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: Local Parks Bill.
Details
Submitted by[?]: Liberal-Progressive Union
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: June 2217
Description[?]:
The matters of hunting and fishing are best left to local authorities. Local maintainance of local parks, less cost for government and better maintainance due to local knowledge of parks, and ecosystems. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government regulation of hunting.
Old value:: Hunting and fishing activities are restricted to designated areas and periods.
Current: Hunting and fishing activities are restricted to designated areas and periods.
Proposed: The matters of hunting and fishing are handled by local governments.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Government policy regarding a national park system.
Old value:: The government funds and maintains a network of national parks and/or marine protected areas.
Current: The government funds and maintains a network of national parks and/or marine protected areas.
Proposed: The government devolves park policy to local governments.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
Date | 21:21:05, April 20, 2006 CET | From | Liberal-Progressive Union | To | Debating the Local Parks Bill. |
Message | Sorry about lack of debate but time is short. |
Date | 21:26:36, April 20, 2006 CET | From | United Blobs | To | Debating the Local Parks Bill. |
Message | Tactical |
Date | 23:21:25, April 20, 2006 CET | From | Liberal-Progressive Union | To | Debating the Local Parks Bill. |
Message | We appreciate your support tactical or not. |
Date | 01:04:01, April 21, 2006 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Local Parks Bill. |
Message | "The matters of hunting and fishing are best left to local authorities." - How so? You have provided no reasoning for this statement and provided no corroborating evidence. "Local maintainance of local parks, less cost for government and better maintainance due to local knowledge of parks, and ecosystems." - Actually, we believe you'll find that maintaining parks at a local level will increase costs to government and, consequently, the tax payer. The only way the costs can be decreased by local government would be to decrease the number of parks and green spaces provided to the public. Local government increases bureaucracy by increasing the layers of government, thusly increasing costs, whilst providing fragmented policy decisions across the Country. Federalism is an expensive disaster and is not one that should be supported by this government or this Country. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
Vote | Seats | |||||
yes |
Total Seats: 136 | |||||
no |
Total Seats: 199 | |||||
abstain |
Total Seats: 65 |
Random fact: Culturally Open nations can adopt advisory/non-enforceable Nation Descriptions. See http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=6242 |
Random quote: "Men who have greatness in them don't go in for politics." - Albert Camus |