I never said that. But if these policemen would have a latino chief and one of latinos would beat up white during arrest, it could possibly happen he will get away with 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.
I do since that local chief is still under eye of his superior in Eutopia city, if we will do such reforms, his superior will have less control over him.
Quite the contrary. Local chiefs will be under more scrutiny, since their bosses will have fewer to worry about, and would be more focused on their region in hand.
Frankly, the office of the MILE gets very little input from police chiefs on local investigations as it is -- witness the debacle with Per Sergei. That said, I would desire express agreement on the part of the strikers that the MILE can co-opt cases at the Ministry's discretion. I do not think this is likely to be abused -- the Ministry has enough on its plate without sticking its nose into every little local investigation -- but we need the oversight necessary to decide when a case is of national importance, implicates more than merely local concerns, or is likely to be mishandled by local law enforcement.
I am also generally opposed to giving up our purview while continuing to pay the same amount. Our law enforcement division is overworked and underpaid to begin with; having them overworked, underpaid, and not under our control is simply worse. Of course, as you say, we hold the purse-strings, which gives us some modicum of control, but it is the wrong kind. Now, if we find ourselves in a struggle for dominance with local police officials, all we can do is cut off their funding, which, to the locals, makes *us* the badguys.
As for Anton, I am surprised to hear that this is an issue, as I thought it clear that the MILE did not oppose bail. I will see to it that this is dealt with presently.
I am also generally opposed to giving up our purview while continuing to pay the same amount. Our law enforcement division is overworked and underpaid to begin with; having them overworked, underpaid, and not under our control is simply worse. Of course, as you say, we hold the purse-strings, which gives us some modicum of control, but it is the wrong kind. Now, if we find ourselves in a struggle for dominance with local police officials, all we can do is cut off their funding, which, to the locals, makes *us* the badguys.
As for Anton, I am surprised to hear that this is an issue, as I thought it clear that the MILE did not oppose bail. I will see to it that this is dealt with presently.
Minister Vilms, I too am weary about giving into strikers demands. As MTEF you are surely seeing the impact on the economy. So how then do you propose we get them back to work? Simply wait them out while the forward progress we're making on the economy is more than canceled out?
I am greatly concerned about this work stopage. But this does not deny an underlying justice to what they are saying.
And so let it be clear: Eutopia will remain a country. Any discussions about giving greater independence to the Latins must come with the framework of Federalism, not independence. This is why their desire to stop teaching English, especially considering that students outside the Latins must learn a Latin language, is unacceptable.
Professor Talbott, I agree that the idea of giving greater Federalism to all provinces is the logical extention of this discussion and think it might be quite proper to include that in this bill. This might be the answer as to how we do not put ourselves at the mercy of rowdy unionists who have a grievance, warranted or not.
-Dr. Jonathan Glasser
I am greatly concerned about this work stopage. But this does not deny an underlying justice to what they are saying.
And so let it be clear: Eutopia will remain a country. Any discussions about giving greater independence to the Latins must come with the framework of Federalism, not independence. This is why their desire to stop teaching English, especially considering that students outside the Latins must learn a Latin language, is unacceptable.
Professor Talbott, I agree that the idea of giving greater Federalism to all provinces is the logical extention of this discussion and think it might be quite proper to include that in this bill. This might be the answer as to how we do not put ourselves at the mercy of rowdy unionists who have a grievance, warranted or not.
-Dr. Jonathan Glasser
De-centralizing in a federal way is all fine and good, but not this, and not in this way. The ends do not justify the means. Frankly, a huge portion of our country was shut down, we can not be seen as rewarding them.
We have to demand that they go back to work before we do anything. I don't mean just a day or two, I mean fully. If not, they will suffer. The teachers are on strike, which means we can cut education for those areas. The same goes to the medical profession, transportation and agriculture. We can cut unemployment as well. If they choose not to work, they choose not to get paid.
If they go back to work we can loosen some things. Perhaps allow for Regional Ministers, appointed by the Governor of the province, who would be deputies. A regional MTEF, or MILE, who could be a link from the province to the Minister. But I do not think we should give in to Federalism now, not after what they did.
We have to demand that they go back to work before we do anything. I don't mean just a day or two, I mean fully. If not, they will suffer. The teachers are on strike, which means we can cut education for those areas. The same goes to the medical profession, transportation and agriculture. We can cut unemployment as well. If they choose not to work, they choose not to get paid.
If they go back to work we can loosen some things. Perhaps allow for Regional Ministers, appointed by the Governor of the province, who would be deputies. A regional MTEF, or MILE, who could be a link from the province to the Minister. But I do not think we should give in to Federalism now, not after what they did.
This is a dire and decidedly wretched situation.
What seems to have escaped you, Per Vilms, and Per Marine, is that re-building the cross-cultural relations, that have so broken down during the course of this strike, requires trust, and requires a genuine relationship between both sides.
You seem to think that by 'giving in' to their demands, which in fact is not the case, we are damaging the fabric of the nation. We are not giving in, we are agreeing to a mutually beneficial set of demands that are both reasonable and relatively simple.
We are not rewarding them for their industrial action. We are repairing a situation that should never have arisen at all.
The strikers need a guarantee that we will live up to their demands. If they simply call off the strike, who's to say that we will cut down what they want. They have seen that I am genuinely wishing to discuss whatever they want, and this trust has been rewarded by a small strike concession. If we want more, we're going to have to earn it.
'What they did' was extremely reasonable considering how under-represented the Latins are. Yes they caused great disruption over a relatively long period of time, but only because no one was willing to deal with their agrievement.
What seems to have escaped you, Per Vilms, and Per Marine, is that re-building the cross-cultural relations, that have so broken down during the course of this strike, requires trust, and requires a genuine relationship between both sides.
You seem to think that by 'giving in' to their demands, which in fact is not the case, we are damaging the fabric of the nation. We are not giving in, we are agreeing to a mutually beneficial set of demands that are both reasonable and relatively simple.
We are not rewarding them for their industrial action. We are repairing a situation that should never have arisen at all.
The strikers need a guarantee that we will live up to their demands. If they simply call off the strike, who's to say that we will cut down what they want. They have seen that I am genuinely wishing to discuss whatever they want, and this trust has been rewarded by a small strike concession. If we want more, we're going to have to earn it.
'What they did' was extremely reasonable considering how under-represented the Latins are. Yes they caused great disruption over a relatively long period of time, but only because no one was willing to deal with their agrievement.
They get as much representation as French do, and I don't see them calling strikes, they get as much representation as Anglos do, and I don't see them calling strikes either, it's not in representation. They are the part under siege not us, don't work= don't get money, it's war of nerves, and we surrendered too soon, besides 2 days of work isn't enough. And even if we would like to pass this bill I haven't saw the speaker in ages!
For one, I believe the French minority in this country is commonly known, with the Spanish, as 'Latin'.
Secondly, I'd like to put to you the number of 'Latin' MNA. There are 8 seats. If the Latins were to be proportionately represented then 2, and almost 3 should be held by members of their cultural group. How many MNA's are of Latin origin?
On any account, it's hardly as if our nation makes the most of its Latin culture. They are some of the poorest, and the most neglected on the island, and so I feel they should be given the encouragement they deserve.
This imbalance needs to be reasserted, and if that involves giving greater autonomy to the provinces, then so be it.
Secondly, I'd like to put to you the number of 'Latin' MNA. There are 8 seats. If the Latins were to be proportionately represented then 2, and almost 3 should be held by members of their cultural group. How many MNA's are of Latin origin?
On any account, it's hardly as if our nation makes the most of its Latin culture. They are some of the poorest, and the most neglected on the island, and so I feel they should be given the encouragement they deserve.
This imbalance needs to be reasserted, and if that involves giving greater autonomy to the provinces, then so be it.
Esteva said:
Ask Former President, Current MDIA and MNA, Professor Talbott if he knows any Latins, you know, like his mother? There is no oppression of the Latins. They have the same vote as the Anglos and the Topans, and the Norse, etc. It is just that there have been recent events which have involved them. And if you think they are the worse off, go to Farpoint. Ive been there, ive seen what the war did. The Latins complain because they want to have more, the W.E.T. complains because it has nothing. Sure, we can give them more autonomy, more autonomy than an autonmous province has? The Constitution gives them massive independance, and yet they want more.
And how do they go about getting more? Why, by voting for those who promise to give it to them? No. They shut down their schools and hospitals and transportation, and go on strike. Then when their economy starts to go back down, they blame the government! Perhaps the Latins need to understand that the government is not around to make everything perfect, and if they go on strike things will get worse.
What we are doing is handing them what they demand. So, excelent, we end the strike. But what happens when they want to be their own country? They go on strike again. When we refuse, do they take up arms? Why not, it could happen, especially if we cave in to outbreaks like this now. I will not, as MTEF, stand for this. As a Minister I am opposed, as an MNA I will vote against it, and as a Eutopian I feel it is letting our country be torn apart by Racial tensions. To give in is to justify, justify some non-existant rascism towards a group of people who are as intertwined with this government as any other.
I'm afraid I shan't be able to continue this little debate.
You'll have to find another donkey to stick up in front of the Latins, see how your hard-nosed snobbery will stand up then.
I have handed in my resignation to the President as MHES.
You'll have to find another donkey to stick up in front of the Latins, see how your hard-nosed snobbery will stand up then.
I have handed in my resignation to the President as MHES.
Konstantin,
Regarding your request, obviously you'll need to get Presidential approval. The office of the MILE has no problem cutting the W.E.T. loose, however -- it will free up some manpower overall.
Regarding your request, obviously you'll need to get Presidential approval. The office of the MILE has no problem cutting the W.E.T. loose, however -- it will free up some manpower overall.
On the phone
We are in somewhat of a conundrum here? Why? Because they're striking and we essentially agree with the strikers. It's a horrid, horrid shame when the political process breaks down like this...and I agree with Konstantin when he says that just giving into their demands would set a bad precedent--giving into any group of political strikers sets a bad precedent, since it gives a few people disproportionately and unrepresentatively large power over the silent majority--and our country descends into the rule of the Parisian mob. It's simply unethical for healthcare workers, members of law enforcement agencies, et al. to go on strike--the national welfare of this country depends on them.
But what if we don't do anything? We only exacerbate the current situation--the strike will eventually end, of course, as to shut down entire provinces is simply economically infeasible. But then the south is economically devastated--and we still have to think of the best interests of the strikers, even if they are striking against us. And it may simply create more resentment in the south--even if we do enact reforms (which most of us feel are necessary) after the strike ends.
I really don't know. I really can't give any reccomenation...I'm out of the country, I don't have a feel for the attitudes in the South. (I know my cousins in Chateauvallon are annoyed at the strikers, but that's about it.) I can imagine this turning very ugly if we give this to them...and I can imagine it equally ugly if we don't. But if we do enact reforms, it has to be on a national scale, not just in the South...and we may (may) want to consider some punitive action against striking government workers...cancelling of any recent pay raises, or something.
We are in somewhat of a conundrum here? Why? Because they're striking and we essentially agree with the strikers. It's a horrid, horrid shame when the political process breaks down like this...and I agree with Konstantin when he says that just giving into their demands would set a bad precedent--giving into any group of political strikers sets a bad precedent, since it gives a few people disproportionately and unrepresentatively large power over the silent majority--and our country descends into the rule of the Parisian mob. It's simply unethical for healthcare workers, members of law enforcement agencies, et al. to go on strike--the national welfare of this country depends on them.
But what if we don't do anything? We only exacerbate the current situation--the strike will eventually end, of course, as to shut down entire provinces is simply economically infeasible. But then the south is economically devastated--and we still have to think of the best interests of the strikers, even if they are striking against us. And it may simply create more resentment in the south--even if we do enact reforms (which most of us feel are necessary) after the strike ends.
I really don't know. I really can't give any reccomenation...I'm out of the country, I don't have a feel for the attitudes in the South. (I know my cousins in Chateauvallon are annoyed at the strikers, but that's about it.) I can imagine this turning very ugly if we give this to them...and I can imagine it equally ugly if we don't. But if we do enact reforms, it has to be on a national scale, not just in the South...and we may (may) want to consider some punitive action against striking government workers...cancelling of any recent pay raises, or something.
Mr. President.
Do I have your permission to begin the process of making the W.E.T. into a full province?
Also, do you want me to meet with the Latino strikers?
Do I have your permission to begin the process of making the W.E.T. into a full province?
Also, do you want me to meet with the Latino strikers?
I am willing to resume negotiations with the workers if the president desires. Some may question my outburst with them the last time I was there. To be honest, I was frustrated. We are offering them basically what they want, and they still want to continue their strike. They're rather unreasonable and this coming from ME---Mr. Love Our Workers.
I've been out of the loop a bit. I need to know a couple things.
One. What exactly are we offering them?
Two. Is it legal? Does the president have the authority to begin some form of sovereignty discussions with the Latinos without National Assembly approval.
Three. IF it requires NA approval, you know it's going to be a bitter fight. And, as all things Eutopian, will take a long time. Which is why, I'm in favour of asking them to resume work right away.
Fourth. Is this government in favour of offering them partial autonomy this way? Is it a good thing?
Josephus
I've been out of the loop a bit. I need to know a couple things.
One. What exactly are we offering them?
Two. Is it legal? Does the president have the authority to begin some form of sovereignty discussions with the Latinos without National Assembly approval.
Three. IF it requires NA approval, you know it's going to be a bitter fight. And, as all things Eutopian, will take a long time. Which is why, I'm in favour of asking them to resume work right away.
Fourth. Is this government in favour of offering them partial autonomy this way? Is it a good thing?
Josephus
Josephus I said:
Amen to that. I have just about lost my goodwill in this situation. And I do desire you resume negiotiations. However this resumption of the strike is an extreme act of bad will especially following upon my public statement commiting to what had previously been talked about. If they start throwing hissy fits feel free to walk away from the table.
We're offering them something we are going to offer the people of every other province which is:
1. Control over law enforcement. There will be exceptions for National Investigations, but for routine robbery, murder, traffic stops, etc local control.
2. Taxing authority. Obviously provinces that opt for local control will not be charged the same tax rate as those that stay with the centralized control. Details need to be worked out (for instance can they impose any sort of tax or only certain ones?). Some have suggested giving them some sort of cap. I would personally be in favor of unlimited rights figuring that the ability of people to move/vote would keep provinces in-check. How much authority they have though is something we should use as bargaining chips.
3. If places are going to have control over schools they need to pay for them. Right now the Federal Government pays for the autonimously administered Latin Schools. This is not something that will continue going forward. This is a concession the Latins will need to make since the work of the MECT is important and I would like to give all of our provinces an incentive to stay federalized here. I see this being an issue that would be question 1b on the referendum, which I'll return to in a second. The Latins also want the right not to teach English in their schools. Again this is something that they better give a hell of a lot to get. Afterall, everyone in this room had to learn a Latin language as part of their schooling. Why should they be special?
4. They want control over agricultural subsidies. Works for me.
5. Any change to a local system will have to be approved by a majority of the people living in the province. Again I see the question of whether schools remain independent being something like "If the province does choose to become semi-autonomous should the schools be placed under provincal control?"
Again if they aren't bargaining in good faith we're simply going to move forward on this without them. Don't be afraid to walk away.
It will take NA approval. I believe they agreed at the start that they would return to work when we submitted the bill not upon passage. Confirm this as for the reasons you stated it is a must.
Opinion seems to be generally in favor of more provincial control but is more mixed over how to do it in this particular situation.
-Dr. Jonathan Glasser
President of Eutopia
My concern here is two-fold:Estonianzulu said:
1. The WET is far smaller than any other province we have. This wouldn't be a problem except that...
2. If we're going to offer all provinces the chance for more provincial control it seems like an inequitable thing to compare WET with any of the other provinces.
Since this is going to take a constituional amendment anyway perhaps we can bundle it into the above bill, with the understanding that they will not be elgiible for semi-autonomous control.