(02-07-2017, 06:43 PM)Roavin Wrote: There's a very, very good reason why we went away from that (that has nothing to do with Tsu), and it would be a biiig step backward to do so for a democratic region like ours.

The PM has, as I see it, two jobs.

1. Be a mediator in the Cabinet
Sometimes the cabinet ministers need to work together but don't agree on something. It's a perfectly normal thing. The PM is there to mediate. In my first term (DM, Imki, Glen, myself), DM was there several times to make sure we children were playing nice with each other.

2. Step in when the other ministers can't
As I see it, the PM must be able to be MoRA, MoMA, or MoFA as needed. During this term, there was a stretch of I think 2-3 weeks were Sam couldn't be on much - DM was there to step up to talk to people during that time (for example, to Neo Kervoskia after the Osiris statement seeking to mend relations with TSP).

DM isn't the most vocal one in the cabinet chambers, but his presence (or another PMs) would still be sorely missed for these reasons if we were to change this. Firmly against any change to this.

More commonly known as a Chief of Staff, or Minister without Portfolio or an advisor.

I must thank you all however as you've proven my point perfectly. You all care too much about the status-quo than even think about supporting any change or any new idea from anyone. I can see why Tsu would not like this, it would mean some real competition for him come Delegate elections. Tsu like DM has no record to defend so everyone thinks he's done an amazing job. When there is nothing for you to defend as there is nothing for you to do, you'll have always done a good job and so there is no need for someone to challenge you, and so the status-quo remains the same.

Have you not noticed that everyone is worthy of re-election, everyone has done an amazing job no matter what. Let's be honest here this Cabinet has been one of our worst. There has been no change, no achievement, nothing. Yet I bet that if they all stood for re-election they would all be re-elected.

I'm talking now to those who want to see TSP active again, who don't want to protect the status-quo, who aren't currently part of the "establishment" (I hate that word but it's the only one that meets the context here). If TSP is to become active again then change is needed. It may not be my change, it may be someone else's, but the only way that TSP will become a success again is with change. If you don't stand up to those who benefit from the status-quo then those people will always be in charge and we will always be in the status-quo.