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: P.d.I. 11/4745 Devolution Reform Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Ordine, Fede e Famiglia
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: December 4752
Description[?]:
| Guilaume Vincitti (MP): Our platform for change. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change State penalties for blasphemy
Old value:: No state penalties are issued for blasphemy.
Current: Public blasphemy is considered a minor offense.
Proposed: Local governments decide on penalties for blasphemy.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy regarding the ownership of domestic animals as pets.
Old value:: There are no laws regarding domestic animal ownership.
Current: People must register domestic animals with the local government.
Proposed: People must register domestic animals with the local government.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy towards hunting endangered animals.
Old value:: Hunting endangered animals is illegal.
Current: Local governments decide about this.
Proposed: Local governments decide about this.
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy regarding the keeping of endangered animals.
Old value:: Only zoos or zoological institutions are allowed to keep endangered animals; all other forms of keeping or trading in endangered animals are forbidden.
Current: Only zoos or zoological institutions are allowed to keep endangered animals; all other forms of keeping or trading in endangered animals are forbidden.
Proposed: Local governments decide about this.
Article 5
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy regarding the keeping of exotic animals.
Old value:: Only zoos or zoological institutions are allowed to keep exotic animals.
Current: Everyone may keep exotic animals, the trade in exotic animals is unregulated.
Proposed: Local governments decide about this.
Article 6
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning farm size.
Old value:: Farms that grow too large are broken up and the land redistributed.
Current: Farm size is not regulated.
Proposed: Farm size regulations are determined by local governments.
Article 7
Proposal[?] to change Government regulation of hunting.
Old value:: Hunting and fishing activities are restricted to designated areas and periods.
Current: The matters of hunting and fishing are handled by local governments.
Proposed: The matters of hunting and fishing are handled by local governments.
Article 8
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on animal welfare in livestock farming.
Old value:: The government enforces moderate animal welfare standards.
Current: The government enforces moderate animal welfare standards.
Proposed: Animal welfare laws for livestock farming are set by local governments.
Article 9
Proposal[?] to change Government policy toward marriage.
Old value:: The government allows all consenting adults to obtain civil marriage contracts.
Current: The government allows all consenting adults to obtain civil marriage contracts.
Proposed: Civil marriages are defined by local governments.
Article 10
Proposal[?] to change Government policy concerning the use of pesticides.
Old value:: Farmers are required to list chemicals used on their crops.
Current: The government approves and regulates agricultural chemical use.
Proposed: Local governments may choose to regulate pesticides certification programs.
Article 11
Proposal[?] to change The government's stance on whaling.
Old value:: Commercial whaling is illegal, but whaling for scientific purposes is allowed.
Current: Commercial whaling is legal and not subject to restrictions.
Proposed: Local governments decide about whaling.
Article 12
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy regarding the keeping of wild animals as pets.
Old value:: The government maintains a list of dangerous wild animals which may not be kept as pets; other wild animals may be kept as pets.
Current: The government maintains a list of dangerous wild animals which may not be kept as pets; other wild animals may be kept as pets.
Proposed: This matter is left up to the local governments.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 17:25:57, April 30, 2020 CET | From | Partito Popolare Osiano | To | Debating the P.d.I. 11/4745 Devolution Reform Act |
| Message | All this devolving of matters will reduce the countryinyo 5 different nations wiht so many difference between them and the people will suffer of this with different rights and services and exodus from regions tonregions to find better or more convenient situations. Malik Al Saud |
| Date | 07:40:11, May 03, 2020 CET | From | Ordine, Fede e Famiglia | To | Debating the P.d.I. 11/4745 Devolution Reform Act |
| Message | Guilaume Vincitti (MP): Mr Saud’s remark is one of fear and exclusion. Strength trough diversity, I say to him in response. Why should we not respect the ideas and feelings of the regions and having those reflected in local legislation? Doesn’t the Hon. Member agree that allowing to differ is a great democratic and Istalian value? We do think so! |
| Date | 14:03:33, May 03, 2020 CET | From | Blocco della Sinistra | To | Debating the P.d.I. 11/4745 Devolution Reform Act |
| Message | Members of the Assembly, It is laughable how between all these proposals, the OFF hides its attempt to give power to the regions to legislative in civil marriages, meaning to strip away the rights of the LGBT group in the regions they rule. |
| Date | 07:04:40, May 07, 2020 CET | From | Ordine, Fede e Famiglia | To | Debating the P.d.I. 11/4745 Devolution Reform Act |
| Message | Guilaume Vincitti (MP): Between the lines we hear the usual rhetoric of the BdS. It appears that the Bloc has become just an one issue party. That's very unfortunate as their electorate expect and deserve more than just that. This proposal deals with many policies which, to our view, can be dealt with by the regional democracies. |
| Date | 09:43:34, May 07, 2020 CET | From | Partito Popolare Osiano | To | Debating the P.d.I. 11/4745 Devolution Reform Act |
| Message | That article of the law about civil marriage is a case of rider provision added to a billoriented totally to other matters. What has ro do the article on mariage with the other environment matters? We invite the other mebmers of parliament ton refuse to vote in favor and wewill see if the promisis from Ani are serious:Approving this bill means to undermine civil egihts in the regions Approving bill changing that law locally. Simonetta Farrago |
| Date | 10:48:54, May 07, 2020 CET | From | Ordine, Fede e Famiglia | To | Debating the P.d.I. 11/4745 Devolution Reform Act |
| Message | Guilaume Vincitti (MP): Frankly, we do not expect the ANI nor the FP to support my bill. This proposal just reflects our agenda on several issues which are important to my party, the OFF. We beleive that all regions should have the freedom to decide whatever they want on local matters. Of course, there will be OFF voters whom will dislike policies of a left wing regional President and v.v. But it is a price worthwhile to pay. |
| Date | 14:12:59, May 07, 2020 CET | From | Alleanza Nazionale | To | Debating the P.d.I. 11/4745 Devolution Reform Act |
| Message | Mr Speaker, Hon. Vincitti is right, the ANI doesn’t support this bill. But colleagues of OFF, we cannot support the bill just because the presence of the articles on civil marriage and blasfemy. And it is unfortunate because without these articles we would have voted yes to the bill. And I cannot hide the feeling of many of my fellow party colleagues: we are quite disappointed because those two articles blocked us and we really wanted to support all the other articles. Now we cannot vote against and we have to abstain: this will have conseguences on our visibility... - Marino Zocchi, ANI |
| Date | 15:53:56, May 07, 2020 CET | From | Ordine, Fede e Famiglia | To | Debating the P.d.I. 11/4745 Devolution Reform Act |
| Message | Guilaume Vincitti (MP): I wish to thank mr Zocchi for his reply. However, your answer puzzled me. As stated , I'm well aware of the fact that your party would not support my bill. But I don't understand your dissapointment about negotiating a deal. My bill was created in July 4745 and brought to the floor in April 4752. That's a period of almost 7 years or 84 months to debate this bill. S&D en BdS did made their view clear to this House. So, why didn't my much esteemed Hon. Colleague, mr Zocch, take the opportunity to debate my proposal earlier on?????? |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 142 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 411 | |||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 128 |
| Random fact: Your user name is not your party name. Choose a concise and easy to remember user name. You can change your party name at any point in time later in the game. |
| Random quote: “Their cheap talk of the 'greater good' is a thinly concealed excuse for subordinating the people to the institutionalized violence that is the state.” - Margaret Woodhall, former Dranian politician |