(05-02-2020, 04:06 AM)Jay Coop Wrote: First of all, I don't understand why Omega's proposal is abandoning the convention of ministry names ending in "affairs".

Quite frankly, I think most of the suggested 'affairs' names we've come up with across the whole of this debate (including December) sound rather silly and there is really no need to continue the convention during such an expansion, especially if, as in Omega's suggestion, we end up with more ministries that don't have it than do. Stretching affairs to cover the the ministries we have right now was a stretch, but a barable one under the circumstances, but extending it post that just seems rather silly to me.

(05-02-2020, 04:06 AM)Jay Coop Wrote: Secondly, I think it would be better to explore what a two-way split would produce than directly jump into a three ministry split. I believe that we, the senior leadership of the Ministry, shared a reasonable alternative.

As Omega and I have pointed out, there's just not much point splitting the ministry so that only integration is removed, since that doesn't, currently, take up much of the ministry's time and effort. As I see it, the real meat of a split is only ever going to be between media and culture and whilst integration is important to the region, no one really wants to do it, either (and that's historical, not just a comment on the present situation). Thus, it either needs to be its own ministry so no one else is "saddled" with it, except those who choose to be, or if a three way split is so unpalatable, it needs to be cut out entirely and perhaps given to the cabinet as a whole as a cabinet project.

I'm in favour of using non-binding polls to find a way forward, although there's no guarantee that they will.