaties. However, before writing anything new, it is a good idea to search for existing treaties which already accomplish what you desire. |
| Random quote: "The most radical revolutionary will become a conservative the day after the revolution." - Hannah Arendt |