• 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.

unmerged(10397)

Citizen
Jul 27, 2002
1.023
0
Alright, I second the OERA. I'd like to bring this to a vote quickly if no one has any changes to propose.

Also, I think we can take a vote on the PACB. Note the removal of the part about the gambling supervisory board. As this issue is more debatable, it can be done later by a second bill.

Privatisation of Airport Casinos Bill (PACB)


This bill will lay out the terms and conditions by which the Airport 'Gambling Lounges', established in the 'Airport Casino Bill', will be sold off as private enterprises, and the procedure by which this sale will take place.

1. The 'Airport Casino Bill' (18/I/04) is hereby revoked.

2. The 'gambling lounges', established in the 'Airport Casino Bill' (18/I/04) will be grouped together into a single corporation known as Eutopian Airport Casinos (EAC).
(a) EAC, in its entireity, will be put up for private tender for the period of one year, during which it will continue to be administered by the Government. During this period, bids will be received by the MERL.
(b) After that period has elapsed, the MERL will make a consideration of all the received bids and decide upon the winner after looking at all the individual merits.
(c) If no bids are received, the MERL will open a further period of one year for offers on part or parts of EAC and after the period has elapsed, the MERL will make a further consideration on the received bids and decide upon whether that part or those parts of EAC should be sold.
(d) If EAC remains unsold in part or in whole after this period of two years, EAC will be floated on the stock exchange as a PLC and the Government will sell all interests in it.

3. If at any point EAC or one of its parts, after passing out of public ownership, should fall into indebtedness, the Government will not provide any subsidy to bail out EAC or one of its parts.

Objections?
 

jacob-Lundgren

GM/Brutal Werewolf Leader
Moderator
67 Badges
Sep 18, 2001
2.600
48
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Hearts of Iron II: Beta
  • Pride of Nations
  • Europa Universalis: Rome Collectors Edition
  • Humble Paradox Bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Magicka
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
Sounds ok to me.
 

unmerged(26817)

Corporal
Mar 15, 2004
28
0
"So sorry for the delay." Strasse announces as he re-enters the Assembly. "Thankyou for reminding everyone of my bill. Indeed, it does exactly what it says on the tin. If there are any questions, I would be delighted to answer them further." He ruffles his notes.

"On a second matter, I would like to reaffirm my request that the Assembly agrees to establish a committee on the matter of New Bengal passing back into the UPE. I understand your concerns, Per O'Floinn, but if people wish to rejoin Eutopia, they must be given opportunity to do so. What message are we giving to others living in St. Espirit and Tilapia who want to come back together again if we do not offer this life-line now? Do I have much support in this matter?"
 

unmerged(35742)

Second Lieutenant
Oct 30, 2004
135
0
I'm sorry per Strasse don't you know that their is aleast one bill that we have to look at before we go any further. you might have put forward the majority of the bills but you should really wait your turn.

says Braxton in a dangerously soft tone
 

unmerged(26817)

Corporal
Mar 15, 2004
28
0
"Well seeing as we're already discussing one of my bills, I'm not too bothered. But I am concerned, Major Braxton, that you are far more interested in seeing everyone get their turn than dealing with the imminent issues affecting people out there in the real world.

The New Bengal issue is not a party political point, it's part of our nation, filled with Eutopian nationals who want to come back into the fold. If you want to abandon any dream some of us might have had to see Eutopia come back peacefully together once again, please do not do so because of some concern that you are not speaking quite as much as you should be, but rather because you genuinely disagree with reunification. All I want to see is action."
 

unmerged(35742)

Second Lieutenant
Oct 30, 2004
135
0
Oh you will be seeing all the action you want after we pass the transportation act. Because it did come up before your gambling act but you managed to divert our attention from it and on to your gambling act. Also please do not insult my intelligence or memory for that matter by saying that this New Bengal issue has nothing to do with party politics if I remember correctly that when you came forward with it you said

On another matter, I want to ask the Assembly what we should be doing about the question of New Bengal. The CUE is very eager to push for a referendum there on the prospect of them rejoining our nation. Would other assembly members be willing to to put their name to a motion setting up a commission on this matter?

You seemed to metion the name CUE now I am sure you were not talking about a game of snooker so the only other CUE you could be talking about is your won political party hence making it party politics. So please let us firstly discuss the Transportation and Omincare act, then move on to New Bengal. And remember Per Strasse the less interuptons for these acts the quicker we can move on to other issues.
 

unmerged(26817)

Corporal
Mar 15, 2004
28
0
"Excuse me, Major Braxton, but you won't brow-beat me into submission that easily. I find your vult face where I'm concerned quite surprising. One moment you were quite happy allowing me to bring up matters that concerned me - the next you would rather I weren't here at all. Some might assume that you knew something the rest of us didn't. Please do let us know.

And your flimsy attempt to make it look like only CUE supporters wanted New Bengal back is quite absurd. Just because I happened to mention my party's name in the same sentence does not make the matter solely of interest to members of my party. The reason that it is not a party political issue is because it concerns all sorts of people - all of them New Bengalese or Eutopian. Bringing them back into Eutopian soil is not beneficial only to Conservatives. It is beneficial to every one of us! Or are you suggesting that New Bengal votes CUE in block? Would that they could, Major Braxton, would that they could! I am not insulting your intelligence, you are insulting my right as a Member of this Assembly to debate and discuss what I want to.

And before we move onto your Transportation and Omnicare Act, I do believe that we were discussing the Privatisation of the Gambling Lounges under the PACB. If we are to privatise them, Major, don't you think it would be most beneficial to ensure that they are also properly regulated? Therefore I would also like to propose the Casino Control Board Act (CCBA).

Casino Control Board Act (CCBA)

The aim of this Act is to establish a permanent independent board for the monitoring and regulation of the casino and gambling industries. It will detail the composition, the remit, and the powers of the board and will describe the punishments that it can mete out to offenders.

1. Composition

(a) The Board shall be made up of seven members including a representative appointed by the MERL, a representative of the gambling industry and five other independent experts in the field appointed by the General Assembly.
(b) If a position on the Board shall become vacant, it must be immediately filled by the relevant authority or will be filled by the General Assembly.
(c) All decisions made the Board must receive a the approval of a majority of members.

2. Remit

(a) The Board is to investigate and regulate all gambling houses, casinos, gambling lounges, gaming rooms, individual slot machines and roulette wheels.
(b) The Board will have the power to create a gambling code of practise by which all the above establishments will have to abide.
(c) The Board will have the power to send inspectors into the above establishments to ensure that they are abiding by the gambling code of practise.
(d) The Board will further have the power to impose punishments, as described below, on establishments not abiding by the gambling code of practise.

3. Punishments

(a) If an establishment does not abide by the described gambling code of practise, the Board will have the power to impose a fine up to the value of 100,000 ducats on any gambling establishment dependent on the severity of the misdemeanour.
(b) Further, for repeated or extremely serious misdemeanours, the Board will have the power to close down and revoke the gambling license of that establishment.
 

unmerged(35742)

Second Lieutenant
Oct 30, 2004
135
0
I was quite happy Mr Strasse to allow you to bring up matters that concerned your self and your party untill I noticed that you seemed a bit to enthusiastic when it comes to these bill's I don't kow about you but it seems to me as you are delibratly spamming if I may use the colloquial phrase this assembly with CUE bills as to stop any other partys able to get a word or should I say bill in edge ways.

This can clearly be seen as that after every time some new legislation is puposed your new legislation sudden pop's up and then as I said before every one elses attention is taken by that new peice of legislation also to further prove this point your Casino Control Board Act (CCBA) all of a sudden pop's up once we have manage to clear some of your other legislation even though we have 2 other earlier bills waiting to be past.

Also don't say your not insluting my intelligence I can cleary see through yor thinly veiled ruse of using the UMP majority for your own advantage as every bill of CUE's we pass the more and more of them making your party a minorty seat holder basically detemine what legislature will be passed.

I have no problems with you being a member or your right to disscuss and debate. What do you think we are doning right now disscussing and debating.
 

unmerged(26817)

Corporal
Mar 15, 2004
28
0
"I'm not quite sure what you mean by my bills 'popping up' and 'spamming' the Assembly. I simply introduced them because I thought they were sensible measures to remedy genuine problems. Hardly 'spam', as you so puerilely put it.

Secondly, you describe me as being enthusiastic when it comes to the bills I introduced. Well, what else would I be? I wrote them, I spent the time putting thought into them - so therefore I have to be enthusiastic.

Furthermore, this CCBA is needed urgently. If the bill that I introduced privatising the airport casinos is passed there needs to be some regulating body to make sure the casinos are working properly. If there isn't, we simply have the most unattractive form of economic liberalism whereby corporations are able to ride roughshod over the morality of the people. I don't want to have to label you a corruptor of the peoples' morality, but that is exactly what you will become if you refuse to see the merit in my bill. It was agreed by our Speaker, Per O'Floinn, that one was necessary, so I have simply stepped up to the mark along with the other aspect of my legislative programme and drawn one up.

Major, I don't like the way you are treating me. It's as if I have become a second-class MGA. I have just as much right to be here as you - I have received just as much support from the people as you personally have - so I should be allowed to do whatever I damn well want in this chamber. A week ago you were perfectly happy to let me speak. Look at you know. You're embarassing yourself."

[OOC: If you're going to let yourself by influenced by information you've read in a Private thread, at least be subtle about it :wacko:]
 

unmerged(35742)

Second Lieutenant
Oct 30, 2004
135
0
I see merit in the bill all I want is fore the other bills to be past first or else we shall never see them happen. And I never said that they were not good I would happly vote fore them like I have done before but I don't want the other bills not to have a chance of seeing the light of day as all the bills passed in here have merit but whose it one to say that this bill is more important than the other it's not right that we should forget about the other bills, so all that I am saying is that after this bill is passed can we look into the other earlier bills

And also aplogise if you feel that I am treating you as a second class MGA. I will put my behaiour in check as I see that it iis inaproperate. All I have been trying to show that we have forgoten about the other legislation.
 

unmerged(26817)

Corporal
Mar 15, 2004
28
0
"I accept your apology. It is always nice to hear a politician accept that he was wrong.

Just to prove that I am not totally ignoring other peoples' legislation, I would just like to make few comments on the Energy Efficiency Programme;

Firstly, I agree with your sentiment. Efficiency, and productivity are words extremely close to my heart. We have to get the most out of whatever we do - both for the purpose of making a profit in business, and for respecting that our environment can only sustain limited damage before the punishment that we exact on it becomes permanent.

But I am not sure that this particular bill actually does anything concrete about the challenge of increasing energy efficiency. Sure, it sets out a number of good aims and examples of what products and techniques are more efficient, but it doesn't actually say how these products can be encouraged, apart from the obvious 'advertisement' - which doesn't require legislation anyway.

What I would much rather see is a bill detailing exactly how energy efficiency can be improved. The aim of incentivising the modernisation of systems is a good place to start, I think - perhaps by offering a small reduction in tax for those companies that use energy efficient products, or a reduction for consumers who buy more energy efficient cars? The tax system could be particularly useful in persuading people."
 

unmerged(10397)

Citizen
Jul 27, 2002
1.023
0
That'll do, gentlemen.

Major Braxton, don't worry, we have time to discuss everything.

Per Strasse, the good major has a point, let's wrap up a little old business before we plow ahead with too many new bills.

Alright, I intend to bring up the PACB, CCBA, and OERA for vote later today. For the moment, I'm restricting other debate until these three are up for vote.
 

unmerged(35742)

Second Lieutenant
Oct 30, 2004
135
0
Ok as I was saying we must stop CUE from taking over..
No I'm only joking let us talk about the engergy bill.
 
Last edited:

unmerged(26817)

Corporal
Mar 15, 2004
28
0
"Oh yes, very amusing Major Braxton. No wonder you're in the GA.

But on the matter of the Energy Efficiency Programme, I believe I have made my feelings quite clear. It has a worthy aim, but is bad legislation. If all of us were able to legislate by just providing a few examples of our broad based aims, it would be left to those who are unelected to really decide what is being done and that's just not democratic.

I really don't see any point debating a bill that only legislates to allow local authorities to advertise about the benefits of energy efficiency.

To give my argument some more flesh, I'd just like to ask the author exactly what he means by;

1) establish Energy saving as a common criteria, used in all fields of Eutopian society
2) cooperation with other entities (both public and privates, both Eutopian and foreign) with the aim of exchange of experience

On the first - yes, a common criteria - but how? With what incentives? People don't just do what the Government says.

On the second - how will you encourage this cooperation? Why will private and public 'entities' want to cooperate with rivals? How will you coordinate this cooperation?

3)Stimulate the use of Energy saving technologies in industrial realities like: cogeneration plants, use of advanced materials and rational plant design in order to maximize energy efficiency

Sure, but how will you do this? You can't just go up to an industrial plant and say 'maximise energy efficiency'. There needs to be guidelines, incentives, education.

4) Advertise a large campaign to spread in the Eutopian population the culture and the benefits of Energy saving, and encourage the use of low impact technologies like: compact fluorescent light-bulbs, energy efficient appliances (categories labelled A+ and A++) and boilers.

This is perhaps a little better, but how will the public be able to afford all of this? It's all pretty expensive, and we're not all Amric whats-his-name.

5) Help local administration in the establishing of a good example of low impact-energy efficient system, instructing the Public employees and incentive the substitution of old systems to modern ones: LED operating traffic lights, power saving city illumination.

Again, how will you 'help' local authorities? What extra funds will you give them to be able to use these 'efficient' systems. The only good part of this is the idea of incentivising modernisation. But exactly how will this be done?"
 

unmerged(35742)

Second Lieutenant
Oct 30, 2004
135
0
Well to deal with a few points we could provide tax cuts and rebates on people who firsty by these energy effiecent products, also It has been stated that the energy efficient prouducts will eventually end up paying them selves in the long run. Also children should be taught about the benifits of energy saving and efficiency. and also forgive me for my shocking attempt of humour.
 
Last edited:

unmerged(24047)

Recruit
Dec 28, 2003
2
0
Firstly i want to express my relief seeing that our democracy works, when someone like Per Strasse can put objections to the propositions of the largest majority party, knowing (even if not wanting to admit it) that the majority party will consider his doubts and changes.

Esteva said:
On the first - yes, a common criteria - but how? With what incentives? People don't just do what the Government says.

The idea behind my proposition is that when the people will understand that by simply buting or using power efficient material they can: lower the pollution, help the technologic progress and (most important) save money in their electricity bill, they will be wanting to change things voluntarily.

Esteva said:
On the second - how will you encourage this cooperation? Why will private and public 'entities' want to cooperate with rivals? How will you coordinate this cooperation?

Around the world (expecially Europian Union) already have similar normatives from years, encouraging cooperation with what you call "rivals" means that we can learn a lot.

Esteva said:
Sure, but how will you do this? You can't just go up to an industrial plant and say 'maximise energy efficiency'. There needs to be guidelines, incentives, education.

I don't think it's my job to lay out plans and enact technical directives, it's MERL job. We can set up a special funding for the industries wanting to improve their standard of quality (instead of direct fundings, it could arranged a tax lowering). So if we approve this bill, a commitee inside the MERL should be formed, founded by this bill. It should be the link where private entities can absorb the directives and be certified as working under the new quality standards.

Esteva said:
This is perhaps a little better, but how will the public be able to afford all of this? It's all pretty expensive, and we're not all Amric whats-his-name.

Believe me, with the pay of a soldier, i'm no Al'Aeshir myself. But next time a family needs to change his washing machine, or his fridge, or even a light-bulb, they MUST know that if they buy a higher saving standard (like the A+) they don't spend more (because they don't cost more) and they can save power, meaning that they in the end help the enviroment and help also their wallet.

Esteva said:
Again, how will you 'help' local authorities? What extra funds will you give them to be able to use these 'efficient' systems. The only good part of this is the idea of incentivising modernisation. But exactly how will this be done?"

We already fund local authorities for replacements and such things, the only thing we need to do is to make sure that they replace older equipment with more efficient one.
The benefits of this will show in long term decrease of power usage, means less power wasted, means less power produced.
 

unmerged(41776)

Private
Mar 20, 2005
11
0
Per Olson posts a new bill for consideration

Cannabis Legalization Act

The sale of cannabis is hereby legalized and the possession of cannabis or its paraphenalia is no longer a crime. Cannabis can now be sold by private individuals and private companies.

Whereas, the sale and use of cannabis by a minor would be a cause for concern, a Cannabis Regulation Board will be established in this act. The Regulation Board's job would be to make sure that private individuals or businesses do not sell cannabis to minors, and that violaters are fined. The legal age limit for use or possession of cannabis would be 21 years of age. Cannabis would be regulated in the same way as alcohol and tobacco.

Whereas, the state can always use additional revenue, cannabis and cannabis paraphenalia would be taxed at the same level as alcohol and tobacco. The revenues raised could be used by the state for any purpose it thought worthy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.