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: Regulation of Pre-School Establishments
Details
Status[?]: passed
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: July 2080
Description[?]:
| RECOGNIZING that children are our future. EMPHASIZING the need for a publicly funded pre-school nursery system, and the benefits it will provide. ACCEPTING that some affluent or religious parents, or parents of children with special needs may wish to send their children to private, for-profit nurseries or other pre-school establishments, and allowing them to do so. PROPOSING that this system of private pre-schools be subject to government health, safety and competency regulations, so that all of the nation's children are in safe and healthy environments. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Pre-school education.
Old value:: The government maintains a system of free publically owned nurseries alongside unregulated private establishments.
Current: The government maintains a system of free publically owned nursery and pre-school educational centres.
Proposed: The government maintains a system of free publically owned nurseries alongside heavily regulated private establishments.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 04:59:40, July 07, 2005 CET | From | CNT/AFL | To | Debating the Regulation of Pre-School Establishments |
| Message | Very cliché, I know. |
| Date | 15:45:09, July 07, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Regulation of Pre-School Establishments |
| Message | Consistent, at least. That is the best thing we can find to say about this. |
| Date | 15:45:21, July 11, 2005 CET | From |  Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Regulation of Pre-School Establishments |
| Message | We find this bill to be unneccesary and counter productive... Against. |
| Date | 04:37:24, July 13, 2005 CET | From | CNT/AFL | To | Debating the Regulation of Pre-School Establishments |
| Message | ((What the heck.)) |
| Date | 05:19:33, July 13, 2005 CET | From | Democractic Socialist Party of Lodamun | To | Debating the Regulation of Pre-School Establishments |
| Message | coutner-productive how? |
| Date | 05:32:15, July 13, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Regulation of Pre-School Establishments |
| Message | Private PreSchools have no incentive to subject any children to unsafe or harmful conditions. If they do, they wont stay in business long. Such regulation has costs that will simply fix anything. "If it isn't broke, don't fix it" |
| Date | 06:00:19, July 13, 2005 CET | From | Democractic Socialist Party of Lodamun | To | Debating the Regulation of Pre-School Establishments |
| Message | I don't know, sweatshops seem to be going very strongly. Not to suggest pre-schools are sweatshops, of course. |
| Date | 14:17:00, July 13, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Regulation of Pre-School Establishments |
| Message | We already have compulsory education for all children. The sweatshop issue is a different matter to this. Here we are talking about the government regulating the activities of childminders, nurses and other pre school child carers. This is just unnecessary bureaucracy as our colleagues from TiC have clearly indicated. However it is opening the door to worse than that. It allows the government to regulate what ideas and concepts can be presented to children at a very impressionable age. While it may be argued that this prevents their indoctrination into cult religions or whatever, it also allows the indoctrination into particular lines of political thinking. It is not suggested that this will be intentional, but the government will tend to approve more of people that approve of it. Hence there will be a bias introduced in the political thinking of the nations pre-school carers. This is, in effect, an attack, all be it unintentional, on the principles of democracy. We urge all conscientious parties to vote against this measure. |
| Date | 18:40:30, July 13, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Regulation of Pre-School Establishments |
| Message | Too late to incorporate this wording, but would the resolution mover agree that the "health, safety and competence" regulations be done by an arms-length indpendent agency of early childhood educators, not be the government directly? We agree with the spirit of the bill, which establishes minimum standards by which pre-schools must operate, but the question (as often is the case) comes down to enforcement. We would prefer to see this done primirily through self-regulation and atr arms length from government. As always, we reject utterly the contention that government-set standards are in any way comparable to indoctrination. |
| Date | 18:47:48, July 13, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Regulation of Pre-School Establishments |
| Message | We appreciate that the intention of the CCF-Greens would not be that of indoctrination, however, even without this intention being there, it does, in fact happen that when a government regulates a process this process is adapted slowly and surely to reflect a unilateral position. That of the government. You may reject the contention, but the facts speak for themselves. |
| Date | 19:56:45, July 13, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Regulation of Pre-School Establishments |
| Message | Outlawing a bad situation does not cause a better situation to take its place. This goes for preschools, sweatshops, the minimum wage, and many other situations. No preschool would prefer to subject its students to substandard health or safety conditions, or to be incompetent. The reason is that parents do not want their children in preschools that do. However, if for some reason a preschool does do this, either it will go out of busniess on its own, or there is some overriding reason why it does not. Either way, it comes down to parent/consumer choice. If they demand their money's worth, they will get it or go somewhere else. The current option already means that they can choose a "free" nursery or a private one. If the private, for profit, one isnt better than the free ones, they will not last. It is hard to compete with free, the only way to do it is to offer a superior service that is more than worth the cost. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 250 | ||||||
| no |
Total Seats: 198 | ||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: If you want to know how many players there are in Particracy right now, check out the Game Statistics buried at the bottom of the World Map screen. |
| Random quote: "An idealist is one who, on noticing that roses smell better than a cabbage, concludes that it will also make better soup." - H. L. Mencken |