CRS Membership Reform Alternative |
I would like to propose the following alternative in CRS membership requirements and the process we have for becoming a member. I strongly believe that making this an Assembly-driven process will open a large security hole in our region, as the Assembly isn't a very deliberative body. A skilled demagogue can whip up enough votes to catapult themselves into the CRS, despite even universal objection from the CRS itself. There's also the very real issue of foreign imports engaging in voting manipulation. They don't need to import a whole lot of people to tip the scales and reach 2/3rds in the Assembly.
Additionally, we need to be realistic about what would go down if we have a CRS with a lot of in-fighting. We know what that looks like with the Cabinet. We've had people resign due to serious in-fighting, and have Cabinets slow to a crawl because of it. That will happen in the CRS, too, which is why it's important for the CRS to have a real say in vetting prospective members. A simple recommendation isn't enough-- it depends entirely on the Assembly deferring to that recommendation, and how many of you right now would actually defer to the CRS's opinion on a nominee? The response to that has been so far: "Well, the people who don't like a prospective member need to resign, because they aren't capable of working with them." That's backwards. If the CRS basically unanimously rejects somebody, we really are going to say that they all need to resign, so that the Assembly can put that person in? That doesn't pass the smell test. When the CRS rejects someone, it's not just because some members don't get along. Sam and I didn't get along, but we work together. Rejected applicants so far have been rejected because a majority of CRS members (sometimes, unanimously) have said that it would be impossible to trust the applicants. That's not "petty spite." Anyways, blogpost over. Here's my alternative: ----- Quote:IX. THE COUNCIL ON REGIONAL SECURITY
I can live with this. I don't know why you didn't bring it up sooner, we could have saved a lot of time and avoided a lot of drama. Regardless...
If I can make a few minor suggestions: - a Soft Power Disbursement Rating of at least 50,000, or a Regional Influence ranking of Vassal, in The South Pacific This ensures no one is admitted to the CRS if their SPDR or RI ranking comes from outside TSP. - with simple majority approval by the Assembly. It's best to be clear. The intelligence classification system idea is new. What do you intend with it? Also, why no chairperson?
I don't have any specific ideas on classification at the moment, but we currently consider some things classified and some not, and at varying degrees. I think it would be a good idea to put that down in writing, particularly who decides levels of classification.
As for the chair, I don't think include it for the reasons mentioned elsewhere. It's a lot for one person to do, and I think the CRS can choose their own spokesperson if they think it's necessary. But one person in charge of running the CRS, doing PR, handling investigations, coordinating intel, etc., would most likely result in a lot of things falling through the cracks. (05-16-2017, 07:59 PM)sandaoguo Wrote: I don't have any specific ideas on classification at the moment, but we currently consider some things classified and some not, and at varying degrees. I think it would be a good idea to put that down in writing, particularly who decides levels of classification. Ah, I see. That seems reasonable and would probably help a lot with some of the issues we've been discussing lately, like the inadequate provisions in the Criminal Code related to espionage. (05-16-2017, 07:59 PM)sandaoguo Wrote: As for the chair, I don't think include it for the reasons mentioned elsewhere. It's a lot for one person to do, and I think the CRS can choose their own spokesperson if they think it's necessary. But one person in charge of running the CRS, doing PR, handling investigations, coordinating intel, etc., would most likely result in a lot of things falling through the cracks. Well, the CRS knows better than I do if it needs a chairperson. The reason I included it in my proposal, and I presume the reason the APC included some chairperson language in their original proposal, is that @Tsunamy has specifically requested something like that several times. He has pointed to the lack of a chairperson as one of the reasons the CRS is so slow to act, etc. If I had one recommendation about this, I would recommend including some kind of chairperson language, even if you reduce the role based on your concerns about giving the chairperson too much to do. Someone to moderate the CRS' discussions and call for a vote before discussion drags on for weeks seems sensible, even if I was perhaps being too excessive in the responsibilities I was assigning the chairperson.
I would prefer a 3/5ths majority vote, but if we think a simple majority is better, then that's fine with me.
-Griffindor/Ebonhand
-Current Roles/Positions -Legislator 2/24/20- -High Court Justice 6/7/20- -South Pacific Coral Guard 11/17/20- -Minister of Engagement 6/17/22- -Past Roles/Positions -Legislator 7/3/16-4/10/18 -Secretary of State 4/3/20-2/24/21 -Chair of the APC 9/24/16-5/31/17 -Vice-Chair of the APC 6/1/17-4/10/18 -Local Council Member 7/1/17-11/17/17 -Citizen 5/2012-12/2014 and 2/26/16-7/3/2016
I defer to the more experienced legislators with respect to actual drafting on CRS reform as the mechanics & inner workings of regional security do not fall under my purview, nor do I know the full history of our region. But for what it's worth, I'd be okay with these reforms.
I like this as well and 5. helps solve the problems mentioned here and elsewhere about cohesiveness.
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
I agree with griffin but other than that I really really like this.
Above all else, I hope to be a decent person.
Has Been What's Next? CoA: August 2016-January 2017
Minister of Foreign Affairs: October 2019-June 2020, October 2020- February 2021
I've added language that lets the CRS choose a chair, with rather open-ended duties that the CRS can choose themselves.
If there's no more debate, I'd like to motion this to vote.
3/5ths majority?
-Griffindor/Ebonhand
-Current Roles/Positions -Legislator 2/24/20- -High Court Justice 6/7/20- -South Pacific Coral Guard 11/17/20- -Minister of Engagement 6/17/22- -Past Roles/Positions -Legislator 7/3/16-4/10/18 -Secretary of State 4/3/20-2/24/21 -Chair of the APC 9/24/16-5/31/17 -Vice-Chair of the APC 6/1/17-4/10/18 -Local Council Member 7/1/17-11/17/17 -Citizen 5/2012-12/2014 and 2/26/16-7/3/2016 |
Users browsing this thread: |
1 Guest(s) |