| Broken Assembly? |
(05-07-2014, 12:59 PM)Tsunamy Wrote:To GE mainly, but also to the other people who talked about changing the powers of the Chair.(05-07-2014, 09:42 AM)Belschaft Wrote: The CoA already enjoys broad discretionary powers. Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator ![[Image: B9ytUsy.png]](https://i.imgur.com/B9ytUsy.png)
Well there broad discretionary powers should then allow them to you know fix typos.
Escade ~ Positions Held in TSP ~ Delegate | Vice Delegate Minister of Regional Affairs, | Minister of Foreign Affairs | Minister of Military Affairs ~ The Sparkly One ~ My Pinterest
No, that's just crazy, Escade! My goodness; I almost fell off my rocking chair...
Delegate of Spiritus
Vice Secretary-General of the World Assembly "When you are the potatoes guy everyone is like, 'Yeah, it's the potatoes guy!'" - Max Barry
Narrow nondiscretionary powers sounds far more accurate to me.
The Third Imperium
Journalist, South Pacific Independent News Network (SPINN) Provost, Magisterium Sergeant, East Pacific Sovereign Army Journalist, East Pacific News Service Foreign Affairs Minister, The West Pacific
I am new here, so I don't know everyone's history... but it seems to me there is a lot of animosity in the "debates". It gets to the point where it deteriorates the arguments down to nothing but seemingly petty personal attacks and blah blah blah. I think that might be a big contribution to the "broken assembly". It makes it impossible to have any meaningful conversation because a majority of the people contributing are just looking for ways to make personal attacks. For me, it's an unattractive quality of the Assembly, and in all honesty it deters me from posting out of fear of becoming caught in the crossfire of hostile and unnecessary dialogue. But again, I'm new here.
United States of Kalukmangala
Former High Court Justice
Shut up, GB!
The Third Imperium
Journalist, South Pacific Independent News Network (SPINN) Provost, Magisterium Sergeant, East Pacific Sovereign Army Journalist, East Pacific News Service Foreign Affairs Minister, The West Pacific
(05-08-2014, 05:20 AM)Gustave Berr Wrote: I am new here, so I don't know everyone's history... but it seems to me there is a lot of animosity in the "debates". It gets to the point where it deteriorates the arguments down to nothing but seemingly petty personal attacks and blah blah blah. I think that might be a big contribution to the "broken assembly". It makes it impossible to have any meaningful conversation because a majority of the people contributing are just looking for ways to make personal attacks. For me, it's an unattractive quality of the Assembly, and in all honesty it deters me from posting out of fear of becoming caught in the crossfire of hostile and unnecessary dialogue. But again, I'm new here. Thanks GB. Really -- having an outsider input is rally important because, as you acknowledged, we all do have histories here. So, please don't be afraid to speak up. Second, going back to Bels point, the CoA technically has the power to decide what goes to a vote and doesn't, which, in turn, can greatly alter the law. (At least, I believe that's part of how others have interpreted the powers of the CoA.) This is a broad power and, vis-a-vis, we shouldn't really be concerned about delinating the powers a bit more since the powers could already be taken by a CoA. (05-08-2014, 08:24 AM)Tsunamy Wrote: Second, going back to Bels point, the CoA technically has the power to decide what goes to a vote and doesn't, which, in turn, can greatly alter the law. (At least, I believe that's part of how others have interpreted the powers of the CoA.)You are correct in that power does exist; it is not, however, one that I am aware of ever being used, at least in terms of refusing to bring something to vote (past Chairs, including myself, have made alterations to bills between the motion to vote and vote stage, usually to clear up Typo's or language). The pending Judicial Review touches on this area - when the law says "all aspects", it means all aspects. The Chair can legally create any form of legislative procedure that does not contradict those areas mandated by law - voting periods as an example - that they feel like. This could include debate format, required legislative form (I used to insist on consistent form for all new legislation), time periods, mandatory second readings, etc. In terms of actual powers held, the CoA is quite possibly the most powerful government official, due to the centrality of The Assembly and as such the sheer number of areas that The Chair has authority over. I created the mandatory three day discussion and then vote system for recalls precisely to prevent the CoA from refusing to bring a vote on their own recall to vote - something that they could have done, legally, prior. Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator
Perhaps some other legislation would benefit from a similar system...
The Third Imperium
Journalist, South Pacific Independent News Network (SPINN) Provost, Magisterium Sergeant, East Pacific Sovereign Army Journalist, East Pacific News Service Foreign Affairs Minister, The West Pacific |
![[+]](/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
PREVIOUS ROLES 
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 2 Guest(s) |