|
| Assent Requested : RC1 - The Wittenberg - Database system merger | Mr. Furxheir, R.M.W. | June 08, 2005 - 20:10 | | Justice dal Navâ | June 09, 2005 - 05:12 |
|
Parent message | | Assent Requested : RC1 - The Wittenberg - Database system merger | Mr. Furxheir, R.M.W. | June 08, 2005 - 20:10 |
| Assent refused.(#4), posted by Justice dal Navâ, [IP Hidden], June 09, 2005 - 05:12. Viewed 386 times. |
|
Justice dal Navâ
Group: admins
(5222 posts total)
(last post: March 14, 2008 - 13:43)
Citizen #20:
Martí- Paìr Furxhéir | > Dear President, this law was adopted by the Chamber of Deputies. As per the constitution of the Republic, I hereby ask your official consent.
>
> The Speaker of the Chamber of Deputies,
> The Honourable MP Furxheir.
>
> RC1 - The Wittenberg - Database system merger
> The Chamber of Deputies resolves to :
>
> - Permit and encourage the Database Administrator of Talossa to merge the Database System into the Wittenberg Database,
> - Allow Wittenberg and the Database system to share a common login,
> - Enable the Database to be have it's [sic] own computerized, automated account to generate Wittenberg posts, such as election notices, new bills notices, election results, etc...
> - Allow the Speaker of the Chamber to delegate to the Database administrator of Talossa some of the Speaker's functions such as the publication of bills or the management of the deputies votes, but not the Speaker's responsablities [sic] over such function.
I refuse my assent.
How can the govt, which doesn't have control of the database or Witt, ask for a merger? Until the Govt has control of them — following the nationalisation of the sites — we technically have no authority over them.
Also, portions of this bill are nonsensical and confusing. "Enable the Database to be have it's"? We really ought to have a clerk of the Chamber to fix such things before the voting.
________________________
Chirischtôval Curt Cavéir,
President of the Republic of Talossa
Minister of Information
Minister of Defence
|
|
| | la garçâ malpadert | June 09, 2005 - 05:47 |
|
Parent message | | Justice dal Navâ | June 09, 2005 - 05:12 |
| The relevant sections of the Constitution(#6), posted by la garçâ malpadert, [IP Hidden], June 09, 2005 - 05:47. Viewed 435 times. |
|
la garçâ malpadert
Group: admins
(4379 posts total)
(last post: March 13, 2008 - 16:29)
Citizen #20:
Martí- Paìr Furxhéir | From Title Two, Article Two:
32.If the President thinks a bill is badly written (that is, it will not have the effect that
Parlamînt desires) or unconstitutional, he or she shall submit it to the High Court for a
legal opinion. If the High Court concurs with the President’s opinion, it shall be passed
back to Parlamînt for amendment.
33.If the President refuses to sign a bill for any other reason, the Secretary of State shall
present that bill to the people in a referendum. All legislation to amend the Constitution
shall be put to referendum.
Under the constitution, we therefore have two courses: either Chris gives RC1 to the High Court for a legal opinion, or we have a referendum on it. There is, of course, an unwritten third option - that we withdraw RC1 as a law and simply pass it as a resolution of the House which doesn't need the President's assent. Frankly I have no idea why M-P insisted as presenting it as a law in the first place, although I'm sure he's about to tell us.
Miestrâ Schivâ
Seneschál dal Repúblicâ Talossán / Prime Minister of the Republic of Talossa
"The Republic's Most Articulate Spokeswhatever" - R. B. Madison
Every bloody emperor claims that freedom is his cause
And he buffs up on his common touch as a get-out clause. |
|
| | Üc Tärfâ | June 09, 2005 - 11:35 |
|
Parent message | | la garçâ malpadert | June 09, 2005 - 05:47 |
| What the Republic can do in my opinion(#9), posted by Üc Tärfâ, [IP Hidden], June 09, 2005 - 11:35. Viewed 394 times. |
|
Üc Tärfâ
Group: citizens
(1365 posts total)
(last post: March 10, 2008 - 08:29)
Citizen #20:
Martí- Paìr Furxhéir | >> I refuse my assent.
>>
>> How can the govt, which doesn't have control of the database or Witt, ask for a merger? Until the Govt has control of them — following the nationalisation of the sites — we technically have no authority over them
I agree. The high court the 12th of May dcided that Wittenberg is a private agency "WittCorp", so the GOv has no control on it while he has the autority over the Database System.
The bill as it's written now, it couldn't be for me because the Gov can't allow or do not allow action upon something that's not over its autority.
Instead it may allow the WittCorp to merge the Database System in its own Database (the witnberg ones) following a contract that establish a control of the InfoMin over the actions of the WittCorp regarding the governamental area of the new merged database.
Or, we have to wait until the National Webspace Act defining the relations betwenn the Republic and WittCorp.
>we withdraw RC1 as a law and simply pass it as a resolution of the House which doesn't need the President's assent.
No, if it's written like that one. You can't allowd to merge the Wittneberg System.
Ugo Truffelli
my opinion.
e-mail: ugo.truffelli AT libero.it |
|
| | Justice dal Navâ | June 09, 2005 - 09:17 |
|
Parent message | | la garçâ malpadert | June 09, 2005 - 05:47 |
| RE: The relevant sections of the Constitution(#8), posted by Justice dal Navâ, [IP Hidden], June 09, 2005 - 09:17. Viewed 369 times. |
|
Justice dal Navâ
Group: admins
(5222 posts total)
(last post: March 14, 2008 - 13:43)
Citizen #20:
Martí- Paìr Furxhéir | > There is, of course, an unwritten third option - that we withdraw RC1 as a law and simply pass it as a resolution of the House which doesn't need the President's assent.
I will hold off on any action to give the Chamber enough opportunity to do just that, if it so wishes.
> Frankly I have no idea why M-P insisted as presenting it as a law in the first place, although I'm sure he's about to tell us.
Mr Furxhéir had a discussion about this very thing a few hours ago.
________________________
Chirischtôval Curt Cavéir,
President of the Republic of Talossa
Minister of Information
Minister of Defence
|
|
| | Mr. Furxheir, R.M.W. | June 09, 2005 - 07:40 |
|
Parent message | | la garçâ malpadert | June 09, 2005 - 05:47 |
| The reason...(#7), posted by Mr. Furxheir, R.M.W., [IP Hidden], June 09, 2005 - 07:40. Viewed 412 times. |
|
Mr. Furxheir, R.M.W.
Group: admins
(1791 posts total)
(last post: November 24, 2007 - 15:07)
Citizen #20:
Martí- Paìr Furxhéir | > From Title Two, Article Two:
>
> 32.If the President thinks a bill is badly written (that is, it will not have the effect that
> Parlamînt desires) or unconstitutional, he or she shall submit it to the High Court for a
> legal opinion. If the High Court concurs with the President’s opinion, it shall be passed
> back to Parlamînt for amendment.
> 33.If the President refuses to sign a bill for any other reason, the Secretary of State shall
> present that bill to the people in a referendum. All legislation to amend the Constitution
> shall be put to referendum.
>
> Under the constitution, we therefore have two courses: either Chris gives RC1 to the High Court for a legal opinion, or we have a referendum on it. There is, of course, an unwritten third option - that we withdraw RC1 as a law and simply pass it as a resolution of the House which doesn't need the President's assent. Frankly I have no idea why M-P insisted as presenting it as a law in the first place, although I'm sure he's about to tell us.
>
I was told by 2 differents citizens that since the merger of the Database and Wittenberg had implications on our legislative system, I should seek permission from the government. I thus proposed a bill on the merger.
Perhaps I should have just asked the government informally. For example, NOW we have an information minister. On the first day of the bill, there wasn't one.
If no one cares about the bill, fine ! I'll live with it ! In any case, the merger WAS done, so YES, we CAN withdraw the bill, rewrite it, toss it around, send it to the high court.
Personally, I presented the law to get to know if the merger was legitimous by looking if the deputies opposed it. 4 deputies voted in favor of the various versions of the bills, and several people found the advantages of the merger interesting.
If the bill was badly written, I appologize. If it should not have been a bill, I apologize also.
In the Republic, we are doing things a lot differently than in the time of the former Kingdom, so It it taking me sometimes a little time to adjust. I was very active in the Kingdom, and there, the legislature was very disorganized. All we had to care about is wheter our bills would be vetoed or not.
I AM learning, and I AM improving and adjusting to the new reality, but it is not always easy, and I am just human.
So, my dear collegues, if you think that the bill itself is unnecessary, I'll remove it. If you think that merging our forum and our database system requires autorization, we can always rewrite it.
I will adapt to whatever you feel is necessary.
This is a shorter sig. Long sigs are as annoying as fuck. |
|
| | la garçâ malpadert | June 09, 2005 - 19:08 |
|
Parent message | | Mr. Furxheir, R.M.W. | June 09, 2005 - 07:40 |
| The way I see it(#10), posted by la garçâ malpadert, [IP Hidden], June 09, 2005 - 19:08. Viewed 357 times. |
|
la garçâ malpadert
Group: admins
(4379 posts total)
(last post: March 13, 2008 - 16:29)
Citizen #20:
Martí- Paìr Furxhéir | Let's look at the effective text of RC1:
The Chamber of Deputies resolves to :
1. Permit and encourage the Database Administrator of Talossa to merge the Database System into the Wittenberg Database,
2. Allow Wittenberg and the Database system to share a common login,
3. Enable the Database to be have it's own computerized, automated account to generate Wittenberg posts, such as election notices, new bills notices, election results, etc...
4. Allow the Speaker of the Chamber to delegate to the Database administrator of Talossa some of the Speaker's functions such as the publication of bills or the management of the deputies votes, but not the Speaker's responsablities over such function.
Wittenberg and the Database System are M-P's private property.
There is no law of the Republic telling M-P what to do with this property, except for the section in the Immigration Law declaring that he must give Witt access to prospectives and Friends.
RC1 does not change the above provisions of the Immigration Code.
Therefore, it makes no positive changes to the existing law of the Republic, and therefore does not require the President's assent.
Further, RC1 does not require M-P to do anything new. Sections 1-3 only "encourage" M-P to do certain things that he was going to do anyway. They only offer the approval of the CoD for this move. Sections 1-3 neither prevent or require M-P doing anything. Therefore, they are not a new law and do not need the President's assent.
Section 4 allows the Túischac'h to delegate certain to the Database Administrator. This is an internal matter for the Chamber of Deputies, which controls what the Túischac'h does. Therefore, s.4 are not a new law and do not need the President's assent.
Therefore, none of the above sections create new law. Therefore, none of them require the President's approval. Therefore, RC1 was submitted to the President in error and we should forget any of this ever happened.
If M-P wants the approval of the Government, he should have damn well asked me directly as Seneschál. If he likes, I will ask the President and Cabinet (in private) for their approval of RC1, and announce our decision on the Mitchell later.
If anyone disagrees with my reasoning or the course of action associated with it, speak RIGHT NOW.
Miestrâ Schivâ
Seneschál dal Repúblicâ Talossán / Prime Minister of the Republic of Talossa
"The Republic's Most Articulate Spokeswhatever" - R. B. Madison
Every bloody emperor claims that freedom is his cause
And he buffs up on his common touch as a get-out clause. |
|
| | la garçâ malpadert | June 09, 2005 - 05:45 |
|
Parent message | | Justice dal Navâ | June 09, 2005 - 05:12 |
| The relevant sections of the Constitution(#5), posted by la garçâ malpadert, [IP Hidden], June 09, 2005 - 05:45. Viewed 356 times. |
|
la garçâ malpadert
Group: admins
(4379 posts total)
(last post: March 13, 2008 - 16:29)
Citizen #20:
Martí- Paìr Furxhéir | From Title Two, Article Two:
32.If the President thinks a bill is badly written (that is, it will not have the effect that
Parlamînt desires) or unconstitutional, he or she shall submit it to the High Court for a
legal opinion. If the High Court concurs with the President’s opinion, it shall be passed
back to Parlamînt for amendment.
33.If the President refuses to sign a bill for any other reason, the Secretary of State shall
present that bill to the people in a referendum. All legislation to amend the Constitution
shall be put to referendum.
Under the constitution, we therefore have two courses: either Chris gives RC1 to the High Court for a legal opinion, or we have a referendum on it. There is, of course, an unwritten third option - that we withdraw RC1 as a law and simply pass it as a resolution of the House which doesn't need the President's assent. Frankly I have no idea why M-P insisted as presenting it as a law in the first place, although I'm sure he's about to tell us.
Miestrâ Schivâ
Seneschál dal Repúblicâ Talossán / Prime Minister of the Republic of Talossa
"The Republic's Most Articulate Spokeswhatever" - R. B. Madison
Every bloody emperor claims that freedom is his cause
And he buffs up on his common touch as a get-out clause. |
|
|
|
