Why I’m Running

I’ve been advising the Cabinet since Roavin was first elected Prime Minister, and he’s given me the great honor of being nominated to run for our region’s Prime Minister. I’m running because I believe I can be a faithful leader to TSP-- somebody who plays the game honestly and according to values.

I’ve been in government before as the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and I’ve prided myself on running an accountable ministry without a hidden agenda. I’ve been an unabashed supporter of defending and defender values, and have promoted a democracy-first approach to our foreign affairs. It’s that kind of governance that I would bring to the Cabinet. A government transparent in its goals and purpose. I think that’s been lacking since the post-coup government, and I’m running in hopes that I can change that.

 

Transparency

 

I don’t believe that TSP’s government consists of only four people. So why has our Cabinet been run as if it does? While the Assembly elects the Cabinet to come up with an agenda, handle foreign affairs, run the military, and promote activity, these things shouldn’t be divorced from public discussion. In 2014, the Cabinet consulted with the Assembly when Independent-imperialist regions tried to force us to choose between attending events with them or with our defender-leaning allies. The Assembly debated fruitfully, and as a whole region we decided a course of action. That’s the kind of transparency we should expect from our government.

As Prime Minister, I would ensure that potential alliances don’t pop out of nowhere from the Assembly’s viewpoint. I’ll keep the Assembly apprised of the oftentimes too-secretive politicking happening in the background of the game. I’ll make sure the Cabinet is honest and upfront about our region’s place in the game, and work with the Assembly whenever there’s something that can truly impact the whole of our region, just like I did in 2014. Some may think this is unrealistic, but it’s actually how we used to do things!

Additionally, I will make sure substantive discussion happens on the forums, and that the Cabinet Discord discussions are appropriately archived on the forums. We should not be able to avoid political accountability by hiding in DMs.

 

More Than a Steward

 

Since the Prime Minister role was created in the Great Council of 2016, the two holders of the office (Drugged Monkeys and Roavin) took a more backseat approach to the Prime Minister’s role in the Cabinet. Rather than a leader, they were more like stewards. I believe this approach has its benefits, but also can cause disarray, disorganization, and miscommunication.

The Cabinet should have a singular agenda, like it did when the Delegate and Vice-Delegate were the leaders. We elect our Cabinet ministers separately, so they will come into office with their own ideas, of course, and it’s those ideas that the Assembly voted for. Those ideas need to be joined together into a coherent agenda, which should be shared with the Assembly. The Prime Minister should set priorities and hold ministers accountable to them. Instead of being a figurehead, the Prime Minister should be, well, the prime minister.

 

But I’m an Associate Justice?

 

I had the honor of being nominated as Associate Justice fairly recently, and being approved by the Assembly in a 20-7 vote. I understand the conflict that comes with being in multiple branches of government, even though the explicit goal of the Judicial Act reforms was to allow an executive officer to also serve as an Associate Justice.

I believe I’m very capable of managing my conflicts of interest and recusing myself from any cases where executive decision, powers, authorities, etc., are at question. It is, however, up to the Assembly to decide if it is okay with this situation. I was honest and upfront that my political ambitions in TSP weren’t over when I was first nominated, and I will be have that same honesty here. If it’s important to a majority of voters that I step aside from my role as Associate Justice, or if conflicts of interest become too difficult to manager, I will do so. On the other hand, if the Assembly still believes in the goals of the Judicial Act reforms, I will serve faithfully and responsibly as both Prime Minister and an Associate Justice.

 

Any Questions?

In our time-honored tradition, having laid out my case for being elected Prime Minister, the floor is now open to questions from my fellow legislators, both serious and silly <3

Reply

I have some concerns about the inevitable CoIs resulting from holding office in two distinct Branches. What are some steps that you will take to prevent the unlikely event that you preside over a case where you have a potential CoI? 

What other measures or plans do you have in mind in increasing the transparency of the Cabinet?

How do you plan on combining the unique ideas of individual ministers so that they form into a coherent agenda?

Finally some silly questions:

Do you prefer Pancakes or Waffles?

Cake or Pie?

Favorite version of SPIT?

Who do you believe will post the craziest campaign this term?

(This post was last modified: 06-05-2018, 11:16 PM by Imperial Frost Federation.)

Reply

Glen, the following are all things which you have said in the past;

I'm... not comfortable at all with people holding multiple positions in TSP at all. We have enough problems getting new people involved, and of course concentration of power poses a risk no matter what positions we're talking about.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

When I say exempt, I mean I'm amenable to somebody serving as Chair here and Delegate in TNP. Not that I'm cool with somebody serving as Chair and Prime Minister :/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

With deputies, the issue here is that you shouldn't have multiple positions in different branches of government. Deputy MoRA should not also be Deputy Chair or the actual Chair, as they're crossing branches and become privy to private executive and legislative branch information. It's really not much to ask that our branches of government remain as separate as possible.

When did your view on separation of powers - and that people shouldn’t have multiple politicians in different branches of government - change? Why did it change?

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

---

PREVIOUS ROLES

Former Delegate (x2.5)
Former Member of the Committee for State Security
Former Chief Justice of The High Court (x3)
Former Minister of Foreign Affairs (x2)
Former Chair of the Assembly (x3)
Former Minister of Security (x2)
Former Local Councillor (x2.5)
Former Forum Administrator
Former Minister of Media

Reply

I have some concerns about the inevitable CoIs resulting from holding office in two distinct Branches. What are some steps that you will take to prevent the unlikely event that you preside over a case where you have a potential CoI? 

Principally, I would recuse myself from any case implicating executive powers. I don't think there's any scenario where it would be appropriate for me to hear a case like that, while serving as Prime Minister. Ideally, somebody else would replace me as Associate Justice, because that would be easier for me in the long-run. But I'm also cognizant of the fact that the Assembly passed the Judicial Act reforms in part with the intent that Associate Justices wouldn't be firewalled.

What other measures or plans do you have in mind in increasing the transparency of the Cabinet?

I think the Cabinet should treat the Assembly more like the US Congress is treated in real life. The Assembly should be notified, if not consulted, about actions that would have big implications for the region, before taking them. When I was Minister of Foreign Affairs, for example, I didn't negotiate the TRR and Lazarus treaties in secret, even though they marked a turning point for our region. The Assembly was fully aware of what I was doing, and in fact I had even ran on it in my election. That's the kind of transparency I think we should have. The Assembly should rarely be surprised by a Cabinet action.

How do you plan on combining the unique ideas of individual ministers so that they form into a coherent agenda?

Ideally, those elected will have ideas that flow together easily. Not every candidate has posted their campaigns yet, so it's hard to answer this fully. I would expect the four of us to reach a common overarching agenda and purpose. That might involve compromises. But at the end of the day, I think the Prime Minister should be the leader, and that means they should have a large say in that agenda. It's been a while since the Assembly has elected Cabinet ministers with wildly different beliefs, but in case that happens, the Prime Minister's agenda should take precedence after compromise has been exhausted.

Do you prefer Pancakes or Waffles?

Waffles, but only if they're Belgian waffles with a nice fruit compote.

Cake or Pie?

Pie, no questions about it.

Favorite version of SPIT?

I like the classic version I helped create A traditional Long Island Iced Tea, substituting lemon-line soda and blue curacao.

Who do you believe will post the craziest campaign this term? 

Resentine's is already pretty crazy

When did your view on separation of powers - and that people shouldn’t have multiple politicians in different branches of government - change? Why did it change? 

In the 16 months between then and now, the Cabinet and judiciary has struggled to fill the judicial bench as required by law. The pool of justices system was good in theory, but whenever it needed to be used, there was a very good chance that all pool justices were either inactive or holding office elsewhere. When Roavin proposed scrapping that pool system and adding two new appointed justices, I was skeptical and said we weren't going to be able to find two highly qualified people to do the job. Everybody who I could imagine being considered was active in government or a regular candidate in elections. That makes sense, because running for office is the main way to gain experience and trust in the community.

His answer was getting rid of the firewall between Associate Justices and the executive branch. This was explicit since the first draft: "Instead, we just have the High Court, led by a firewalled chief justice and aided by several non-firewalled associate justices." It was the most discussed aspect of the reforms, and the bill was passed 27-0. The Assembly spoke then, and they said they were fine with Associate Justices serving other roles in government. I debated the issue, too, and Roavin convinced me (along with the past 2 years of evidence that the firewall was breaking the judiciary).

I wouldn't say that my position has wholly changed on separation of powers. I've been convinced by pretty solid arguments and experiences that the firewall for Associate Justices was an impracticality for our game. That doesn't mean I believe somebody should be Delegate and Prime Minister, or MoFA and Chair. The judiciary is unique in that it's a) far less active, b) necessarily reactionary, and c) non-political. It's an area of government where we don't need strict separation for it to work. It certainly helps that Kris is only a justice, and he's the Chief Justice. If all 3 justices were politically active, that could very well be a problem. There are no hard and fast rules, like most things in our game.

(This post was last modified: 06-06-2018, 05:42 PM by sandaoguo.)

Reply

Ok Potential PM. (Sorry it's late and I'm no longer lucid)

1.How are you better than your opponent?

First, let me say that I think Farengeto would make a fine Prime Minister. I've known him and worked with him personally for years, and I've known him to have good judgement and drive. We're different people, of course, and our differences don't necessarily make one of us "better" than the other. That being said, here's how I see our biggest difference:

I have a lot more experience than he does dealing with those outside of our region. Like it or not, we're a big region in the game, and we'll get attention from others no matter what our stances or views. TSP needs a Prime Minister that is intimately familiar with how Gameplay people think and operate. It's true that I'm not the most popular person in other regions, and it's exactly because I foiled plans to infiltrate or manipulate TSP. I'm disliked by Independent-imperialist regions like Europeia, Balder, or TWP, because those regions have threatened TSP and I stood up to them. That's a positive quality. Of course anybody who does this is going to earn enemies.

That being said, I haven't been in the Cabinet since October 2016. That hasn't stopped the same regions as always from trying to bully, intimidate, threaten, or manipulate TSP. And electing somebody who professes to be neutral or unaligned isn't going to stop it, either. You don't need to be a defender to acknowledge who our enemies are, and even neutral Cabinet members will need to recognize that if they're going to protect TSP. If Farengeto is elected Prime Minister, he'll find himself vilified just the same as Roavin or myself, unless he decides to simply give in and turn TSP into the Independent-imperialist fold. I don't see him doing that.

2. Given apparent lack of LC interaction in the past how will you push this forward?

Could you expand on what you mean here?

3. Can you explain how now established elements in discord can be brought back to gameside?

Can you expand on this as well? Generally speaking, I don't think we should be "bringing things back" to the RMB, when it comes to governance.

Reply

What is your view on the IJCC? What do you think TSP should do or not do in response?

What would you do if a Minister in your Cabinet is not cooperative?

The Prime Minister must be someone capable of understanding the issues in RA, MA, and FA. Can you briefly explain why you have the requisite background and/or knowledge to understand any issues in each of these ministries?

Can you imagine scenarios where the typical "defender party line" is not necessarily the best approach for TSP, and how would you react to such a scenario in terms of executive decision-making?

Reply

HI GLEN! WHAT ARE YOUR PLANS RELATING TO THE JOINT GOOD OF GAME-SIDE, FORUM AND DISCORD COMMUNITIES?

The Lord of Space and Protector of the TARDIS Keys of
The Solar System Scope

Logo

[Image: T5F5a5I.png]

Reply

What is your view on the IJCC? What do you think TSP should do or not do in response?

I think Europeia, Balder, and the Land of Kings and Emperors have been antagonists of TSP since 2014. This alliance is a revival of the United Imperial Armed Forces, which back when we were allied with The New Inquisition, treated us a client state that needed to always fall in line. The Independent Joint Command Coalition is targeted explicitly against our ally The Pacific, and there have been plenty of insinuations that TSP is being targeted as well. Given the long history of these regions -- and particularly, the players involved, like OnderKelkia -- being unfriendly or downright supporting the overthrow of the Coalition, those insinuations have a lot backing them.

As for what we do, we need to come up with a unified response (as far as possible) with our allies, particularly those who will be targeted for attacks by the IJCC. We need to show our allies that we will support them against this imperialist resurgence, and ensure our ties are strong so we can protect each other. What happens beyond that depends on how successful the IJCC becomes. They've yet to try a big military operation. Once they do, we'll know just how big of a threat we're dealing with.

What would you do if a Minister in your Cabinet is not cooperative?

This is tricky, because Cabinet ministers are elected on their own, rather than on the same platform together. However, the Cabinet doesn't work when there's a lot of discord, as we've seen this past term. I think if a Cabinet minister disagrees so strongly with the agenda the rest of the Cabinet supports, to the point where they won't do their jobs or they actively try to obstruct, then they should resign. If they don't resign, then the rest of the Cabinet should go to the Assembly and ask for a recall.

The Prime Minister must be someone capable of understanding the issues in RA, MA, and FA. Can you briefly explain why you have the requisite background and/or knowledge to understand any issues in each of these ministries?

My background is mostly in foreign affairs, but I've been in many Cabinets, so I've seen how all the ministries are run. I'm not personally very good at running big regional events, but then again I'm not running for Minister of Regional Affairs. There's a difference, I think, in understanding how a ministry works versus running that ministry itself. I would expect Cabinet ministers to be competent in their own fields, because they ran for those offices. Cabinet ministers should also be able to explain particular issues they're having, especially if the Prime Minister can help with it.

Can you imagine scenarios where the typical "defender party line" is not necessarily the best approach for TSP, and how would you react to such a scenario in terms of executive decision-making?

I don't think there is a "party line" really, not anymore. My values are that destroying regions hurts people and makes the game less enjoyable, and that's not an acceptable cost for entertaining raiders for a day or two. That's why I call myself a defender. I don't universally accept defender dogma, and I routinely criticize defender groups when they deserve it-- the Grey Wardens can attest to that. But I do believe our military can raid without being destructive; that defending is more challenging and builds better skills; and that our regional culture is not amenable to the kind of dark/evil/demony themes that help the biggest raider groups recruit.

About the only thing I would stand against in how our regions conducts itself in R/D is destroying regions and long-term raider occupations. Region destruction is a bright line. Long-term raider occupations drain resources without any added value to an unaligned region.
 

HI GLEN! WHAT ARE YOUR PLANS RELATING TO THE JOINT GOOD OF GAME-SIDE, FORUM AND DISCORD COMMUNITIES?

This is an area where I think the Minister of Regional Affairs takes lead. If elected, cross-platform issues will definitely be a part of the unified agenda my Cabinet would publish, with a lot of input from MoRA.

(This post was last modified: 06-09-2018, 09:42 AM by sandaoguo.)

Reply

1) How do you feel about regional involvement in the election so far?
2) Do you believe the Cabinet should go back to using formal statements as the primary means we communicate in the NSGP forums?
3) If a minister disagreed got elected on a platform different than the agenda you are proposing the prime minister set (or simply disagrees) for the agenda you set out.  If it came down to it, who's view should have supremacy?

The 16th Delegate of The South Pacific

Reply

the Cabinet doesn't work when there's a lot of discord

Solution: return to the forums! #ForumSupremacy

~ Aumeltopia ~

Raccoons are bandits! First they steal your food . . . and then your heart/identity!

Reply