| APC Sponsored Bill - Splitting RA |
I have no issue creating named positions for these roles. But I don't see the necessity of making them Cabinet positions, or that it's a particularly good idea to do that, frankly.
Also, was the current MoRA consulted for these changes? It doesn't seem like it...
Reading through the various arguments presented in favour of this by the APC, I'm not seeing any benefit in this idea; it won't reduce the workload at all, or increase the number of people available to do it - it will simply create a new Cabinet position, but one with an overlapping remit with other positions. There's nothing stopping anyone from joining the MoRA at present, so the only possible way this would "reduce" the workload is if there's someone who's only willing to help out if they get to be a minister. If so, then that person doesn't deserve to be a minister in my opinion.
Our current ministries are all fairly broad, but cover a clearly identifiable area of regional governance; foreign affairs handles interactions with other regions, military affairs handles the army, regional affairs handles cultural activities and internal development. I agree that Regional Affairs is the largest portfolio, but that's why it tends to also have the most people working in it. Splitting it up won't reduce the amount of work, it will just decrease it's organisation and split-up the team working on it - my suspicion is that it will end up producing more work, due to replication of effort and the two ministries working at cross purposes. It also creates an obvious potential for argument, turf-wars and bickering. Long story short; this won't reduce the workload, just make it harder to get it done. Bad idea. Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator ![[Image: B9ytUsy.png]](https://i.imgur.com/B9ytUsy.png)
Can we please stop acting as if RA is doing amazingly well because it is not. It is stronger than it may have been at our all time low but not by much.
I'm asking you to take a chance with this. RA is not doing amazingly well, we've had the same system for how long now? We are replacing one Minister after another and things are still stagnating. You can say it all comes done to leadership but we keep swapping our Ministers and still things remain roughly the same. Give this a chance for on term and I can guarantee that productivity levels in RA will go shooting up. Activity will be so much better. Instead of being afraid of taking a chance and trying something different take the risk and see the benefits. If we keep the same old same old nothing will get better and nothing will change. It's time for TSP to try something different even if it only lasts one term. It's time that we take a chance and reap the rewards. Europeian Ambassador to The South Pacific
Former Local Council Member Former Minister of Regional Affairs Former High Court Justice
I am in Full support of this Bill.
(12-13-2016, 12:28 PM)Punchwood Wrote: Give this a chance for on term and I can guarantee that productivity levels in RA will go shooting up. Activity will be so much better. I'm curious about this. I wonder if you could explain your reasoning? Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator. I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum. Legal Resources: THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System (12-13-2016, 12:36 PM)Kris Kringle Wrote: I'm curious about this. I wonder if you could explain your reasoning? I think that by having one Minister who can focus on just one area of RA instead of lots of branches there will be a lot more activity as there should be more and higher quality content going out. What I'm going to propose now is not that we permanently split the Ministry but lets try it out for one term. We don't actually know what effect this will have. It could be awful, it could be amazing, it could be the same, slightly better, slightly worst we don't know. One term can't destroy RA, it's long enough for a testing period but short enough so that permanent damage can't be done. Let's try this out. We don't know what the results might be. Let us see if it does work and if it is a better system then we can keep it like that, two separate Ministries. If it does not work then we can re-join the Ministries. Let's at least try it out rather than just hoping the current system will get better. Let's try something different, and see what happens. Europeian Ambassador to The South Pacific
Former Local Council Member Former Minister of Regional Affairs Former High Court Justice (12-13-2016, 03:02 PM)Punchwood Wrote:(12-13-2016, 12:36 PM)Kris Kringle Wrote: I'm curious about this. I wonder if you could explain your reasoning? Upon what basis do you think this? You haven't demonstrated any reason why splitting the RA will magically create new activity and higher quality content, which is what Kris was asking for, rather than a rewording of your supposition. Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator (12-13-2016, 03:16 PM)Belschaft Wrote: Upon what basis do you think this? You haven't demonstrated any reason why splitting the RA will magically create new activity and higher quality content, which is what Kris was asking for, rather than a rewording of your supposition. You clearly have not been listening. By having one Minister focus on one thing they can provide better leadership and guidance to Fellows in that Ministry. With that person knowing a lot and no doubt being passionate about that area they will be in a better position to help newer Fellows learn about that area. Think of it like a primary school teacher and a secondary school teacher. The primary school teacher can teach you the basics of everything really but only the secondary school teacher can teach you the specifics. It would lead to a much simpler and more streamlined system. Instead of having to find the correct sub-forum and then the correct sub-forum within that before then going to the right thread you would know exactly where to post in a separate Ministry. People would also know 100% who is in charge of what, instead of having a Director who is in charge of X, an AC member who is in charge of XY, a Deputy in charge of XYZ and then a Minister of charge of it all. Splitting would lead to a much easier and simpler line of leadership. Ministers could work on the things they enjoy the most rather than that along with XYZ. I much prefer Comms rather than culture but as Minister while I may have appointed some people in charge of cultural projects I still had to check up on it and when that person may have been on a LoA or was inactive I had to try and get it going again rather than work 100% on the bit I enjoyed and was much better at. It has worked in countless regions before us and can you give me a reason why splitting the Ministry would lead to less activity? Europeian Ambassador to The South Pacific
Former Local Council Member Former Minister of Regional Affairs Former High Court Justice
Sure, but do they really need to be Cabinet ministries? That comes with more than just regional affairs responsibilities and power.
|
![[+]](/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
PREVIOUS ROLES 
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |