| Great Council Extension? |
|
And this deadline meand that any changes to the government will be made by the 14th. Any reforms to Cabinet positions will be done BEFORE elections rather than right after electing a new cabinet
None of these proposals are *ready* to go to vote. We still need more debate.
Hileville, Tsu, and myself are still working on our proposals. We have jobs. I get approximately 2 days off a week to dedicate to this, along with living a life. There's no reason why the GC needs to end before elections. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Also, it's actually an incredibly bad idea to rush this so everything applies before the next election. Elections start in 8 days. We are not going to have the wrinkles ironed out in that time. We don't know what's going to pass and what isn't, and we will have to rewrite the elections law based on what passes. Rushing everything is inviting problems.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I would strongly encourage Farengeto and Sandaoguo to talk with each other and find an acceptable compromise between immediate suspension and idenfinite extension. Constantly switching between the two is not conductive to civil debate and will only divert attention from the important issues in this Council.
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
There is literally no reason why we need to rush anything. No harm is being done by keeping the GC open until the actual participants finish their proposals and we vote on them. An indefinite extension is meant to get rid of the need to keep changing the dates, and honestly I would've wrote it in there in the first place if this was going to be such an unnecessarily big deal.
We are literally changing the foundations of our governing system in these proposals. The Prime Minister proposal was written only a week ago. Those of us who actually care need the time to continue hashing out the details, so we're not rushing and writing sloppy law that will need to be fixed because it fucks up the election. If you find the GC boring or dragging along, then don't participate. The only people I'm seeing clamoring for a speedy end are those who aren't really engaging in it all that much. If Farengeto doesn't want to keep it going because he never even wanted to do it in the first place (as he said on IRC), then fine, resign as Chair or wait around until the few of us who are working on it come get you to fulfill you ceremonial role. Nobody is forcing anybody to participate, and keeping the forum open isn't doing any harm to anybody either. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I agree with GR here. There are a couple of big changes being proposed and some of the other stuff we have been talking about would need to be altered based on what is decided.
The proposals we are currently debating are to change how the Cabinet works, therefor any five year old could tell you that the council must end before the election. This council has had almost a month it's been slow the whole way through and now I'm only two or three people debating issues now. This council has to end now.
Europeian Ambassador to The South Pacific
Former Local Council Member Former Minister of Regional Affairs Former High Court Justice
(11-07-2015, 06:50 PM)Punchwood Wrote: The proposals we are currently debating are to change how the Cabinet works, therefor any five year old could tell you that the council must end before the election. This council has had almost a month it's been slow the whole way through and now I'm only two or three people debating issues now. This council has to end now. Well, I'm 23 and I'm telling you you're wrong. Changing how elections are run a week before they start is a bad idea-- coming from the person who has to run them. There literally won't be enough time, anyways. And for the record, we haven't been debating all proposals for a month. The head of state proposal wasn't written until a week ago. You guys are exaggerating. Not that a month is even all that long anyways. Major reforms are slow moving in TSP and always have been. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Changing them after the election is wrong then we'll need another one or the whole thing will end up being very complicate. The only people who want to extended this council are the only people who want huge changes. Nobody wants massive changes it's about time you learned that and just accept the fact that your ideas and one you support may fail and get on with life.
Europeian Ambassador to The South Pacific
Former Local Council Member Former Minister of Regional Affairs Former High Court Justice (11-08-2015, 05:35 PM)Punchwood Wrote: Nobody wants massive changes it's about time you learned that and just accept the fact that your ideas and one you support may fail and get on with life. That's both overly harsh and completely false Punch. I'm quite interested in a few of these proposals and I'm willing to patiently wait for those creating drafts to finish up. I don't see a need to finish before elections. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |