Quote:Elections Act
An act establishing elections for office
[...]
6. Vacancies of Office
(1) A special election will be held for vacancies arising within the Cabinet, if at least half of the term remains. If less than half of the term remains, or the position is vacant due to nobody running in its election, the Cabinet may appoint a replacement until the next regularly scheduled election.
(2) Should the office of Delegate become vacant, the next person in the line of succession will become interim Delegate until the next regularly scheduled election. If no person qualifies for the office, then a special election will be held.
(3) If a Chair is no longer in office prior to the election of a new Chair, a deputy appointed by the outgoing Chair will serve as Acting Chair to exercise all powers and responsibilities of the office of the Chair, subject to all regulations and restrictions imposed upon the Chair by law. In the event that more than one deputy was appointed, the most senior deputy according to the order of appointment and availability will serve as Acting Chair. In the event that no deputy was appointed or is available, the Cabinet will designate a legislator to serve as Acting Chair.
(4) Prime Minister and Cabinet ministers may trigger a special election for the position they hold with the intent to resign upon inauguration of the new Prime Minister or Cabinet minister, if no less than half of their term remains.
[...]
With the brief discussion that occurred in the
Resignation as Prime Minister thread, and a pending
Legal Question before the High Court - I bring the quoted amendment for discussion and consideration.
From nominations to certifications, elections take time. HumanSanity, sensibly, offered to hold the position until the next PM was elected to ensure a smooth transition. Election Commissioner, on the other hand, declared that a vacancy must occur as per the Elections Act for a special elections to be held. While the Legal Question may be answered by the High Court and a binding precedent might be established -- I believe it is this Assemblies responsibility to address this issue.
The amendment is fairly simple. If the Prime Minister or Cabinet ministers intends to resign, they can. Alternatively, they may trigger a special election
while they are holding their elected office,. PM may trigger this special election whenever, as the leader of the 'government', and the Cabinet ministers may trigger this special election as long as no less than half of their term remains. (If they served more than their half term, the Cabinet can appoint their successor until next regularly scheduled election) They shall continue to serve in their elected office until Election Commissioner certifies the results of the special election.
I don't see the need for such urgency. There is a question currently pending before the Court; let's see what our Justices say and then act accordingly.
I'm opposed to this because it seems to indicate if the PM resigns with less than half the term remaining, they must be elected. Special elections introduce a lot of inefficiency in executive government while adding almost no benefit in oversight. Doing them when more than half the term remains is understandable at least (although, to be quite honest, could be persuaded to get rid of it). Doing them at literally any time will result in PMs who wait through week and a half elections to serve two week terms.
Maybe I'm just jaded from how the last few months have gone, but honestly we should consider doing away with non-PM special elections and let the Cabinet select new portfolio'd Ministers after resignations/recalls anyway.
(03-08-2022, 01:22 PM)Quebecshire Wrote: [ -> ]Maybe I'm just jaded from how the last few months have gone, but honestly we should consider doing away with non-PM special elections and let the Cabinet select new portfolio'd Ministers after resignations/recalls anyway.
Hey, if we're throwing out radical ideas, let's just have the PM appoint the Cabinet.
(03-08-2022, 10:58 AM)Kris Kringle Wrote: [ -> ]I don't see the need for such urgency. There is a question currently pending before the Court; let's see what our Justices say and then act accordingly.
I welcome the High Courts review of the legal question brought before it by you as the Election Commissioner in due course. However, I don't believe we are rushing anything by discussing a possible amendment to the law, as it is the Assemblies responsibility to legislate to address this issue that was not previously considered.
(03-08-2022, 12:50 PM)HumanSanity Wrote: [ -> ]I'm opposed to this because it seems to indicate if the PM resigns with less than half the term remaining, they must be elected. Special elections introduce a lot of inefficiency in executive government while adding almost no benefit in oversight. Doing them when more than half the term remains is understandable at least (although, to be quite honest, could be persuaded to get rid of it). Doing them at literally any time will result in PMs who wait through week and a half elections to serve two week terms.
While I understand the time it might take to replace the Prime Minister, my take was that the leader of government should probably be elected by the legislators and not via a cabinet decision. That said, as an alternative;
(4) Prime Minister and Cabinet ministers may trigger a special election for the position they hold with the intent to resign upon certification of the results by the Election Commissioner, if no less than half of their term remains.
Just curious — and it's a bit late at night and I'm a bit tired, so forgive me if I'm missing something obvious — but why did you choose to write the amendment language in this way, as opposed to just starting the existing special election process upon a resignation without requiring a vacancy?
(03-09-2022, 05:24 AM)LFP Wrote: [ -> ]I welcome the High Courts review of the legal question brought before it by you as the Election Commissioner in due course. However, I don't believe we are rushing anything by discussing a possible amendment to the law, as it is the Assemblies responsibility to legislate to address this issue that was not previously considered.
The moment the Assembly passes this whatever the Court says, if it has even said it by then, will become irrelevant. I don't see why there's a need to even submit a draft now instead of waiting to see what the Court answers, let alone debate it.
With nearly a month since the Legal Question was asked to the Courts, and three weeks since the question was found justiciable and this discussion was posted for the Assembly, I motion to move this amendment to a vote.
I apologize for not having looked at this for a bit. I think a modification should be made before it goes to vote.
As it is, your amendment does not accomplish its intended purpose. By law, there is a one week transition period after an election (including a special election) before the new Minister takes office. As worded, this would leave us Minister-less for that one week transition period. Thus, it closes some but not all of the issue.
I would suggest the phrase "upon certification of the results by the Election Commissioner" be replaced by the phrase "upon inauguration of the new Prime Minister or Cabinet minister".