|
| RE: Txec's Proposals | President Anglatzarâ | March 27, 2006 - 14:15 | | D. N. Vercáriâ | March 27, 2006 - 14:29 |
|
Parent message | | President Anglatzarâ | March 27, 2006 - 14:15 |
| RE: Txec's Proposals(#25962), posted by D. N. Vercáriâ, [IP Hidden], March 27, 2006 - 14:29. Viewed 153 times. |
|
D. N. Vercáriâ
Group: citizens
(4498 posts total)
(last post: March 15, 2008 - 16:51)
Citizen #23:
Ián Anglatzarâ | > > Personally, I think we should not worry about instituting the Senats. Maybe even abolish it outright and work unicamerally permanently. We're not large enough, and wont be in the forseeable future.
>
> Hear, hear!
Yeah.
- Dieter
|
|
| | la garçâ malpadert | March 27, 2006 - 17:06 |
|
Parent message | | D. N. Vercáriâ | March 27, 2006 - 14:29 |
| RE: Txec's Proposals(#25969), posted by la garçâ malpadert, [IP Hidden], March 27, 2006 - 17:06. Viewed 163 times. |
|
la garçâ malpadert
Group: admins
(4379 posts total)
(last post: March 13, 2008 - 16:29)
Citizen #23:
Ián Anglatzarâ | > > > Personally, I think we should not worry about instituting the Senats. Maybe even abolish it outright and work unicamerally permanently. We're not large enough, and wont be in the forseeable future.
> >
> > Hear, hear!
>
> Yeah.
The main argument for the Senäts that I can see is that it would give an added dimension to Parlamînt. Firstly, people grumble about the "party list" voting system for the Deputies - the Senators would be elected as individuals. In addition, all Senators would be distinguished by long service in the Republic. I do like the idea of a sober upper house of semi-retired politicians acting to advise and warn the young hotheads in the Chamber.
If we were to abolish the Senats, then I would certainly support a shift to STV for the Chamber, so that we could have some legislators elected as individuals. Another idea to consider would be whether we needed a provincial basis for an upper house, or whether it could be elected on some other basis.
Miestrâ Schivâ
Seneschál dal Repúblicâ Talossán / Prime Minister of the Talossan Republic
"The Republic's Most Articulate Spokeswhatever" - R. B. Madison
|
|
| | D. N. Vercáriâ | March 28, 2006 - 03:03 |
|
Parent message | | la garçâ malpadert | March 27, 2006 - 17:06 |
| RE: Unicameral, Bi-Cameral, Tri-Cameral, hey!(#25981), posted by D. N. Vercáriâ, [IP Hidden], March 28, 2006 - 03:03. Viewed 178 times. |
|
D. N. Vercáriâ
Group: citizens
(4498 posts total)
(last post: March 15, 2008 - 16:51)
Citizen #23:
Ián Anglatzarâ | Catchy headline, eh?
> > > > Personally, I think we should not worry about instituting the Senats. Maybe even abolish it outright and work unicamerally permanently. We're not large enough, and wont be in the forseeable future.
> > >
> > > Hear, hear!
> >
> > Yeah.
>
> The main argument for the Senäts that I can see is that it would give an added dimension to Parlamînt. Firstly, people grumble about the "party list" voting system for the Deputies - the Senators would be elected as individuals. In addition, all Senators would be distinguished by long service in the Republic. I do like the idea of a sober upper house of semi-retired politicians acting to advise and warn the young hotheads in the Chamber.
Who are not sober? For shame!
> If we were to abolish the Senats, then I would certainly support a shift to STV for the Chamber, so that we could have some legislators elected as individuals. Another idea to consider would be whether we needed a provincial basis for an upper house, or whether it could be elected on some other basis.
We could of course introduce an unicameral parliament in which half of the Deputies are directly elected representants of the Provinces. In the bicameral picture it's hard to explain why Senators should be elected by the Provinces, if the job of the Senäts isn't even remotely related to provincial affairs. "Because some people grumble about the party list voting system" is not a sufficiently good reason, IMHO.
- Dieter
|
|
| | President Anglatzarâ | March 28, 2006 - 03:33 |
|
Parent message | | D. N. Vercáriâ | March 28, 2006 - 03:03 |
| RE: Unicameral, Bi-Cameral, Tri-Cameral, hey!(#25982), posted by President Anglatzarâ, [IP Hidden], March 28, 2006 - 03:33. Viewed 175 times. |
|
President Anglatzarâ
Group: admins
(3194 posts total)
(last post: March 14, 2008 - 07:21)
Citizen #23:
Ián Anglatzarâ | > Another idea to consider would be whether we needed a provincial basis for an upper house, or whether it could be elected on some other basis.
>
> We could of course introduce an unicameral parliament in which half of the Deputies are directly elected representants of the Provinces. In the bicameral picture it's hard to explain why Senators should be elected by the Provinces, if the job of the Senäts isn't even remotely related to provincial affairs. "Because some people grumble about the party list voting system" is not a sufficiently good reason, IMHO.
Theer are countries who elect their upper house/first chamber/senate by a nationwide election, without the senators representing anything in particular other than the entire nation. Theyv are simply a collection of elder statesmen as a check on the government and second chamber. That would be fine with me, BUT FIRST WE NEED AT LEAST ANOTHER 15 CITIZENS! Look at the current government and civil servant structure and see how thinly we are spread. Clamouring for a Senate at the moment is ridiculous. I'd say we won't be able to have one for at least two years, realistically.
--
Latest acquisitions (March 27): Seth Bremberg (ed): Transpirationer och annan vers från Grönköping; Terry Pratchett: Thud!; Diana Wynne Jones: Unexpected Magic
Currently reading: Poul Anderson: The Best of Poul Anderson |
|
| | D. N. Vercáriâ | March 28, 2006 - 12:01 |
|
Parent message | | President Anglatzarâ | March 28, 2006 - 03:33 |
| STV-elected House of Keys?(#25983), posted by D. N. Vercáriâ, [IP Hidden], March 28, 2006 - 12:01. Viewed 164 times. |
|
D. N. Vercáriâ
Group: citizens
(4498 posts total)
(last post: March 15, 2008 - 16:51)
Citizen #23:
Ián Anglatzarâ | > > Another idea to consider would be whether we needed a provincial basis for an upper house, or whether it could be elected on some other basis.
> >
> > We could of course introduce an unicameral parliament in which half of the Deputies are directly elected representants of the Provinces. In the bicameral picture it's hard to explain why Senators should be elected by the Provinces, if the job of the Senäts isn't even remotely related to provincial affairs. "Because some people grumble about the party list voting system" is not a sufficiently good reason, IMHO.
>
> Theer are countries who elect their upper house/first chamber/senate by a nationwide election, without the senators representing anything in particular other than the entire nation. Theyv are simply a collection of elder statesmen as a check on the government and second chamber. That would be fine with me, BUT FIRST WE NEED AT LEAST ANOTHER 15 CITIZENS! Look at the current government and civil servant structure and see how thinly we are spread. Clamouring for a Senate at the moment is ridiculous. I'd say we won't be able to have one for at least two years, realistically.
Regarding the current constitutional layout, the Senäts as an upper house of parliament won't do much except implementing one more instance of political checks and balances, between the C.o.D. and the President. So if we need this, what about nationwide elections, i.e., elections that are not based on the Provinces? For example, a 3-seat Senäts that is elected using the STV method?
And what about something different, like the Penguinean "House of Keys", an elected executive with check-and-balance powers? I could roughly think of three "Keys": The SoS, The Attorney-General and the Mençéi.
- Dieter
|
|
|
|
