Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: January 5461
Next month in: 00:52:01
Server time: 19:07:58, March 28, 2024 CET
Currently online (9): albaniansunited | ameerali | friedrich3 | hexaus18 | hexaus19 | HopesFor | lulus | reformist2024 | Tayes3 | 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: Historical Compromise, 2209

Details

Submitted by[?]: KSP - Kazulia Socialdemokratisk Parti

Status[?]: defeated

Votes: This bill asks for an amendement to the Constitution. It will require two-thirds of the legislature to vote in favor. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.

Voting deadline: April 2210

Description[?]:

This bill asks for the ratification of the <a href="viewtreaty.php?treatyid=155">The Axis Agreement</a>. If this treaty is ratified, it becomes binding and will define national law.

It includes also the creation of the Kazulianisk Statsförbund Republik.

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date12:39:50, April 03, 2006 CET
FromKonservativ Monarkistpartiet
ToDebating the Historical Compromise, 2209
MessageWheres the compromise? There 6 things you want, one thing you don't want, not much of a compromise.

Date15:04:19, April 03, 2006 CET
FromKSP - Kazulia Socialdemokratisk Parti
ToDebating the Historical Compromise, 2209
MessageActually, we have the Axis agreement on a side, the Republic on the other: as KLP had suggested on precedent proposal.

Date17:44:40, April 03, 2006 CET
FromNorthern Light
ToDebating the Historical Compromise, 2209
MessageThis agreement was already discussed in lenght, and the major party already approved it.

Date18:24:54, April 03, 2006 CET
FromKlassiskt Liberala Partiet
ToDebating the Historical Compromise, 2209
Messagethis is not what we agreed to.

Date18:55:07, April 03, 2006 CET
FromKSP - Kazulia Socialdemokratisk Parti
ToDebating the Historical Compromise, 2209
MessagePlease?

Date19:03:08, April 03, 2006 CET
FromKSP - Kazulia Socialdemokratisk Parti
ToDebating the Historical Compromise, 2209
Message@KLP:

If you mean that the names are not what you propose, this is right. But since the Axis is already on the desk, we can't propose another law which contains this treaty (game mech) :(

Also, you had removed your precedent proposal, and we not remember which were the titles proposed. Suggestion: vote yes on this (since elections are too close in order to put another law) and put another law with your titles.

Date22:39:25, April 03, 2006 CET
FromKlassiskt Liberala Partiet
ToDebating the Historical Compromise, 2209
MessageNo. You tried to screw us over. Not any longer.

Date23:22:43, April 03, 2006 CET
FromKSP - Kazulia Socialdemokratisk Parti
ToDebating the Historical Compromise, 2209
MessageSincerly, no. If you put on the desk your proposal, we will approve it.

Date23:59:14, April 03, 2006 CET
FromKSP - Kazulia Socialdemokratisk Parti
ToDebating the Historical Compromise, 2209
MessageAnd since your formerly coalition parties will return to have a greater weigth on next elections, this compromise will be never possible, since they will not accept the creation of a Republic. Now we are about 5-1, next election will be 5-3 and it will be moore difficult to do.

Date00:08:23, April 04, 2006 CET
FromKlassiskt Liberala Partiet
ToDebating the Historical Compromise, 2209
MessageYou obviously tried to fool us, there is no point in denying it. It is your own fault this compromise will fail.

Date00:14:05, April 04, 2006 CET
FromKSP - Kazulia Socialdemokratisk Parti
ToDebating the Historical Compromise, 2209
MessageIf are scared by your formerly coalition parties, its your problem. We had already put our hands for the support of your possible modified law: make it and put on vote and we will support it.

Date00:31:14, April 04, 2006 CET
FromKlassiskt Liberala Partiet
ToDebating the Historical Compromise, 2209
MessageThe axis treaty was part of our trade, but since you try to introduce the treaty with these other proposals, you were just trying to avoid any compromise at all. But we are not that stupid.

Date04:31:34, April 04, 2006 CET
FromBlack Magic
ToDebating the Historical Compromise, 2209
MessageAnd we are not particularly interested in an Axis agreement, nor do we consider a concentration of such power (Article 4) a healthy choice at this time.

Date09:01:26, April 04, 2006 CET
FromKSP - Kazulia Socialdemokratisk Parti
ToDebating the Historical Compromise, 2209
Message@KLP: then you want that we propose 2 laws with the compromise splitted? Well, this is impossible: if you want to have Axis, the only way is to have a law which contains also the republic creation. It's not the first time that you were a flip-flop. A law which merges the 2 questions is a grant for all parties.

Date14:09:54, April 04, 2006 CET
FromNorthern Light
ToDebating the Historical Compromise, 2209
MessageSeems like KLP is undef the malign spell of SV again...oh well..Are we out of the axis yet?

Date17:16:44, April 04, 2006 CET
FromKonservativ Monarkistpartiet
ToDebating the Historical Compromise, 2209
MessageWoohoo

Date18:18:03, April 04, 2006 CET
FromKSP - Kazulia Socialdemokratisk Parti
ToDebating the Historical Compromise, 2209
MessageThe most interesting thing is thatt the greater party of Kazulia is under one of the minor party.

Date20:01:45, April 04, 2006 CET
FromBlack Magic
ToDebating the Historical Compromise, 2209
MessageThey like to try different positions, perhaps . . .

Date12:37:14, April 05, 2006 CET
FromKonservativ Monarkistpartiet
ToDebating the Historical Compromise, 2209
MessageWhy is the foul abuse being heaped upon the SV? Having actually done nothing other than use both of our MP's to vote no, I am surprised that the KSP seem to think the SV exert control over other larger parties. However what is interesting is that the HoG of Kazulia comes from a minor party.

Date14:34:05, April 05, 2006 CET
FromKlassiskt Liberala Partiet
ToDebating the Historical Compromise, 2209
Messagewell well well, KSP, get your facts straight.
firstly, i clearly stated in my bill, that my proposed compromise was only created under the impression that both SV and RF were inactive. maybe i should have waited a bit longer, but i realized that I won't have a chance at defending the monarchy alone against 4 other parties, so i tried to pass a compromise so i could at least safe some things. This of course has changed with the return of the two parties mentioned before.
and secondly, we would have pushed through the compromise if you had introduced the axis treaty in an agreeable manner. But we couldn't tolerate your treacherous attempt at passing your own prefered constitutional settings without needing any compromise at all. Your poor attempts to mock me won't hide the fact that the only one who screwed this up is you - go blame yourself, not me.

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
   

Total Seats: 38

no
   

Total Seats: 39

abstain
  

Total Seats: 22


Random fact: Players using inactive accounts and/or accounts from outside nations may only propose bills and/or contribute to discussions, whether IC (in-character) or OOC (out-of-character) with the general consent of the players in the nation.

Random quote: "Those who are responsible for the national security must be the sole judges of what the national security requires. It would be obviously undesirable that such matters should be made the subject of evidence in a court of law or otherwise discussed in public." - Unattributed member of the the House of Lords on the removal of trade union rights

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 94