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: Cabinet M. White I - Animal Welfare Standard Reform
Details
Submitted by[?]: Green Progressive Alliance [PAG]
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: December 4400
Description[?]:
| Mss. President, I am proud to announce the first new cabinet legislation in the form of the Animal Welfare Standard Reform. We should all agree on the need to treat our animals as best as we possibly can. Therefor, we propose intensifying the regulations about the treatment of animals. We propose to enter high standards of animal welfare in our constitution. I want to invite the opposition to vote yes on this proposal, since I assume that no party in our Parliament can disagree on protecting our domestic and lifestock animals. I see forward to the vote with confidence in the politicians of Gaduridos! Kind regards, Bruce Lefwood Minister of Environment and Tourism |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on animal welfare in livestock farming.
Old value:: The government enforces moderate animal welfare standards.
Current: The government enforces high animal welfare standards.
Proposed: The government enforces high animal welfare standards.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 05:46:11, May 29, 2018 CET | From | NLP | To | Debating the Cabinet M. White I - Animal Welfare Standard Reform |
| Message | The coalition's first move is to change animal welfare. Meanwhile, the opposition pushes for major government re-structural reforms. Observe, ladies and gentlemen, the efficacy of the coalition government! |
| Date | 06:48:18, May 29, 2018 CET | From | NLP | To | Debating the Cabinet M. White I - Animal Welfare Standard Reform |
| Message | We will like to remind all parties voting in favor that this is a constitutional amendment, and would require 2/3rds of legislature to remove or enact. Also, enforcing higher animal welfare standards would directly hurt our agricultural sector. Is the government so naive as to think that cheaper products from other nations would not be bought by the consumers of our nation? We would not improve animal welfare, but destroy our local agricultural sector. Trading our jobs and prosperity for those of other nations, for no real gain in animal welfare. We ask all parties reevaluate their positions - do they stand with the agricultural sector - the jobs and prosperity brought by that? Or do they stand for a bill of rhetoric by the GPA, which will have no real effect on animal welfare, since our citizens are not fools, and will simply buy foreign produce? |
| Date | 07:10:25, May 29, 2018 CET | From | Progressive Conservative Party | To | Debating the Cabinet M. White I - Animal Welfare Standard Reform |
| Message | PCP is operating under the assumption that this is a regular bill not a constitutional amendment. We assumed GPA's use of the word "constitution" was referring to changing our country's general body of laws and not changing The Constitution of the Federal Union of Gaduridos. We ask GPA to provide clarification as we are not sure if such policy belongs in a document that has historically been used only to provide instruction on government operations rather than to legislate on policy issues. Laura Esposito PCP Parliamentary Spokesperson |
| Date | 07:13:48, May 29, 2018 CET | From | NLP | To | Debating the Cabinet M. White I - Animal Welfare Standard Reform |
| Message | To the PCP: It doesn't, as there have been numerous constitutional amendments in the past that affect policy on wide-scope, but not a single policy. |
| Date | 07:16:57, May 29, 2018 CET | From | Progressive Conservative Party | To | Debating the Cabinet M. White I - Animal Welfare Standard Reform |
| Message | Is there a list of these policy-related constiutional amendments somewhere? Laura Esposito PCP Parliamentary Spokesperson |
| Date | 07:19:33, May 29, 2018 CET | From | NLP | To | Debating the Cabinet M. White I - Animal Welfare Standard Reform |
| Message | http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=512223 http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=509167 |
| Date | 07:21:17, May 29, 2018 CET | From | NLP | To | Debating the Cabinet M. White I - Animal Welfare Standard Reform |
| Message | Technically, actually, due to our current budget, we are in violation of constitutional amendment 16. |
| Date | 07:36:07, May 29, 2018 CET | From | Progressive Conservative Party | To | Debating the Cabinet M. White I - Animal Welfare Standard Reform |
| Message | OOC: It'd be very helpful if we had a list with links to all the amendments in the bills under debate section. Otherwise, I'm not sure how parties that weren't around when the amendments passed are supposed to be aware of them. |
| Date | 07:42:01, May 29, 2018 CET | From | NLP | To | Debating the Cabinet M. White I - Animal Welfare Standard Reform |
| Message | OOC: We did have one, but they all got archived when the parties of my era (God, that makes me sound old) all went inactive. Want to make one, or should I? To my knowledge, those were the only ones ever passed, but I might have to check. |
| Date | 07:57:00, May 29, 2018 CET | From | Progressive Conservative Party | To | Debating the Cabinet M. White I - Animal Welfare Standard Reform |
| Message | OOC: Haha I think I'll leave it you to make. You definitely know the history better than I do. |
| Date | 08:21:05, May 29, 2018 CET | From | NLP | To | Debating the Cabinet M. White I - Animal Welfare Standard Reform |
| Message | OOC: I've messaged mods to see if we can simply unarchive them |
| Date | 14:58:22, May 29, 2018 CET | From | Green Progressive Alliance [PAG] | To | Debating the Cabinet M. White I - Animal Welfare Standard Reform |
| Message | CLARIFY: this Bill is a normal Bill, not a constitutional amendment. The wording was just to get a nice message across. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 234 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 66 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: It is the collective responsibility of the players in a nation to ensure all currently binding RP laws are clearly outlined in an OOC reference bill in the "Bills under debate" section of the nation page. Confusion should not be created by displaying only some of the current RP laws or displaying RP laws which are no longer current. |
| Random quote: "The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." - Thomas Jefferson |