| Appointed Cabinet |
I think there's something to say about our system leading to divided Cabinets. How many months have gone to waste because of Cabinet infighting caused by people running on opposed platforms?
In my opinion, we are too small and/or inactive for an appointed cabinet. In TNP, as I see it, an appointed cabinet is succesful because new people come. Activity is higher than in TSP. If we have an appointed cabinet, not only more chances at electing our officials will disappear, but Delegates may choose to appoint the Old Guard and those who joined them over and over. After all, the only experienced and/or likeable people here are the old generation, plus some relatively new members. We are waning in activity, and that means a shrinking pool of new politicians. The Old Guard may just be chosen over and over. If you want my support for this, first our activity needs to boom and new people must get involved in our affairs. Because the only people I see in politics who actually get elected are mostly people from 3-10 years ago.
If we pass this, the forum would be less democratic than the RMB community, for pete's sake! They would elect three officials, whilist we will only elect one. One. And here's my suggestion to stop infighting: instead of fighting in Cabinet, how about if candidates start talking to other candidates of different fields, and form alliances and support them?
Deputy Regional Minister of the Planning and Development Agency(March 8-May 19, 2014)
Local Council Member(April 24-August 11) Court Justice of TSP(August 15-December 7)
(01-13-2016, 10:21 PM)sandaoguo Wrote: I think there's something to say about our system leading to divided Cabinets. How many months have gone to waste because of Cabinet infighting caused by people running on opposed platforms? Yeah because some people — who shall remain nameless — feel the need to set up us-versus-them mentalities. Beside, the reasons there are issues is when one Cabinet member decides to intervene in other Cabinet areas. That can easily be solved by better dividing responsibilities.
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
I find this proposal interesting, and I'm not sure either way. I would however, be 100% for allowing the cabinet to appoint a replacement for a resigning minister.
(01-13-2016, 10:04 PM)Tsunamy Wrote: I don't like this. We've been discussing how to get more people involved and increase activity and this flies directly in the face of that. Moreover, if we're pushing to get rid of the EC, the court is appointed and now the Cabinet is appointed — we're cutting down on the Assembly's say. I actually disagree here. We aren't cutting down on the say because we will have more candidates for Delegate/Vice Delegate in the elections. We will have better elections for this position with the winners then deciding on their preferred Cabinet which needs Assembly approval. (01-13-2016, 10:38 PM)Ryccia Wrote: In my opinion, we are too small and/or inactive for an appointed cabinet. In TNP, as I see it, an appointed cabinet is succesful because new people come. Activity is higher than in TSP. If we have an appointed cabinet, not only more chances at electing our officials will disappear, but Delegates may choose to appoint the Old Guard and those who joined them over and over. After all, the only experienced and/or likeable people here are the old generation, plus some relatively new members. We are waning in activity, and that means a shrinking pool of new politicians. The Old Guard may just be chosen over and over. If you want my support for this, first our activity needs to boom and new people must get involved in our affairs. Because the only people I see in politics who actually get elected are mostly people from 3-10 years ago. You actually make a good point but are looking at wrong. We typically steer towards electing the known candidate in all races where more than one person runs. But this system would allow for newer nations to be appointed very quickly. TNP has a ton of active citizens but the gem here is that it is the newer citizens that usually get a chance on the Cabinet. I really can see this working in our favor to boost activity. Having a Cabinet that is all working towards the same goal is much easier when one person is picking them. That one person is being empowered to do that (of course with Assembly approval of the nominees) by the Citizens. There would still be an election for the Chair of the Assembly. What I envision happening with this is really a boom in both of those elections where we will get more quality candidates.
I am in favour of the proposed system.
I like to think of it this way: people who care are going to put themselves out there to get on the delegate-elect's radar. The other thing is it raises the value of the delegate and assembly elections. I'd like to think people who want to involve themselves in said ministries are most likely to be noticeable to a delegate. All nominees have to be vetted by the Assembly, so the majority can still influence the cabinets. The un-electable will remain the incapable of being ministers. I'd like to also point out this makes it much easier to involve our RMB with the voting. Just a point to consider. If nothing else, I'd like to do away with special elections, if only for the fact they disrupt the ministries massively.
Call me toast.
(01-14-2016, 03:10 AM)Hileville Wrote:Realistically, though, can we ever point to an instance where a nomination wasn't rubber stamped by the Assembly?(01-13-2016, 10:04 PM)Tsunamy Wrote: I don't like this. We've been discussing how to get more people involved and increase activity and this flies directly in the face of that. Moreover, if we're pushing to get rid of the EC, the court is appointed and now the Cabinet is appointed — we're cutting down on the Assembly's say. I also generally disagree about the idea that we're going to see more candidates for Delegate and Vice Delegate. And think it's likely we're going to have the same amount and then be scrambling to get people to fill the positions. Honestly, I'm torn here. I don't especially like this, but I don't want to stand in the way of change. I guess I'd just ask if we want TSP to become TNP-lite? For me the region has always been a place where we had ample opportunity to get involved in the democratic process. And I feel like this is cutting down on those options.
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
Im not sure this is a great idea. I see it coming down to the elected delegate picking their friends, not those who are actually qualified, for cabinet positions. And the fact that, the anyone running for delegate would have to approach people to be in their cabinet if they were to win... It could, and most likely will, lead to not having a full cabinet at the beginning of a term.
"...if you're normal, the crowd will accept you. But if you're deranged, the crowd will make you their leader." - Christopher Titus
Deranged in NS since 2011 One and ONLY minion of LadyRebels The OUTRAGEOUS CRAZY other half of LadyElysium
I think we have more than enough time to assemble a Cabinet between voting closing and the 1st of the month.
(01-13-2016, 06:48 PM)Hileville Wrote: There was NEVER a vote on this. It was brought up as a discussion and got mixed opinions. The only reason I didn't pursue a vote was due to RL time constraints and the rushed ending to the Great Council. We will see soon what the region thinks on this when it goes to a vote. But we basically did, if no one bothered to write up a final draft then it can't be popular then. Europeian Ambassador to The South Pacific
Former Local Council Member Former Minister of Regional Affairs Former High Court Justice |
![[+]](/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
Quotes
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 2 Guest(s) |