|
| RE: Amendment ( 8. stricken or reformed ) | la garçâ malpadert | January 15, 2008 - 14:43 | | D. N. Vercáriâ | January 15, 2008 - 15:04 |
|
Parent message | | la garçâ malpadert | January 15, 2008 - 14:43 |
| RE: Amendment ( 8. stricken or reformed )(#1910), posted by D. N. Vercáriâ, [IP Hidden], January 15, 2008 - 15:04. Viewed 141 times. |
|
D. N. Vercáriâ
Group: citizens
(4498 posts total)
(last post: March 15, 2008 - 16:51)
Citizen #22:
Miestrâ Schivâ | >
> > My preference is to pass it as a resolution and not as legistation. I do not think we should have to change a law because we have changed our stance on Public Relations with the Kingdom. Laws are for determining processes and outcomes, and not specifying attitudes or stances. Resolutions are for that.
>
> On the contrary, estimat Tuischac'h, laws are for determining what a government is allowed and not allowed to do. This bill does precisely that - it specifically makes no imposition on the rights of any private citizen. Making it a resolution will make it worthless, since any government will be free to ignore it.
>
> Your amendment, BTW, should make it clear that you are suggesting changing 6RC5 from a bill to enact legislation to a resolution with no legislative force. And it makes absolutely no sense that a resolution of this chamber should have Presidential assent - that's only to enact laws. I also don't see the sense in having a referendum on a non-binding resolution that everyone's free to ignore.
>
> What do others think?
I guess I already said that I would prefer a resolution to a law in this, so of course a referendum would not be required.
_________________
- Dieter
A long history is fine, a long future is better.
|
|
|
|
