I'm not opposed to making the Cabinet channel publicly viewable. Of course, we might need to keep the existing channel private because of opsec possibly being in that channel.

4× Cabinet minister /// 1× OWL director /// CRS member /// SPSF

My History

Reply

There are legitimate diplomatic reasons some treaties aren't talked about before they are ready. I was all about letting the Assembly know when I would start negotiating some treaties and that was always an intentional choice. I also know as soon as I mention a treaty to the Assembly, even in the private halls, everyone who is anyone in NS will know what we are doing.

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

Reply

Of course, part of the onus is also on legislators to actually demand accountability from their elected officials.

This. I can't even count how often I would beg the electorate to ask me (as PM) their questions only to be greeted with mostly silence.

As the one that has been PM more than anybody else: Yes, we should demand more from our Prime Ministers. That would be a much more effective thing than opening things up in this way. In theory, the PM could still lie, but that's what whistleblowers are for (and they're protected under the law)

(This post was last modified: 01-12-2021, 05:09 AM by Roavin.)

Reply

Of course, part of the onus is also on legislators to actually demand accountability from their elected officials.

This. I can't even count how often I would beg the electorate to ask me (as PM) their questions only to be greeted with mostly silence.

As the one that has been PM more than anybody else: Yes, we should demand more from our Prime Ministers. That would be a much more effective thing than opening things up in this way. In theory, the PM could still lie, but that's what whistleblowers are for (and they're protected under the law)

I think there’s a real disconnect when we’re “begging” the Assembly to hold the Cabinet accountable, but at the same time almost everything the Cabinet does is done in secrecy and we’ve created a culture where the Assembly doesn’t need to know “how the sausage is made.”

While you do point out the whistleblower law, there are two big flaws in relying on that for real accountability:
- It relies on people within the ministry or part of the project to report the behavior. Relying on in-groups to hold themselves accountable isn’t effective.
- There hasn’t been a change in culture where people would *feel* like revealing confidential info is socially acceptable, even if it’s legal. (And that ties into what we culturally would consider “concerning behavior” that’s protected under the whistleblower act.)

In the recall of Swifty, how would things have gone differently if the Assembly had the benefit, from the beginning of the term, of seeing exactly how active they were? How many times they were asked for updates and didn’t respond? How many times they missed deadlines? Etc. All of that being behind closed doors provided protection from accountability. The Assembly relied on hearsay, and ultimately voted (imo) based on their preconceived notions of those lodging the complaints *and* the systemic cultural bias we have towards new/inexperienced ministers.

Things may have gone very differently if the Assembly was able to see how the ministry was operating in real time, because the channels were viewable by the public. There’s nothing in any of the relevant channels that would harm TSP, yet the Assembly is unlikely to ever see the contents at all.

Reply

So, since my phrasing was invoked, I do feel the need to clarify "how the sausage gets made" was in reference to say ... a thread about the linguistic nuanced in a press release. Like, sure, there's no inherent reason to keep it secret, but what does anyone learning to from finding out Seraph fixes my comma splices (for a fictional example)? Or a vote ... maybe say on a treaty ... where particular members have reservations, but the Cabinet wants to create a seemingly united front?

I agree that relying on whistleblowers is not generally the best practice since many people who inculturated into particular ways of doing things and then those structures don't get challenged.

Again, I think the situation is the right amount of calibration. I think having a Q&A as suggested is an interesting idea and, potentially, an activity-creating one. But, having some level of openness without completing throwing the doors open can be useful, too.

-tsunamy
[forum admin]

Reply

My point isn't to rely on whistleblowers, but specifically that we as Legislators should demand that our Prime Minister answers to us on a more regular basis. Be that through increased Cabinet Twitter, through Q&A sessions, or direct questions really doesn't matter, so long as it's being done. If that's being done and the PM is outright lying about something, it'll come out soon enough one way or the other.

Reply

The Cabinet definitely needs to have access to a private space to do their work, and I don't think making it publicly viewable is necessary or reasonable.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

---

PREVIOUS ROLES

Former Delegate (x2.5)
Former Member of the Committee for State Security
Former Chief Justice of The High Court (x3)
Former Minister of Foreign Affairs (x2)
Former Chair of the Assembly (x3)
Former Minister of Security (x2)
Former Local Councillor (x2.5)
Former Forum Administrator
Former Minister of Media

Reply

Just to sum it up, and since I don't have any clever fixes as of this moment, here are the main points that I hear in this argument: 

(For Transparency)

-Cabinet officials would be more accountable for their actions as well as what they say
-Internal problems in Ministries would be more easily noticed instead of buried in rumor and mystery
-TSP Legislators, or whoever we will let see the channels, as a whole, would hold each other accountable for the work they say they will do. 
-Whistleblowers are ineffective when it comes to accountability

(Against Transparency)

- It would be trivial to show pointless information that would diminish the final product (media articles)
- Some treaties are "case-sensitive" and would be in jeopardy if they are out in the open
- The Cabinet needs a private space to work


(Solutions)

-Creation of bimonthly QAs/AMAs toward the Ministers that would be hosted by the Chair
-Usage of the Sunshine Act for Discord logs that would be released after a period of time

Local Councillor (3/15/20 - 6/23/20)
Deputy Minister of Educational Affairs (2/19/20 - 4/9/20)
Senior Fellow of Integration (12/20/20 - 2/19/20)
Fellow (1/12/19 - ~10/14/20) 
Ambassador to Osiris and TWP (4/3/20 - 7/8/20)
Legislator (1/19/19 - 11/1/21)
Chair of the Assembly (6/23/20 - 9/3/20)
Secretary of State (7/8/20 - 2/4/21 | 6/14/21 - 11/1/21) 
Deputy of Media (2/14/21 - 11/1/21)
Ambassador to TNP and Lazarus  (6/14/21 - 10/22/21)
MoE Leadership (10/14/20 - 11/1/21)

Reply

So, since my phrasing was invoked, I do feel the need to clarify "how the sausage gets made" was in reference to say ... a thread about the linguistic nuanced in a press release. Like, sure, there's no inherent reason to keep it secret, but what does anyone learning to from finding out Seraph fixes my comma splices (for a fictional example)? Or a vote ... maybe say on a treaty ... where particular members have reservations, but the Cabinet wants to create a seemingly united front?

They learn that Seraph is, indeed, working on it. I think that you guys are taking the best case scenario of a Cabinet and wondering, "What's the issue?" But a more apt example that speaks to why I like the idea of most ministry channels/areas being publicly accessible is what happens when we don't have great Cabinets, or we have ministers that are trying to mislead people. A minister, for example, that is saying there are a number of project well on their way, but in reality they just scrambled to get together something after being called inactive. Or a minister that does something for selfish reasons, but tells the Assembly that the thought never crossed their mind. Or all kinds of misrepresentations (small and large) that have happened on a semi-regular basis for a long time now. I can't tell you how supremely frustrating it is to see a minister be inactive for 3 months, only to throw together something before elections so they can say "this is what we've been working on!" and the Assembly is none the wiser. (And no, "progress reports" or QA sessions or regular updates don't prevent this. Those also tend to exaggerate.)

As far as treaties and private channels, nobody has said every single thing must be done in daylight. It is worth having a channel where the Cabinet can discuss confidential matters. And anything involving other regions where those other regions want the discussions to be confidential... can be. There's nothing wrong with that. But the current practice is to consider absolutely everything the Cabinet and individual ministers say and do is confidential until they want it to be otherwise, and probably 90% of Cabinet work is never made public at all.

(This post was last modified: 01-13-2021, 07:15 PM by sandaoguo.)

Reply

Glen — I wasn't actually disagreeing with you on most of this, I just wanted to clarify what I meant because the phrase has some negative connotations and I'm talking more innocuously. 

Again, it seems it's just matter of degrees.

-tsunamy
[forum admin]

Reply