Sorry can't be done, photoshop image wich I used set firmly in .jpg now, so no can do. I can make it smaller though for on party documents
-
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 have a dab of experience with paint shop pro and the like if the suggestion of bram is to be considered, I could knock up a logo.
What do you all think of Melanchthon's statements regarding division of power, and the role of the VP?
All,
after reviewing recent statements by the CC and MP, it seems clear that the Centre-Right has little interest in giving the Speakership to the RD. I can't say I'm thrilled. I see a lot of talk about the sacrifices the CC has made for the CPR. In reality, the CC hasn't made any sacrifices that the RD (and especially the ESRP) hasn't made. Nevertheless, everybody seems terribly concerned with making sure that the CC doesn't feel left out; it apparently hasn't occurred to anyone to ask at what point precisely the *RD* will feel left out.
The RD-membership had a lot of misgivings about the CPR to begin with, and the Right's lack of concern with a balanced distribution of power does little to dispel those misgivings. Let me make one thing very clear: the RD-leadership has used all its influence in the party to bring the membership on board with the CPR. We did so because we perceived the CPR to be in the best interest of Eutopia and because we expected to be treated fairly. We did not do it to get shafted.
That said, I have consulted the RD-membership, and our party is willing to make one last concession in the interest of keeping the CPR afloat. Note that the following offer is beyond the threshold of pain already.
(1) The RD will concede the Speakership to the CC.
(2) The VP is made into a separate Cabinet position.
(3) The VP will have the right to propose legislation in Parliament.
(4) The VP will have a seat on all Government and parliamentary Commissions.
(5) The VP will be responsible for all state-owned corporations and for representing the government in all companies which are partially owned by the state.
(6) The VP will be responsible for education, culture, communities, science, and technology.
(7) In exchange for losing the above portfolios, the MHSA gains Environment and will be renamed to Ministry of the Environment and Social Affairs (MESA).
(8) Sebastian Fitzpatrick is appointed VP.
(9) The MESA stays with the RD.
(10) The Deputy Speakership goes to the RD or ESRP.
This proposal requires a number of constitutional changes; we offer the concession of the Speakership with the understanding that these changes will be implemented without delay.
P.N.H. Schwarzerd
All,
after reviewing recent statements by the CC and MP, it seems clear that the Centre-Right has little interest in giving the Speakership to the RD. I can't say I'm thrilled. I see a lot of talk about the sacrifices the CC has made for the CPR. In reality, the CC hasn't made any sacrifices that the RD (and especially the ESRP) hasn't made. Nevertheless, everybody seems terribly concerned with making sure that the CC doesn't feel left out; it apparently hasn't occurred to anyone to ask at what point precisely the *RD* will feel left out.
The RD-membership had a lot of misgivings about the CPR to begin with, and the Right's lack of concern with a balanced distribution of power does little to dispel those misgivings. Let me make one thing very clear: the RD-leadership has used all its influence in the party to bring the membership on board with the CPR. We did so because we perceived the CPR to be in the best interest of Eutopia and because we expected to be treated fairly. We did not do it to get shafted.
That said, I have consulted the RD-membership, and our party is willing to make one last concession in the interest of keeping the CPR afloat. Note that the following offer is beyond the threshold of pain already.
(1) The RD will concede the Speakership to the CC.
(2) The VP is made into a separate Cabinet position.
(3) The VP will have the right to propose legislation in Parliament.
(4) The VP will have a seat on all Government and parliamentary Commissions.
(5) The VP will be responsible for all state-owned corporations and for representing the government in all companies which are partially owned by the state.
(6) The VP will be responsible for education, culture, communities, science, and technology.
(7) In exchange for losing the above portfolios, the MHSA gains Environment and will be renamed to Ministry of the Environment and Social Affairs (MESA).
(8) Sebastian Fitzpatrick is appointed VP.
(9) The MESA stays with the RD.
(10) The Deputy Speakership goes to the RD or ESRP.
This proposal requires a number of constitutional changes; we offer the concession of the Speakership with the understanding that these changes will be implemented without delay.
P.N.H. Schwarzerd
It seems we gain very little out of this, although P.N.H. Schwarzerd has said we have had to make enormous concessions. I don't really like this... I guess
Bram,
I share your concern. We did end up being the smallest party in the coalition though.
What do you think of the powers given to the VP as presented by Mel, or whatever he's calling himself these days?
I share your concern. We did end up being the smallest party in the coalition though.
What do you think of the powers given to the VP as presented by Mel, or whatever he's calling himself these days?
The VP will be awfully busy I guess, especially when we collec... ehm national... ehhmm, reorganize the railways under a state-owned and state-controlled corporation
So, I guess the VP would be too powerful, or at least too busy with that HUGE number of portfolios he has.
So, I guess the VP would be too powerful, or at least too busy with that HUGE number of portfolios he has.
Comerades, I feel the right is asking more than they have right for, looking at the election results. I was for a coalition, but not this form of coalition. But heck we can't turn back now, if we do so, who do you think will trust us of our voters.
[OOC: Actually, that's been my IC name since July last year - it's just that nobody ever used it.
]
Originally posted by Melanchthon
[OOC: Actually, that's been my IC name since July last year - it's just that nobody ever used it.
[OOC: Mel is mutch mutch easier....
/]
Originally posted by Melanchthon
[OOC: Actually, that's been my IC name since July last year - it's just that nobody ever used it.
It would be fine if you signed with it, Mel. It's so hard to remember these things.
Originally posted by Archeolooginspe
Comerades, I feel the right is asking more than they have right for, looking at the election results. I was for a coalition, but not this form of coalition. But heck we can't turn back now, if we do so, who do you think will trust us of our voters.
I agree Svein. As Mel, uh, Schwarzed, said it's all about compromise. I really think it (speaker) should go to RD and an unmodified VP to the CC. But, I think if no one has objections, then Schwarzed's compromise plan is well worth following up.
Originally posted by Bramarius
The VP will be awfully busy I guess, especially when we collec... ehm national... ehhmm, reorganize the railways under a state-owned and state-controlled corporation
Hey Bram, should we look into that in the METI department?
[OOC:
Except when I forget to do it, of course. ]
Just call my character PNH.Originally posted by I_Killed-Kenny
[OOC: Mel is mutch mutch easier....
I know; which is why I have started signing IC posts with my IC name.Originally posted by Josephus I
It would be fine if you signed with it, Mel. It's so hard to remember these things.
Except when I forget to do it, of course. ]
Now that Kevyn Fox has left teh RD, I think that the RD should get a lot less tahn in their last proposal, we can't accept this, I guess.
Josephus: Why, off course, comrade! But how ar we EVER going to get that through parliament? Hm.... perhaps... if the railways would perform REAL bad... or with a couple of bomb explosins... Whoops, didn't say that, off course
Josephus: Why, off course, comrade!
But how ar we EVER going to get that through parliament? Hm.... perhaps... if the railways would perform REAL bad... or with a couple of bomb explosins... Whoops, didn't say that, off course
Comrades,
As usual in Eutopia, things move along at a snail's pace, or move with all the velocity of a gas explosion.
In the next 24-hours, we may see the RD and CC fight reach a point where one one of them threatens to leave the CPR.
I need to know where the Party stands on this issue. If the CC leaves, I think, obviously we remain.
BUT--and it's a big BUT--if the RD leaves CPR, where do we stand? If the scenario allows the ESRP to get another ministerial position in government, should we remain? [This, IMO, would be the minimal request; and I don't mean vice-speaker]
What do you think?
As usual in Eutopia, things move along at a snail's pace, or move with all the velocity of a gas explosion.
In the next 24-hours, we may see the RD and CC fight reach a point where one one of them threatens to leave the CPR.
I need to know where the Party stands on this issue. If the CC leaves, I think, obviously we remain.
BUT--and it's a big BUT--if the RD leaves CPR, where do we stand? If the scenario allows the ESRP to get another ministerial position in government, should we remain? [This, IMO, would be the minimal request; and I don't mean vice-speaker]
What do you think?
Hmm... Yeah, I guess we could ask for another ministry, but I think teh CC would want one also, so we'd have to do somethuing like Mel, ehhh PNH, suggested. We could have Arch to replace Fitzpatrick.
Svein,
You have a big decision to make. On May 6th, voting ends in the Speakers Election and I see you haven't voted (stickied thread up top in this Forum). Bramarius already voted, as instructed by the Party for the then-RD candidate). Now, things have changed, Svein, and I ask you to read the last 1 or 2 pages in the Coalition to Preserve Republic Thread, catch up with the latest doings in there, and vote.
I don't know what the Party stance is now. There hasn't been enough time to hear all your opinions on this.
Basically, the gist is, if we send at least one vote Jacob's way, we may get the VP position. A bit of a bribe, and to be honest, I haven't heard this from the Prez himself. On the other hand, you all know how I feel about Jacob; but then maybe we ought to give him the benefit of the doubt--that he didn't puposely stall the DP debate.
PNH (Mel, to those who know him well) has argued that giving the CC the speaker position is giving them too much, given their performance in the elections, compared to the RDs. I'm tempted to agree, but then the only other candidate is now an independent who has maligned the CPR.
If this hasn't given you a headache yet, I'm not sure who PNH is now suggesting we support---maybe you can see something in the thread that I missed.
So, the long and short of it, Svein, is...study the issue and vote where you think your vote best belongs. You can debate your thoughts here time permitting.
The future of the Coalition might be in jeopardy, comrades, and we need to assert where we stand in an RD-less CPR.
Meanwhile, there's a hot babe in the bar; who may want me to read her "The Communist Manifesto" tonight. Must go check her out....
You have a big decision to make. On May 6th, voting ends in the Speakers Election and I see you haven't voted (stickied thread up top in this Forum). Bramarius already voted, as instructed by the Party for the then-RD candidate). Now, things have changed, Svein, and I ask you to read the last 1 or 2 pages in the Coalition to Preserve Republic Thread, catch up with the latest doings in there, and vote.
I don't know what the Party stance is now. There hasn't been enough time to hear all your opinions on this.
Basically, the gist is, if we send at least one vote Jacob's way, we may get the VP position. A bit of a bribe, and to be honest, I haven't heard this from the Prez himself. On the other hand, you all know how I feel about Jacob; but then maybe we ought to give him the benefit of the doubt--that he didn't puposely stall the DP debate.
PNH (Mel, to those who know him well) has argued that giving the CC the speaker position is giving them too much, given their performance in the elections, compared to the RDs. I'm tempted to agree, but then the only other candidate is now an independent who has maligned the CPR.
If this hasn't given you a headache yet, I'm not sure who PNH is now suggesting we support---maybe you can see something in the thread that I missed.
So, the long and short of it, Svein, is...study the issue and vote where you think your vote best belongs. You can debate your thoughts here time permitting.
The future of the Coalition might be in jeopardy, comrades, and we need to assert where we stand in an RD-less CPR.
Meanwhile, there's a hot babe in the bar; who may want me to read her "The Communist Manifesto" tonight. Must go check her out....
I've voted for Lundgren, comerade. I don't award dissent! So I hope we have somebody from the CPR as speaker!(ooc: I thought I had voted all ready but Murmurandus and me had the same avator )
)
aren't these royalists ridicilous, first they vote for jacob lundgren, but than if they now the CPR will vote for him, they support Keviynus