| [PASSED] OWL ministry alternative |
|
My one misgiving about this and about the similar idea of demoting some of all of the legacy Ministries to Offices or such like, is hope it speaks of our priorities as a region. The presence of a Cabinet Minister with equal voting rights to the rest of the Cabinet tells me that we value that Minister's portfolio as much as those of the rest of the Cabinet. It's one of the reasons I was for the MoRA split, because I felt our domestic and cultural output was seen as someway lesser than our military and foreign affairs interests, by the weighting of their votes.
In the case of the World Assembly, I'll be the first to admit that I don't personally have much stake - it's never been part of my personal interests in this game, but I've always been passionate about TSP being a well-rounded welcome to all aspects of the game for those who join and, as such, Is be keen for us to show how serious we are by weighting it equally with other cabinet concerns. Is there a way to achieve a balance between a sense of equal importance without giving the Office Cabinet level privileges? Would this just be something we have to work on culturally, or can we legislate any degree of compromise? I have no suggestions here, only genuine questions seeking solutions. Founder of the Church of the South Pacific [Forum Thread] [Discord], a safe place to discuss spirituality for people of all faiths and none (currently looking for those interested in prayer and/or "home" groups);
And The Silicon Pens [Discord], a writer's group for the South Pacific and beyond! Yahweo usenneo ir varleo, ihraneo jurlaweo hraseu seu, ir jiweveo arladi. Salma 145:8
(02-07-2021, 05:56 PM)Seraph Wrote: The presence of a Cabinet Minister with equal voting rights to the rest of the Cabinet tells me that we value that Minister's portfolio as much as those of the rest of the Cabinet. ... While I understand and see where you're coming from, I think this is ultimately unhealthy for our government to view things this way. The reality of how the Cabinet functions is that there aren't many votes on things. When there are, it's almost always on things that aren't actually part of most ministers' portfolios. For instance, foreign affairs-- we're reaching the point where the ministers without foreign affairs as part of their portfolio (MoM, MoE, MoC) are literally outnumbering the ministers that do have it (MoFA, MoD). So it's entirely possible today, and even more so if we add a new ministry, that FA decisions are ultimately made by ministers other than the one we actually elect to do the job, if they end up disagreeing with the MoFA. That's something I think we need to have a bigger discussion on, but I digress... (02-07-2021, 05:56 PM)Seraph Wrote: Is there a way to achieve a balance between a sense of equal importance without giving the Office Cabinet level privileges? Would this just be something we have to work on culturally, or can we legislate any degree of compromise? To me, I think this is a valid compromise. We do have a cultural conception of the executive branch as limited to "the Cabinet." But it doesn't have to be. OWL as its own executive-level office does make it of great importance. The Director would be running things at the same executive level as a minister. But ultimately, when you look at what the Cabinet is really for (policy-making), there are important functions of our government that don't really fit in with the Cabinet's purpose. Does that make sense?
I’m in support of this too. I agree with the concerns about a WA Ministry and thus have voted no to the current legislation. It’s not really a policymaking body and I don’t see what its role in the executive really is, but I do like the idea of formalizing it. I’ve largely stayed out of this debate because I don’t really get involved in WA politics, but I agree with Glen’s reasoning here and have his same concerns.
Witchcraft and Sorcery Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense. Formerly many things in other regions. Defender. Ideologue. he/they.
I said on the other thread that I have no objection to formalising the role of OWL, but that I oppose the creation of a new ministry. This proposal achieves that end and I am happy to support it.
I'm not sure the Assembly needs to confirm the office-holder, for the reasons given earlier in the thread. If I recall recent discussions correctly, it was broadly agreed that even an unelected official could be recalled by the Assembly, so that strikes me as an appropriate safeguard.
Updated formatting if the vote to create a full ministry fails:
(please see OP for clarity)
little formatting note: in section 1.1 of the World Assembly act, last line. "Ministry" should now be "Office," no?
otherwise this looks good. I support either version depending on whether the current vote passes or fails. Witchcraft and Sorcery Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense. Formerly many things in other regions. Defender. Ideologue. he/they.
OP updated with latest draft language. Removed enabling resolution, as it's no longer necessary. Added ability for Director to appoint deputies.
Full support from me.
Since this last change was just adapting the language for the other vote failing with no real substantive changes, I motion to waive the debate period and motion this to vote.
I'll second both motions.
-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 |
![[+]](/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
translate![[-]](https://tspforums.xyz/images/sidr/blue/collapse.png)
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 4 Guest(s) |