[Talossa.com portal]
[Citizens Toolbox]
[Immigration]
[Propose a bill or an ammendment]
[Vote on bills or ammendments]
[Final Vote] 6RC5 The Schivâ Doctrine on Pan-Talossan Affairs Act(#1966), posted by Túischac’h Txec Ereufighleu, [IP Hidden], February 01, 2008 - 11:16. Viewed 266 times.
User InfoText
Túischac’h Txec Ereufighleu
Group: citizens
(847 posts total)
(last post: March 12, 2008 - 12:13)
Citizen #33:
James O'Neill		Esteemed Deputies and Me (Túischac'h),

You have 7 days to cast your vote for '6RC5 'The Schivâ Doctrine on Pan-Talossan Affairs Act"' whose finalized text is found below (Original Text, Amendment Not Passed)

Please also review the Standing Orders for more process information.

An Act Embodying Principles For The Defence of the Republic and for National Unity:

Be it enacted by the President and Chamber of Deputies of the Talossan Republic in Parlamint assembled, that the following principles shall form the basis of all policy by the Government of this Republic towards the Talossan Royalist regime:

  1. There is only one single and indivisible Talossan nation, divided at the present time into two States, the Talossan Republic and the Kingdom of Talossa. All citizens of both States are members of the Talossan nation, as are certain people who are citizens of neither state but who have contributed to Talossa in the past.
  2. The Talossan nation has existed continuously since 26 December 1979. However, the Kingdom of Talossa which was founded on that date no longer exists. The two Talossan States - the Republic of Talossa existing since 1 June 2004, and the Royalist regime styling itself "the Kingdom of Talossa" existing since 15 August 2005 - are equally legitimate successor states to the old Kingdom of Talossa.
  3. Given the above, political unification of all Talossans under one single state can never be accomplished by one successor State imposing its legitimacy over that of the other State. The Kingdom will never absorb the Republic, or vice versa. The political unification of the Talossan nation will require the simultaneous extinction of both successor states and their rival, equally valid but mutually exclusive claims to legitimacy.
  4. Given the above, the Talossan Republic declares as a non-negotiable precondition that any discussion of political unification of Talossa must take place in the framework of discussing a wholly new constitution and legal framework which would supersede and extinguish both the current Kingdom and Republic of Talossa; and that in these discussions every facet of constitutional and other law shall be open for discussion and negotiation, including the form of government, the nature of the Head of State and the name of the unified State.
  5. The Talossan Republic declares that its preferred format for such a process would be:
    1. A negotiating committee made up of equal representatives from both existing States.
    2. A new constitution, provisional legal code and provisional Government for the unified State of Talossa to be agreed by a 2/3 majority of this committee.
    3. The framework of the new unified State to be approved by simultaneous referenda in both States.
  6. Until the preconditions in Article 4 above are met, the Talossan Republic will not entertain any initiatives for political unification, and formally rejects any claim by any institution operating under the Organic Law of the Kingdom of Talossa to any pan-Talossan legitimacy, except where endorsed by an equivalent institution operating under the Constitution of the Republic.
  7. Notwithstanding anything above, the Talossan Republic declares its support for friendship, cultural co-operation and free traffic of ideas and other goods between Talossan citizens anywhere, no matter which State they owe their allegiance to. The Talossan Republic reaffirms our respect for citizens of the Kingdom as co-equal and legitimate members of the Talossan nation, and pledges to defend the claims of our own citizens for reciprocal respect. The Talossan Republic officially supports all non-governmental efforts to develop a process of "spontaneous grassroots cultural unification", by means of the fullest cultural contacts between the two States.
  8. To reinforce the consent of the Talossan nation as a whole to these principles, this Act will only come into force on its approval in referendum, by the means prescribed by law.


Túischac’h Txec Ereufighleu
Resident Pot Stirrer
A one man stampede towards an opportunity to be chivalrous. MJBIII
Chairman of the Union for Talossan Progress

[Final Vote] 6RC5 The Schivâ Doctrine on Pan-Talossan Affairs ActTúischac’h Txec EreufighleuFebruary 01, 2008 - 11:16
Túischac’h Txec EreufighleuFebruary 08, 2008 - 10:08
Parent message
  • [Final Vote] 6RC5 The Schivâ Doctrine on Pan-Talossan Affairs Act
    		• Túischac’h Txec EreufighleuFebruary 01, 2008 - 11:16
    Passed (n/c)(#1993), posted by Túischac’h Txec Ereufighleu, [IP Hidden], February 08, 2008 - 10:08. Viewed 159 times.
    User InfoText
    Túischac’h Txec Ereufighleu
    Group: citizens
    (847 posts total)
    (last post: March 12, 2008 - 12:13)
    Citizen #33:
    James O'Neill    		(n/c)

    Túischac’h Txec Ereufighleu
    Resident Pot Stirrer
    A one man stampede towards an opportunity to be chivalrous. MJBIII
    Chairman of the Union for Talossan Progress

    Túischac’h Txec EreufighleuFebruary 04, 2008 - 09:20
    Parent message
  • [Final Vote] 6RC5 The Schivâ Doctrine on Pan-Talossan Affairs Act
    		• Túischac’h Txec EreufighleuFebruary 01, 2008 - 11:16
    Për (w/c)(#1986), posted by Túischac’h Txec Ereufighleu, [IP Hidden], February 04, 2008 - 09:20. Viewed 170 times.
    User InfoText
    Túischac’h Txec Ereufighleu
    Group: citizens
    (847 posts total)
    (last post: March 12, 2008 - 12:13)
    Citizen #33:
    James O'Neill    		Again, I will reiterate that I support this bill with the exception of it becoming force of law.

    Túischac’h Txec Ereufighleu
    Resident Pot Stirrer
    A one man stampede towards an opportunity to be chivalrous. MJBIII
    Chairman of the Union for Talossan Progress

    Ep Inxheneu CrovâFebruary 03, 2008 - 10:37
    Parent message
  • [Final Vote] 6RC5 The Schivâ Doctrine on Pan-Talossan Affairs Act
    		• Túischac’h Txec EreufighleuFebruary 01, 2008 - 11:16
    Contrâ(#1984), posted by Ep Inxheneu Crovâ, [IP Hidden], February 03, 2008 - 10:37. Viewed 177 times.
    User InfoText
    Ep Inxheneu Crovâ
    Group: admins
    (1303 posts total)
    (last post: March 13, 2008 - 03:56)
    Citizen #33:
    James O'Neill    		B'cos I'm evil, or something.
    ================================

    'I don't make predictions, and I never will.....' Paul Gascoigne.
    D. N. VercáriâFebruary 03, 2008 - 11:24
    Parent message
    Ep Inxheneu CrovâFebruary 03, 2008 - 10:37
    RE: Contrâ(#1985), posted by D. N. Vercáriâ, [IP Hidden], February 03, 2008 - 11:24. Viewed 170 times.
    User InfoText
    D. N. Vercáriâ
    Group: citizens
    (4498 posts total)
    (last post: March 15, 2008 - 16:51)
    Citizen #33:
    James O'Neill    		> B'cos I'm evil, or something.

    Don't brag, esteemed Dp. :-)

    _________________
    - Dieter

    A long history is fine, a long future is better.

    D. N. VercáriâFebruary 02, 2008 - 16:09
    Parent message
  • [Final Vote] 6RC5 The Schivâ Doctrine on Pan-Talossan Affairs Act
    		• Túischac’h Txec EreufighleuFebruary 01, 2008 - 11:16
    Për - and a rant(#1981), posted by D. N. Vercáriâ, [IP Hidden], February 02, 2008 - 16:09. Viewed 173 times.
    User InfoText
    D. N. Vercáriâ
    Group: citizens
    (4498 posts total)
    (last post: March 15, 2008 - 16:51)
    Citizen #33:
    James O'Neill    		I vote për to give way to a referendum in which I will vote contrâ, for reasons that I mentioned before: Our day-to-day politics and doctrines, as good as they may seem, must not be embossed in laws; it's up to the electors to enforce or to overthrow these easily by means of their votes in general elections.

    So if we'll have the referendum - power to the people! - I will intensively campaign for a vote against making the Shivâ Doctrine a law.

    In case if you're wondering what this longwinded rant is all about, it's a deal I made with Dp. Schivâ. The option of having the Schivâ Doctrine passed as a resolution (which I would have prefered) was kicked out by the vote of GV, Cin., PlN, PCP, ACDC, HP, HOGWARTS, NFL, CBS, Aug. Nat. Golf, Yale Glee Club, Alcatraz Glee Club, Manchester United Glee Club. So it would have been an option to shoot vote the whole doctrine thing down quickly, which in consequence would have meant longwinded negotiations to save some of the substance of the doctrine. This way or the other, I think it's better to have it backed by a vote of the people.

    _________________
    - Dieter

    A long history is fine, a long future is better.

    Gödafrïeu Válcadác’hFebruary 02, 2008 - 15:26
    Parent message
  • [Final Vote] 6RC5 The Schivâ Doctrine on Pan-Talossan Affairs Act
    		• Túischac’h Txec EreufighleuFebruary 01, 2008 - 11:16
    To heck with the amendment. - Për(#1979), posted by Gödafrïeu Válcadác’h, [IP Hidden], February 02, 2008 - 15:26. Viewed 173 times.
    User InfoText
    Gödafrïeu Válcadác’h
    Group: admins
    (3164 posts total)
    (last post: March 14, 2008 - 15:24)
    Citizen #33:
    James O'Neill    		Dp. GV
    Visit oracla.com
    You know you want to.
    Username: readoracla
    Password: andbehappy
    la garçâ malpadertFebruary 02, 2008 - 14:43
    Parent message
  • [Final Vote] 6RC5 The Schivâ Doctrine on Pan-Talossan Affairs Act
    		• Túischac’h Txec EreufighleuFebruary 01, 2008 - 11:16
    Amendment withdrawn - I vote PËR (n/t)(#1973), posted by la garçâ malpadert, [IP Hidden], February 02, 2008 - 14:43. Viewed 153 times.
    User InfoText
    la garçâ malpadert
    Group: admins
    (4379 posts total)
    (last post: March 13, 2008 - 16:29)
    Citizen #33:
    James O'Neill    		> Esteemed Deputies and Me (Túischac'h),
    >
    > You have 7 days to cast your vote for '6RC5 'The Schivâ Doctrine on Pan-Talossan Affairs Act"' whose finalized text is found below (Original Text, Amendment Not Passed)
    >
    > Please also review the Standing Orders for more process information.
    >
    >

    An Act Embodying Principles For The Defence of the Republic and for National Unity:

    Be it enacted by the President and Chamber of Deputies of the Talossan Republic in Parlamint assembled, that the following principles shall form the basis of all policy by the Government of this Republic towards the Talossan Royalist regime:

    1. There is only one single and indivisible Talossan nation, divided at the present time into two States, the Talossan Republic and the Kingdom of Talossa. All citizens of both States are members of the Talossan nation, as are certain people who are citizens of neither state but who have contributed to Talossa in the past.
    2. The Talossan nation has existed continuously since 26 December 1979. However, the Kingdom of Talossa which was founded on that date no longer exists. The two Talossan States - the Republic of Talossa existing since 1 June 2004, and the Royalist regime styling itself "the Kingdom of Talossa" existing since 15 August 2005 - are equally legitimate successor states to the old Kingdom of Talossa.
    3. Given the above, political unification of all Talossans under one single state can never be accomplished by one successor State imposing its legitimacy over that of the other State. The Kingdom will never absorb the Republic, or vice versa. The political unification of the Talossan nation will require the simultaneous extinction of both successor states and their rival, equally valid but mutually exclusive claims to legitimacy.
    4. Given the above, the Talossan Republic declares as a non-negotiable precondition that any discussion of political unification of Talossa must take place in the framework of discussing a wholly new constitution and legal framework which would supersede and extinguish both the current Kingdom and Republic of Talossa; and that in these discussions every facet of constitutional and other law shall be open for discussion and negotiation, including the form of government, the nature of the Head of State and the name of the unified State.
    5. The Talossan Republic declares that its preferred format for such a process would be:
      1. A negotiating committee made up of equal representatives from both existing States.
      2. A new constitution, provisional legal code and provisional Government for the unified State of Talossa to be agreed by a 2/3 majority of this committee.
      3. The framework of the new unified State to be approved by simultaneous referenda in both States.
    6. Until the preconditions in Article 4 above are met, the Talossan Republic will not entertain any initiatives for political unification, and formally rejects any claim by any institution operating under the Organic Law of the Kingdom of Talossa to any pan-Talossan legitimacy, except where endorsed by an equivalent institution operating under the Constitution of the Republic.
    7. Notwithstanding anything above, the Talossan Republic declares its support for friendship, cultural co-operation and free traffic of ideas and other goods between Talossan citizens anywhere, no matter which State they owe their allegiance to. The Talossan Republic reaffirms our respect for citizens of the Kingdom as co-equal and legitimate members of the Talossan nation, and pledges to defend the claims of our own citizens for reciprocal respect. The Talossan Republic officially supports all non-governmental efforts to develop a process of "spontaneous grassroots cultural unification", by means of the fullest cultural contacts between the two States.
    8. To reinforce the consent of the Talossan nation as a whole to these principles, this Act will only come into force on its approval in referendum, by the means prescribed by law.

    >
    >

    Túischac’h Txec Ereufighleu
    Resident Pot Stirrer
    A one man stampede towards an opportunity to be chivalrous. MJBIII
    Chairman of the Union for Talossan Progress



    Miestrâ Schivâ
    Minister of Immigration
    Editor, Qator Itrìns
    Founder-President, ZRT - Party of National Unity
    Chief High Language Geek of the Talossan Republic

    TALOSSA, C’È ASÚNTS SERIÖSEN!
    la garçâ malpadertFebruary 01, 2008 - 14:37
    Parent message
  • [Final Vote] 6RC5 The Schivâ Doctrine on Pan-Talossan Affairs Act
    		• Túischac’h Txec EreufighleuFebruary 01, 2008 - 11:16
    I wish to make one tiny final amendment.(#1968), posted by la garçâ malpadert, [IP Hidden], February 01, 2008 - 14:37. Viewed 193 times.
    User InfoText
    la garçâ malpadert
    Group: admins
    (4379 posts total)
    (last post: March 13, 2008 - 16:29)
    Citizen #33:
    James O'Neill    		Section 8 of the Bill reads:

    To reinforce the consent of the Talossan nation as a whole to these principles, this Act will only come into force on its approval in referendum, by the means prescribed by law.


    If there are no objections from the Speaker or other Deputies, I would like to clarify this by changing it to:

    This bill shall be enacted into law only upon its approval by the citizens of the Republic in referendum, by the means prescribed by law. This bill does not restrain the rights of any citizen to oppose these principles or seek their amendment or repeal.





    Miestrâ Schivâ
    Minister of Immigration
    Editor, Qator Itrìns
    Founder-President, ZRT - Party of National Unity
    Chief High Language Geek of the Talossan Republic

    TALOSSA, C’È ASÚNTS SERIÖSEN!
    Gödafrïeu Válcadác’hFebruary 02, 2008 - 15:25
    Parent message
    la garçâ malpadertFebruary 01, 2008 - 14:37
    This amendment I support.(#1978), posted by Gödafrïeu Válcadác’h, [IP Hidden], February 02, 2008 - 15:25. Viewed 150 times.
    User InfoText
    Gödafrïeu Válcadác’h
    Group: admins
    (3164 posts total)
    (last post: March 14, 2008 - 15:24)
    Citizen #33:
    James O'Neill    		GV
    Visit oracla.com
    You know you want to.
    Username: readoracla
    Password: andbehappy
    Ep Inxheneu CrovâFebruary 02, 2008 - 12:38
    Parent message
    la garçâ malpadertFebruary 01, 2008 - 14:37
    RE: I wish to make one tiny final amendment.(#1969), posted by Ep Inxheneu Crovâ, [IP Hidden], February 02, 2008 - 12:38. Viewed 186 times.
    User InfoText
    Ep Inxheneu Crovâ
    Group: admins
    (1303 posts total)
    (last post: March 13, 2008 - 03:56)
    Citizen #33:
    James O'Neill    		Tuischa'ch,

    As I will not be in these hallowed halls for much longer, I feel that I must hog a little more of the limelight by objecting to this amendment.

    The Deputy should not have two opportunities to amend this Bill-this is the purpose of the amendment phase. It should either be voted on as the final text or withdrawn and resubmitted so all Deputies have an equal right to present any further changes. I am emphatically not an expert on parliamentary procedure, and am about to watch the first episode of the second season of Dexter with my Other Half (the soul of romance, thats me), so I will leave it to the eggheads to resolve this issue.

    Another, more weighty but perhaps equally ridiculous problem occured to me as I was considering this Bill. The Bill prescribes that it shall not come into force without popular ratification-which makes it a quasi-constitutional measure. However, since it is technically an ordinary Bill, nothing prevents a future Chamber from simply repealing or amending it without reference to the people. Is this not an inconsistency?

    ================================

    'I don't make predictions, and I never will.....' Paul Gascoigne.
    D. N. VercáriâFebruary 02, 2008 - 12:56
    Parent message
    Ep Inxheneu CrovâFebruary 02, 2008 - 12:38
    RE: I wish to make one tiny final amendment.(#1970), posted by D. N. Vercáriâ, [IP Hidden], February 02, 2008 - 12:56. Viewed 178 times.
    User InfoText
    D. N. Vercáriâ
    Group: citizens
    (4498 posts total)
    (last post: March 15, 2008 - 16:51)
    Citizen #33:
    James O'Neill    		> Tuischa'ch,
    >
    > As I will not be in these hallowed halls for much longer, I feel that I must hog a little more of the limelight by objecting to this amendment.
    >
    > The Deputy should not have two opportunities to amend this Bill-this is the purpose of the amendment phase. It should either be voted on as the final text or withdrawn and resubmitted so all Deputies have an equal right to present any further changes. I am emphatically not an expert on parliamentary procedure, and am about to watch the first episode of the second season of Dexter with my Other Half (the soul of romance, thats me), so I will leave it to the eggheads to resolve this issue.

    It's true, no tiny final amendmends during the phase that is called "Final Vote", say the Standing Orders.

    > Another, more weighty but perhaps equally ridiculous problem occured to me as I was considering this Bill. The Bill prescribes that it shall not come into force without popular ratification-which makes it a quasi-constitutional measure. However, since it is technically an ordinary Bill, nothing prevents a future Chamber from simply repealing or amending it without reference to the people. Is this not an inconsistency?

    AFAIK, a referendum is compulsory when it comes to amendments of the Constitution, yes, but an option at any other occasion. It is indeed an interesting theoretical question whether laws that have been "entrenched" by a referendum could be abolished without a referendum; AFAIK again, our laws don't say anything about this.

    _________________
    - Dieter

    A long history is fine, a long future is better.

    la garçâ malpadertFebruary 02, 2008 - 14:46
    Parent message
    D. N. VercáriâFebruary 02, 2008 - 12:56
    RE: I wish to make one tiny final amendment.(#1974), posted by la garçâ malpadert, [IP Hidden], February 02, 2008 - 14:46. Viewed 190 times.
    User InfoText
    la garçâ malpadert
    Group: admins
    (4379 posts total)
    (last post: March 13, 2008 - 16:29)
    Citizen #33:
    James O'Neill
    > > The Deputy should not have two opportunities to amend this Bill-this is the purpose of the amendment phase.
    >
    > It's true, no tiny final amendmends during the phase that is called "Final Vote", say the Standing Orders.

    We've made tiny final "tweaks" to wording before. But in the interests of consensus, I withdraw my suggestion.

    > > However, since it is technically an ordinary Bill, nothing prevents a future Chamber from simply repealing or amending it without reference to the people. Is this not an inconsistency?
    >
    > It is indeed an interesting theoretical question whether laws that have been "entrenched" by a referendum could be abolished without a referendum; AFAIK again, our laws don't say anything about this.

    I think it is a basic tenet of a functioning legal democracy that if the law doesn't say it's forbidden, it's allowed. Yes, it is a feature of this law that it can be amended or even repealed by Parlamînt without another referendum. When I suggested "entrenching" it (making it unamendable without another referendum) people shouted me down. So this is the halfway house. I'm surprised you don't remember that.



    Miestrâ Schivâ
    Minister of Immigration
    Editor, Qator Itrìns
    Founder-President, ZRT - Party of National Unity
    Chief High Language Geek of the Talossan Republic

    TALOSSA, C’È ASÚNTS SERIÖSEN!
    Ep Inxheneu CrovâFebruary 03, 2008 - 10:36
    Parent message
    la garçâ malpadertFebruary 02, 2008 - 14:46
    RE: I wish to make one tiny final amendment.(#1983), posted by Ep Inxheneu Crovâ, [IP Hidden], February 03, 2008 - 10:36. Viewed 180 times.
    User InfoText
    Ep Inxheneu Crovâ
    Group: admins
    (1303 posts total)
    (last post: March 13, 2008 - 03:56)
    Citizen #33:
    James O'Neill    		> I think it is a basic tenet of a functioning legal democracy that if the law doesn't say it's forbidden, it's allowed. Yes, it is a feature of this law that it can be amended or even repealed by Parlamînt without another referendum. When I suggested "entrenching" it (making it unamendable without another referendum) people shouted me down. So this is the halfway house. I'm surprised you don't remember that.
    >

    We already entrench certain laws-thats why we have a written constitution. This requires a higher standard of approval by Parliament, so perhaps this is why it was not done in this way. All other laws should on principle be reversible by an elected Parliament. Those who objected were perfectly right to do so, IMHO.
    ================================

    'I don't make predictions, and I never will.....' Paul Gascoigne.
    Reply to this post | Back to the forum | Forums Overview| Deactivate Thread View
    Forums Overview | Login | Register | Lost your password? Cyphor (Release: 0.19, PHP 5.2.5)