PRESS RELEASE     Assembly Discussion on OWL Reform 21 August 2021 Fellow South Pacificans, Since early July, the Cabinet has been conducting a review of the Office of WA Legislation's (OWL) current structure and staffing following several issues with its operations. Initially, this review was prompted by the repeated failure of OWL to open votes on WA recommendations, thereby failing its core charge per Article 1(1) of the World Assembly Act in issuing World Assembly voting recommendations. To some extent, these issues were one of staffer attention, and a reshuffling of OWL Staff mitigated these issues. However, there were further concerns that the current bureaucratic structure of OWL's voting made the work burden on staffers opening and closing votes too high, while also decreasing the engagement of staffers and the general public in discussions, thereby making staffer engagement in the program structurally unsustainable. As a generalized observation, OWL voting discussions rarely resulted in substantive back-and-forth engagement, making it difficult to find South Pacifican opinions to quote in the current OWL recommendations, and hampering the ability of the region to develop its own autonomous WA judgement and soft power on WA issues. This prompted further discussion about OWL procedure, including discussions of how to encourage further collaboration and/or discussion, decrease the excessively mechanized nature of OWL staffer work, and ensure OWL staffers are not overburdened. The Cabinet and OWL Director deliberated together at length, offering different suggestions and philosophies for WA engagement. Having already discussed these issues at length, we believe it is now time to open these discussions up more to the Assembly writ large. While the Cabinet has extensive thoughts on these matters, it is important to involve all the relevant stakeholders in the conversation before OWL ultimately decides on its own direction. With that, the Prime Minister has declassified the thread "Discord discussion re OWL + talk more here" with several relevant Discord conversations related to OWL reform. The Cabinet invites discussion on the future of OWL, specifically as it relates to resolving the problems of staffer attention and activity and using OWL to increase TSP's broader WA discussion, engagement, and interregional soft power. While discussion has been ongoing for some time, the Cabinet would like to see discussion wrap up in the next month so that work on any relevant reforms can begin near the end of our term and be finalized in the upcoming term. Faithfully yours, The Cabinet

 
Witchcraft and Sorcery

---

Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense. Formerly many things in other regions. Defender. Ideologue. he/they.

(This post was last modified: 08-23-2021, 12:53 PM by Witchcraft and Sorcery.)

Reply

Please read the Cabinet thread here, now declassified: https://tspforums.xyz/thread-9542.html

 
Witchcraft and Sorcery

---

Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense. Formerly many things in other regions. Defender. Ideologue. he/they.

(This post was last modified: 08-22-2021, 11:45 AM by Witchcraft and Sorcery.)

Reply

I still need to go over the full thread, but just to get the question out there, is there a reason why OWL couldn’t work as a more public version of the Court in that truly engaged staff discuss proposals on the merits and effect on TSP and issue recommendations based on that, rather than passively collect opinions?

Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator.
I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum.

Legal Resources:
THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System

(This post was last modified: 08-22-2021, 12:19 PM by Kris Kringle.)

Reply

I still need to go over the full thread, but just to get the question out there, is there a reason why OWL couldn’t work as a more public version of the Court in that truly engaged staff discuss proposals on the merits and effect on TSP and issue recommendations based on that, rather than passively collect opinions?

I think this is a good way to describe one of the options under consideration / goals of a potential OWL reform. Right now, OWL takes a poll on the RMB and compiles opinions and then instructs the Delegate how to vote. In my opinion (which I believe is a consensus, but maybe I'm wrong), we are unsuccessful at actually eliciting discussion or collective decision-making over WA issues, which depletes our ability to use our WA vote in support of our ideals, regional interests, and also in support of the generalized idea of rigorous debates and intellectualism about WA resolutions (and realization that supporting that can increase our soft power in the WA and act as a basis for inevitably beneficial activity in the region).

One potential option is to have a more discussion-oriented format via Discord and/or the forum and/or the RMB followed by issuing recommendations that reflect the consensus (or vote) of that discussion. How exactly that discussion would be run, using what platform, etc. are details that are up for debate.

Minister of Foreign Affairs
General of the South Pacific Special Forces
Ambassador to Balder
Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense

Reply

I agree with the idea of removing Senior Staff and merging it with usual OWL Staff, but I also would support making OWL a normal ministry, rather than just an office.

Local Councilroar.

Selfie

Reply

The only solution is to make OWL a standalone ministry and treat it as such. Only then will it be taken seriously and treated equally to all other ministries. If Media has it's own ministry, why doesn't the World Assembly?

The Commonwealth of Langburn

Nation info

Capital city: Onita (pop. 1,543,000)
National population: 4.2 million
2020 GDP: $NSD 4, 434, 185, 421

WA Member
Regional Legislative Office

Reply

I personally see the question of "how should OWL work/process votes" as a distinct question from "should OWL be a standalone Ministry/its leadership be part of the elected Cabinet".

OWL can be its own Ministry and still follow the exact same process it currently does. OWL could also have its process wildly altered after discussion by the Direction and their Staff and not be an equal Ministry seat. 

Perhaps an elected Ministry portfolio could be a mechanism by which to induce change to OWL and accountability for its structure and leadership. These are certainly interrelated questions, but they are not the same, and I'd hate for the response to the questions raised by the original post or the discussion points in the Cabinet thread to simply be "make it a Ministry".

Minister of Foreign Affairs
General of the South Pacific Special Forces
Ambassador to Balder
Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense

Reply

The only solution is to make OWL a standalone ministry and treat it as such. Only then will it be taken seriously and treated equally to all other ministries. If Media has it's own ministry, why doesn't the World Assembly?

I don’t see how that is “the only solution”. If anything, it isn’t a solution at all. HumanSanity is quite right that the status of OWL is a different question. The focus here should be on how OWL should operate, which has nothing to do with whether the institution is an office or a ministry.

Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator.
I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum.

Legal Resources:
THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System

Reply

The only solution is to make OWL a standalone ministry and treat it as such. Only then will it be taken seriously and treated equally to all other ministries. If Media has it's own ministry, why doesn't the World Assembly?

I support this position.

For some time this area of government has been called an experiment, but we do not have the luxury as a region of our stature to say that a World Assembly department isn't right for us or shouldn't be at the forefront of our consideration. With a substantial margin, the South Pacific has the second most endorsements of any region on NationStates, and is a giant in political power. It is really not acceptable that resolutions take us by surprise, especially when they may be at the core of our cultural or strategic interests. All resolutions should be subject to the process of our debate and consideration, and OWL becoming an electable ministry will promote it being held to direct accountability and ease the difficulty of reform when desired.

Reply

For what it's worth, I'm leaning heavily towards supporting elevating OWL to a full WA Ministry, but I think that should be discussed in a separate thread if someone wants to start it, and separately from the bulk of what's in the prior Cabinet discussion which can occur in either OWL-as-is or OWL-as-Ministry.

Minister of Foreign Affairs
General of the South Pacific Special Forces
Ambassador to Balder
Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense

Reply