Of course, commissions take forever to do anything (WTO Commission: FOUR MONTHS [OOC: real time]), but that doesn't deter you, does it?
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Well, a proper commission, chaired by a responsible person can set a deadline.
When Strausser took over the gambling commission, he did an admirable job of wrapping that up. Granted, nothing ever really came of it, but my point is with reasonable chairing, the commission can do its job.
Josephus
When Strausser took over the gambling commission, he did an admirable job of wrapping that up. Granted, nothing ever really came of it, but my point is with reasonable chairing, the commission can do its job.
Josephus
I think the RoFA has already been debated to death, and now it should be taken to a vote without further delay, so as not to waste the assemblies time
Mr sspeaker, i think it would be a good idea if a request was made for either the president or another senior government minister to come before the assembly to give us a briefing on the exact situation in farpoint, the events surrounding the US raid on MEOR and anyother issues this house sees as important. We are the elected representatives and should be kept properly informed of events
I know the assembly has no power to force attendence, but at least you could ask. though i do think this should change and i am considering drafting legislation to give this assembly more teeth, especially regarding the executive.
Mr sspeaker, i think it would be a good idea if a request was made for either the president or another senior government minister to come before the assembly to give us a briefing on the exact situation in farpoint, the events surrounding the US raid on MEOR and anyother issues this house sees as important. We are the elected representatives and should be kept properly informed of events
I know the assembly has no power to force attendence, but at least you could ask. though i do think this should change and i am considering drafting legislation to give this assembly more teeth, especially regarding the executive.
Mister Borgman.
Firstly, for about the tenth time, the Presidential Succession Amendment failed due to a technical malfunction in Mr. Vilms' microphone.
Secondly, Langley reintroduced the bill; although I was a major proponent of the bill, blame Langley, not me.
Thirdly, if the bill had not been reintroduced, we would not have an executive at the present moment, as it is that amendment which allowed Dr. Glasser to succeed President Langley (albeit with a little liberal interpretation from the High Court).
Fourthly, my proposed bill is not replacing the PSA, it is not "the new PSA," it is only replacing one section of it, it is only fixing minor problems with it, but I won't let the truth get in the way of good debate.
Fifthly, the current amendment I have proposed is covering an extreme circumstance that was left out of the last bill--if you think that to guard for such a circumstance is unnecessary--well it just happened.
Sixthly, at the time, such an occurrence seemed very unlikely; so unlikely, in fact, that it did not even occur to us--but this does not mean that I was lazy. I didn't write the PSA, Langley did. If you look back over the minutes, Mr. Borgman, you'll find that it was I who did the most work in trying to prevent such failures of the bill. I didn't see one. I'm sorry--I'm not perfect. Where were you, Mr. Borgman, when we were working out the PSA? I don't recall you ever trying to fix its shortcomings, Mr. Borgman. Don't berate me for failing to see shortcomings in somebody else's bill when you didn't even attemtp to do so, Mr. Borgman.
Seventhly, I'm sorry for using up this assembly's time with this, I truly am, I want to get on with it as much as you do, but there are flaws in the Constitution that need to be addressed. Or do you think, Mr. Borgman, that an hour or two of this assembly's time is more important than having a working Constitution?
Eighthly, Mr. Borgman, this bill has been proposed and seconded. By all constitutional procedure, after appropriate debate, it shall go to a vote. Mr. Borgman, you do not have veto power. You have no right, none whatsoever, to stifle debate, crush democracy, and trample on our Constitution in this manner, Mr. Borgman. You'd need an amendment to do that.
Firstly, for about the tenth time, the Presidential Succession Amendment failed due to a technical malfunction in Mr. Vilms' microphone.
Secondly, Langley reintroduced the bill; although I was a major proponent of the bill, blame Langley, not me.
Thirdly, if the bill had not been reintroduced, we would not have an executive at the present moment, as it is that amendment which allowed Dr. Glasser to succeed President Langley (albeit with a little liberal interpretation from the High Court).
Fourthly, my proposed bill is not replacing the PSA, it is not "the new PSA," it is only replacing one section of it, it is only fixing minor problems with it, but I won't let the truth get in the way of good debate.
Fifthly, the current amendment I have proposed is covering an extreme circumstance that was left out of the last bill--if you think that to guard for such a circumstance is unnecessary--well it just happened.
Sixthly, at the time, such an occurrence seemed very unlikely; so unlikely, in fact, that it did not even occur to us--but this does not mean that I was lazy. I didn't write the PSA, Langley did. If you look back over the minutes, Mr. Borgman, you'll find that it was I who did the most work in trying to prevent such failures of the bill. I didn't see one. I'm sorry--I'm not perfect. Where were you, Mr. Borgman, when we were working out the PSA? I don't recall you ever trying to fix its shortcomings, Mr. Borgman. Don't berate me for failing to see shortcomings in somebody else's bill when you didn't even attemtp to do so, Mr. Borgman.
Seventhly, I'm sorry for using up this assembly's time with this, I truly am, I want to get on with it as much as you do, but there are flaws in the Constitution that need to be addressed. Or do you think, Mr. Borgman, that an hour or two of this assembly's time is more important than having a working Constitution?
Eighthly, Mr. Borgman, this bill has been proposed and seconded. By all constitutional procedure, after appropriate debate, it shall go to a vote. Mr. Borgman, you do not have veto power. You have no right, none whatsoever, to stifle debate, crush democracy, and trample on our Constitution in this manner, Mr. Borgman. You'd need an amendment to do that.
Last edited:
And, to Commander Stewart...do the provisions of the PSA-Addendum not satisfy such a need? If not, what exactly are you proposing, and perhaps the structure of the PSA-Addendum could be altered in order to encompass your concerns.
Mister Talbott.
Firstly, for about the tenth time, the Presidential Succession Amendment passed.
Firstly, for about the tenth time, the Presidential Succession Amendment passed.
i feel that the assembly need powers similar to congress in the US to bring ministers here by legaly enforceable summons and under oath have them inform the assembly about actions of themselves or their departments. in fact I think this power should extend to summoning any public offical including CEO's of state companies. except judges to preserve judical independance.
Apologies, Commander Stewart, for misinterpreting your last statement.
I agree, Commander Stewart. The NA should have the power to serve as or set up commissions for such investigative purposes, as in the United States.
I agree, Commander Stewart. The NA should have the power to serve as or set up commissions for such investigative purposes, as in the United States.
Looking over the RoFA again, I do have two small questions about it--sorry if this delays putting it to a vote. Who exactly will be administering these courses? Where could one complete them? Personally, I think that if local gun ranges could be licensed to conduct such courses, it would help to alleviate at least of the inconvenience associated with them that might cause people to choose not to license their guns.
Also, there are some mentions of "misdemeanors" and "criminal record"...what violations of the law are considered large enough to be misdemeanors? I assume traffic violations & such would not qualify as misdemeanors...to deny someone the right to bear arms because they forgot to signal three times is patently absurd.
Also, there are some mentions of "misdemeanors" and "criminal record"...what violations of the law are considered large enough to be misdemeanors? I assume traffic violations & such would not qualify as misdemeanors...to deny someone the right to bear arms because they forgot to signal three times is patently absurd.
Violating the law is one thing, being CONVICTED is another. I think it means being convicted of certain crimes. Being accused and found innocent means you haven't actually committed the crime, or at least that person wasn't convicted of it anyway...
I thank Deputy Speaker Borgman once again for his admirable service as Acting Speaker, and once again resume my duties as Speaker.
I think the course should be handled by MILE. It is really an administrative issue and if he wants to use local gun clubs and so on i see nothing in the legislation to prevent that. he should be left with some discretion on how to implement things.
I suppose convicted of a criminal offence would be the most applicable way to look at it. i don't think normal traffic violations fall into that, ie speeding, running a red light. but perhaps again that should be left to MILE and the courts to put into practice. they will be ebst placed to see what is reasonable and practical when they start to run this. If they act in a way we don't like the legislation can always be amended
Mr. Deputy Speaker, I must object to you unilaterally changing a bil you did not propose. Members of this body may make suggestions, but only the author of the bill can actually change the wording of the bill. As I am the author of the RoFA, that would fall under my jurisidiction.
Also, I would strongly appreciate seeing the Economic Stimulation through Higher Technology Act called to a vote. It has been introduced, seconded, and debated.
Also, I would strongly appreciate seeing the Economic Stimulation through Higher Technology Act called to a vote. It has been introduced, seconded, and debated.
Mr. President you are out of order. I know you believe in the seperation of powers amongst the branches of government as much as I do and so I ask you to please respect our branch and not participate in our debates. The Deputy Speaker may propose amendments to the bill, as can any NA member. His amendments are indeed not automatically incorporated, but neither are they out of order.
-Dr. Jonathan Glasser, Speaker of the NA
-Dr. Jonathan Glasser, Speaker of the NA
Last edited:
I believe I am allowed to speak on bills that I have introduced. After all, it would be rather awkward to debate a bill and not be able to speak to the person that created it and the one who can clarify the logic or reasoning behind it.
Deputy Speaker Borgman did not present the changes as proposals or amendments, but as the final version of the bill. Naturally, any member of the National Assembly may propose changes, alterations, or amendments to the bill, but the author must retain final say on the bill that will be voted on.
Deputy Speaker Borgman did not present the changes as proposals or amendments, but as the final version of the bill. Naturally, any member of the National Assembly may propose changes, alterations, or amendments to the bill, but the author must retain final say on the bill that will be voted on.
As long as we are all agreed that Mr. Borgman's changes are not fully accepted as changes in the final wording of the bill, as yet, I think there is little cause for disagreement on this issue.
As to the RoFA itself: thank you for your expert clarification of the bill, Commander Stewart.
As to Mr. Borgman's changes, although it is obviously Mr. Langley's perogative to confirm or deny them, I would like to make one comment.
In your changes to the Junior Firearms license section, you state it can only be used, apart from hunting, "in a competition at a sports club / shooting range." These changes do not allow for juniors to practice their skills whatsoever, even in a firing range, let alone at home under parental supervision--a provision that I must protest as being gratuitously restrictive.
As to the RoFA itself: thank you for your expert clarification of the bill, Commander Stewart.
As to Mr. Borgman's changes, although it is obviously Mr. Langley's perogative to confirm or deny them, I would like to make one comment.
In your changes to the Junior Firearms license section, you state it can only be used, apart from hunting, "in a competition at a sports club / shooting range." These changes do not allow for juniors to practice their skills whatsoever, even in a firing range, let alone at home under parental supervision--a provision that I must protest as being gratuitously restrictive.
Thats is a good point, mabey it should read "only allowed to use a firearm under supervison of an adult permit holder at a sports club/firing range
Mr. President if you wish to appeal your right to speak in these chambers you may do so. However, as chair I must once again rule you out of order. The constitution states that you may "may propose legislation in the National Assembly". This is ruled, in the eyes of the chair, to mean you may present but not speak before this body, except by invitation, a privledge that may be extended by the Chair to anyone.
I also rule that Deput Speaker Borgman may propose changes to your legislation and may, with a consent of 2/3 of this body alter the legislation without your consent, otherwise known as a hostile amendment. Of course you may freely accept proposed changes, otherwise known as a friendly amendment.
I do rule, however, that Deputy Speaker Borgman's "posting" of the does not reflect the bill before this body. He is free to offer his own competing legislation along the lines he has written, however Deputy Speaker Borgman's bill shall not be considered the one under discussion. However, the The Eutopian Responsible Gun Act, which I introduced, is also on the floor for discussion. For ease of discussion I shall for the moment accept Deputy Speaker Borgman's bill as changes to my own, owing to the overall similarties of the two. Members may debate either bill at this time.
Thank you for your cooperation and understanding in this matter.
Dr. Jonathan Glasser, Speaker of the National Assembley
I also rule that Deput Speaker Borgman may propose changes to your legislation and may, with a consent of 2/3 of this body alter the legislation without your consent, otherwise known as a hostile amendment. Of course you may freely accept proposed changes, otherwise known as a friendly amendment.
I do rule, however, that Deputy Speaker Borgman's "posting" of the does not reflect the bill before this body. He is free to offer his own competing legislation along the lines he has written, however Deputy Speaker Borgman's bill shall not be considered the one under discussion. However, the The Eutopian Responsible Gun Act, which I introduced, is also on the floor for discussion. For ease of discussion I shall for the moment accept Deputy Speaker Borgman's bill as changes to my own, owing to the overall similarties of the two. Members may debate either bill at this time.
Thank you for your cooperation and understanding in this matter.
Dr. Jonathan Glasser, Speaker of the National Assembley
Last edited:
The constitution does not lay down rules for how bills should be amended within this chamber, so i see no reason why there should be any problem with what the deputy speaker did. also considering the fact he did it when both you Mr speaker and the present had left without any notice it was perfectly reasonable.
Can we please get a final version of this bill settled and put to the vote before this session finishes.
Can we please get a final version of this bill settled and put to the vote before this session finishes.