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: Ratification of the Likatonian Friendship and Co-Operation Treaty.
Details
Submitted by[?]: Liberal-Progressive Union
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill proposes for the ratification of a treaty. It will require two-thirds of the legislature to vote in favor[?]. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: June 2214
Description[?]:
| This bill asks for the ratification of the Likatonian Friendship and Co-Operation Treaty.. If this treaty is ratified, it becomes binding and will define national law. |
Proposals
Article 1
Ratify the Likatonian Friendship and Co-Operation Treaty..
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 05:09:51, April 11, 2006 CET | From |   Liberal-Progressive Union | To | Debating the Ratification of the Likatonian Friendship and Co-Operation Treaty. |
| Message | Statement from Foreign Minister Benson Popper. I support the ratifiaction of this treaty by the Chamber of the Republic for the brief reasons below. 1) It will provide contact with a nation (Likatonia) we have no contact with currently and this a positive first step. 2) We have been following a policy of isolationism which has been damaging to our foreign relations and influence around Terra. 3) It will bolster trade and provide economic benefits for the nations involved. 4) As foreign minister my military training is limited but the military benefits seem simple enough to warrant ratification. I will let our defense minister review the military aspects and provide a more detailed briefing to this chamber to the benefits ot may provide. Thankyou and long live the republic. |
| Date | 05:39:44, April 11, 2006 CET | From | National Imperial Hobrazian Front | To | Debating the Ratification of the Likatonian Friendship and Co-Operation Treaty. |
| Message | While we support a step towards friendship with Likatonia, we are opposed to the pledge of mutual military aid in times of war. We already have a plethora of allies abroad between the Allies and the members of the Trade and Defense Entente. A simple cost-benefit analysis would reveal that the weight of having one additional military ally among a our already-existing abundance versus the chance to be dragged into a conflict that does not involve our interests. Perhaps we should come up with some other sort of arrangement with the Likatonians? |
| Date | 06:55:45, April 11, 2006 CET | From | Liberal-Progressive Union | To | Debating the Ratification of the Likatonian Friendship and Co-Operation Treaty. |
| Message | We agree that we have multiple treaties and allies and are concerned that this may be a too big of a step to take at first. But the idea of military cooperation with a nation whose location allows greater flexability and improves our military's defensive posture. We should allow for the Defense minister to comment before we reach a decision on ratification. |
| Date | 09:40:40, April 11, 2006 CET | From | Deltarian Nationalist Party | To | Debating the Ratification of the Likatonian Friendship and Co-Operation Treaty. |
| Message | I am in full support, but CSP has a point maybe we should review the number of treaties we have with a mutual defence clause and possibly change these at some point in the future. |
| Date | 11:28:06, April 11, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Ratification of the Likatonian Friendship and Co-Operation Treaty. |
| Message | If the delegates of Hobrazia will allow us to intrude on their deliberations for a moment, Arius Hunter, as First Advocate (Head of Government) for Likatonia, begs your indulgence to make a brief point or two: First - The Christian Socialist Party may be confusing treaties. The "Likatonian Friendship and Co-Operation Treaty" does not HAVE a clause for pleding 'mutual military aid in times of war'. Secondly - the "Likatonian Friendship and Co-Operation Treaty" is unbinding, and 'forces' NO behaviour on ANY participant. If one carefully looks at the Treaty language: "Members of this agreement ARE REQUESTED to establish an embassy.... Alternatively any nation within this agreement MAY REQUEST another third party nation... Member nations WILL BE ENCOURAGED to conduct regular military exercises..." Just a couple of points for your delegates to consider. Likatonia is quite opposed to heavily 'binding' Treaties, preferring just the kind of open approach this Treaty presents. Arius Hunter, head of the Axis Mundi Revolution! and First Advocate for the Likatonian Convocation, thanks you for your time, and hopes we have caused no offense. |
| Date | 12:55:32, April 11, 2006 CET | From | Deltarian Nationalist Party | To | Debating the Ratification of the Likatonian Friendship and Co-Operation Treaty. |
| Message | He has a point, very few treaties get passed in Likatonia, none if they have any points that are law binding. This treaty is the perfect way to open up channels of communication with Likatonia. |
| Date | 16:44:45, April 11, 2006 CET | From | Liberal-Progressive Union | To | Debating the Ratification of the Likatonian Friendship and Co-Operation Treaty. |
| Message | I agree and will send it to vote. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 353 | |||||||
| no | Total Seats: 47 | |||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: When you join the game, you will find yourself with only zero seats. That's because your party's representatives haven't been elected yet. You need to establish your party's position on issues by proposing several bills that your party wants passed and sending them to vote. This raises your visibility and if you do it enough, you will win seats at the next election. |
| Random quote: "Conservative, n: A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal who wishes to replace them with others." - Ambrose Bierce |