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: 21st PMQ's
Details
Submitted by[?]: Luthorian Conservative Party 🔵
Status[?]: passed
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 4732
Description[?]:
| Rules: 1. The Prime Minister must answer all questions or a member of the cabinet if directed to a member. 2. The largest party in opposition may ask 5 questions to the government.(If they tie in seats then the largest party will be determined by popular vote.) 3. Smaller parties on the cross bench may ask 1. 4. If a party holds no seats in the Diet/Assembly they are not allowed to ask questions. 6. Members of the coalition may not ask questions to the government. 7. Supply party members may ask questions. When asking a question as to the speaker but direct it to a Minster by the title of the office. The Naming And Succession Act Prime Minister - Prime Minster (The Great Four)- The top four Roles in Government: 1. Internal Affairs - Deputy Prime Minister 2. Finance - Chancellor of the Exchequer 3. Foreign Affairs - Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Foreign Secretary) 4. Infrastructure and Transport - Secretary of State for the Home Department (Home Secretary) Cabinet List Continue: 5. Defence - Secretary of State for Defence 6. Trade and Industry - Secretary of State for International Trade and Industry (Trade Secretary) 7. Health and Social Services - Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Social Care Secretary) 8. Education and Culture - Secretary of State for Education (Education Secretary) 9. Food and Agriculture - Secretary of State for Food and Rural Affairs (Rural And Food Secretary) 10. Environment and Tourism - Secretary of State for the Environment and Tourism (Environment Secretary) 11. Justice - Chancellor of Justice 12. Science and Technology - Chairman of the Board of Science and Technology |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 20:22:05, March 27, 2020 CET | From | Luthorian Conservative Party 🔵 | To | Debating the 21st PMQ's |
| Message | (The tie is broken by popular vote in the assembly or diet elections.) |
| Date | 20:22:05, March 27, 2020 CET | From | Luthorian Conservative Party 🔵 | To | Debating the 21st PMQ's |
| Message | (The tie is broken by popular vote in the assembly or diet elections.) |
| Date | 00:19:18, March 28, 2020 CET | From | The Peoples’ Communist Party | To | Debating the 21st PMQ's |
| Message | Mr Speaker, As I am the newly appointed Leader of the Opposition (by way of popular vote), I am given the responsibility of proposing five questions that I feel need to be asked not only by members of my party or the other opposition parties, but by the middle and low class citizens of our country. They will be compiled in this one message, so as to not ring out time as this bill passes in just a few short months. They are as follows: Question #1: Mr Speaker, this question is for the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care. In the national budget you proposed in August of 4729, we saw a dramatic decrease in spending on Health and Social Services. 11,000,000,000 LPD to be exact. Why are you taking billions of dollars away from the healthcare of our citizens, as well as burning the pockets of our citizens who fully deserve and draw Social Security, as this can be the only form of income to our seniors? Question #2: Mr Speaker, just recently you proposed an act that proposes the federal government only recognizes civil marriages between one man and one woman. For years, Mr Speaker, our government has been a shining light all over the world in accepting and progressing in civil rights for our citizens. I feel that as long as you are a consenting adult, you can marry who you want to, regardless of gender. For the federal government to step in and decide the rights and wrongs of marriage contracts is simply unconstitutional and inhumane. Why do you feel this way about the LGBTQ community in our nation? Are they not people too? Question #3: In a recent article published by the Luthori Central News Network (LCNN), you were quoted as calling the President's address calling for international sanctions as "inappropriate, overtly political and unacceptable." We feel that we cannot extend the power of our government overseas. They are independent nations, with their own elected representatives and their own heads of government. Why should we be the nation to overstep those boundaries and decide what another nation should do in terms of our foreign policy and trade decisions? Question #4: With the proposal of the Parliamentary Seats Act of 4730, you stated that you would welcome the proposal of bringing the seat total to 401. However, on the voting block we see that you had a change of heart. Why is that? Did your democratic conscience speak to you in declining the possibility of a sole-White Rose or right-wing dictatorship? Question #5: Mr Speaker, with the proposals of the Arranged Marriage Act, the Pollution Act and the Adultery Act, you earned our support in the passing of these bills. The most important question on the minds of our citizens is how will this continue. Although we do share our distinct and historical differences on a variety of issues, we've managed to find middle or even common ground on some issues. What will you and your government do in order to continue this outreach to not only our party, but the farther left leaning parties as well, like the CPL and the WFP? Thank you for your time, Mr Speaker. I look forward to hearing from you and working with you in the future to further the progress of our nation that our party has in mind, and we hope you are willing to hear us out as we all move forward. Yours Truly, Jonathan Martin MP Leader of the Opposition and the Chairman of the Labour Party of Luthori |
| Date | 01:41:11, March 28, 2020 CET | From | White Rose | To | Debating the 21st PMQ's |
| Message | Mr Speaker, We congratulate the Leader of the Opposition and we shall answer in the same vein, with a single message. #1-The left increased health and social spending by over £10 billion, we see no need or requirement for this money to be spent given employment is strong, taxes are low and we have abolished abortion funding, removed the salary cap and ended the working hours limit. People earn more so need less welfare, their is a well funded public health system, as well as a strong private sector too, and we believe the money is better spent on other services which will put money back in people’s pockets through less expense or tax, not handouts. #2-We recognise and accept their relationships but the principle and definition of marriage is a man and a woman joining as one under God. We believe in the Holy Church and in this definition of marriage is all. #3-We should not be. The President was asking other nations to sanction Luthori, we believe this was a gross violation of his constitutional role and worthy of impeachment. We said this publicly and stand by it. #4-We do support it, but it did not have the numbers to pass and our allies asked us to support them. #5-This Assembly, soon to be Diet, welcomes bills from all parties of Luthori, and we review them individually to see if the proposals are supported by us and our members. We will continue to do this, of course, if something more concrete and negotiated is proposed, we will review that too. Mr Speaker, these sessions are a tool to hold the Government to account, long may they continue. Duke Thomas Weston Prime Minister |
| Date | 02:19:42, March 28, 2020 CET | From | The Peoples’ Communist Party | To | Debating the 21st PMQ's |
| Message | Mr Speaker, We would like to thank you for the congratulations on my appointment as the Leader of the Opposition. We will respond to your answers respectfully as to not cause a debate among this forum, as we seem it's only fair to ask you questions, recieve answers, then respond to your answers with our opinions. We will also be responding in the same vein, with a single message. Response to Answer #1: We understand completely where you are coming from with bringing up the fact that our citizens have a well funded public health system as well as a strong private sector. You are correct about that. What we struggle with is the idea that you would take government financial support in the billions away from those programs, so that they have no safety net if there were a pandemic or economic recession to happen. We agree in spending money on services that will put money pack in people's pockets through less expense or tax, but we do not agree on where to get that money. We absolutely do not support taking that money from our citizens health programs. Response to Answer #2: While we respect your opinion on the sanctity of marriage, we cannot simply in good standing agree with you. We would just like to remind you that God does not belong to a political party, and it is downright blasphemous to hear you claim to stand for God when it comes to the basic human rights of our constitution. I myself am a very religious man, but I also understand that we as a government and as followers of God cannot speak on his behalf, especially when it comes to determining the rights of fellow children of God. Response to Answer #3: We simply disagree, and we urge you to read back through the article, and we also reccomend that you personally speak to the President about his decisions and why he made them. Simply running to a microphone or a television camera is not the way we share our opinion or govern at the hands of the people, Mr Speaker. Response to Answer #4: We understand, but we would like to see the reasoning why as well as the change in support made clearly in the debate sections of these bills when a change in opinion or vote is made. It adds to the much needed transparency in our government, and it truly shows our people that parties and party leaders are certainly human and also have a change in mind or heart every now and then. Thank you for clarifying on that. Response to Answer #5: We thank you for the honest answer to that question, as we hold the values and bipartisanship between our parties near and dear to our hearts. Yes, we understand that you are a conservative-leaning party and we are a socialist-leaning party, however that does not mean that we share similarities above our differences. We just notices in bills past that without hesitation when legislation was brought to a vote, you would almost immediately vote against the left-leaning party or parties. However, we've seen you stick to your guns and stay true to your word and analyze legislation and sometimes vote with the left or center-left leaning parties. Mr Speaker, we cannot thank you enough for your time and we completely agree with you, these are a most necessary tool to hold our government accountable and to help keep our democracy moving forward and transparently! Jonathan Martin MP Leader of the Opposition and Chairman of the Labour Party of Luthori |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 96 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 0 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 18 |
| Random fact: When elections in a country are held, all bills in the voting phase are reset to the debate phase. |
| Random quote: "Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves." - Confucius |