-
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.
Mr. Speaker, I humbly request your permission to be seated in this august body as a member (associated with the ENP caucus).
Prof. Talbott, I imagine that there are no objections. Welcome.
I am announcing that although I am returned from my trip, I will be sharing much of my work with the Deputy Speaker. He has done a relatively good job during my absence, and I think that between the two of us we can do well.
I see the suggestion from Reverend Park has some support, and I essentially agree with it, so if the Assembly is willing to accept it as standing proceedure?
I am announcing that although I am returned from my trip, I will be sharing much of my work with the Deputy Speaker. He has done a relatively good job during my absence, and I think that between the two of us we can do well.
I see the suggestion from Reverend Park has some support, and I essentially agree with it, so if the Assembly is willing to accept it as standing proceedure?
"I'll accept the proposed changes for the sake of moving things along, but I would strongly prefer you change the wording regarding the role of the senior legislators to include the qualifications that they be both a majority of the senior legislators and that their parties represent a majority of the GA. Since you find my wording unclear or contrary, please feel free to come up with your own, since you are apparently an expert on the subject."
"Per Minister, as soon as you can provide a clarification of your numbers and perhaps provide some of the information that has been requested, we can move to vote on your proposed budget amendment."
"Other than that, we are currently lacking any bills with a second, though several have been introduced and have published ECB impact reports."
"Per Minister, as soon as you can provide a clarification of your numbers and perhaps provide some of the information that has been requested, we can move to vote on your proposed budget amendment."
"Other than that, we are currently lacking any bills with a second, though several have been introduced and have published ECB impact reports."
"Thank-you Mr. Leary. As the wording now stands, given the number of GA members in each party, agreement between any two of the Senior Legislators from the three largest parties can overrule the Speaker on a procedural matter. Next term, the members per party may be different, so the numbers could change. If any legislator believes that results in a decision that is incorrect or unfair, they could still raise a point of order, so I believe there is adequate protection for every member, no matter what party they are from. I understand why you would like it changed, but as it is currently written, it allows the will of the majority to be expressed in a convenient fashion, without needing to go through the time consuming process of a lengthy vote on every procedural matter. Full votes are still required for the most important matters, the legislation. I would like to thank-you for drafting the original version of the rules. In the version we appear to be adopting, most of the language is yours."
Woody bows in Mr. Leary's direction and then sits back down.
Woody bows in Mr. Leary's direction and then sits back down.
Before we discuss the Infrastructure bill related to the highways, I was wondering if the commentary provided by the ECB about the routing to Erikshamm had caused you to amend your proposal? In the campaign I had suggested a highway to the west coast, passing through the major inland oilfields, and terminating at a potential new port site or loading facility through which we could export the surplus portion of our interior production. I believe former President Al'Aeshir, back when he was campaigning for the MRP, in one of his last lucid moments, also advocated building a new port facility on the west coast of Western Eutopia. I am not certain, but I thought Erikshamm was a bit far north for that, and, of course, such a development would totally destroy the current character of that lovely hamlet as well as severely negatively impact the pursuit of the traditional livelihoods of the current residents.
"Very well. Since it appears this version has widespread support, we'll move to a vote now."
Mr. Leary, When I went to vote, I noticed that I had failed to amend one portion to be consistent with the rest.
Is indeed what I wrote, so it is my mistake, for which I apologize to you and this body. What I had intended, consistent with the rest of rules was:
Could you kindly incorporate that change? Sorry to have put you to this extra work.
Since the Minister has not seen fit to respond, I suggest we move on to discussing other matters until the Minister of Social Services clarifiies his figures and replies to our inquiries.
ECB has recently published several impact reports. In light of their findings, I would like to make a few minor changes to the Infrastructure Expansion Act.
The changes were in regards to the funding of the freeway expansion and the time table set. I'd also like to address that the Eirikshamm situation of not being able to fund overruns with local taxes. Since that solution is not possible, in the event of an overrun, the minister would simply have to submit a revised budget for his portfolio to meet the additional needs. I feel the increase in funding Sea Transportation recieved should be adaquete to fund the entire expansion at both locations.
Also, I'd like to alter the Shipping, Transportation, and Maritime Construction Stimulus Bill slightly to reflect the ECB report.
I lengthened the duration of the training and grant programs to three terms to better coincide with the infrastructure expansion.
Per Park, regarding the Eutopian Federal Mortgage Guarantee Corporation Establishment Act, I assume you will alter your bill to include the start up funding and place under the appropriate minister portfolio. That said, with the potential passage of the Economic Recovery and Tax Reform Act, the Infrastructure Expansion Act, and the Shipping, Transportation, and Maritime Construction Stimulus Bill I feel our economy will be well on the road to recovery and the EFMGC should have little trouble attracting investment. Provided you make those changes, I would be ready to second your bill.
ECB has recently published several impact reports. In light of their findings, I would like to make a few minor changes to the Infrastructure Expansion Act.
ECB Impact Report said:
The changes were in regards to the funding of the freeway expansion and the time table set. I'd also like to address that the Eirikshamm situation of not being able to fund overruns with local taxes. Since that solution is not possible, in the event of an overrun, the minister would simply have to submit a revised budget for his portfolio to meet the additional needs. I feel the increase in funding Sea Transportation recieved should be adaquete to fund the entire expansion at both locations.
Also, I'd like to alter the Shipping, Transportation, and Maritime Construction Stimulus Bill slightly to reflect the ECB report.
ECB Impact Report said:
I lengthened the duration of the training and grant programs to three terms to better coincide with the infrastructure expansion.
Per Park, regarding the Eutopian Federal Mortgage Guarantee Corporation Establishment Act, I assume you will alter your bill to include the start up funding and place under the appropriate minister portfolio. That said, with the potential passage of the Economic Recovery and Tax Reform Act, the Infrastructure Expansion Act, and the Shipping, Transportation, and Maritime Construction Stimulus Bill I feel our economy will be well on the road to recovery and the EFMGC should have little trouble attracting investment. Provided you make those changes, I would be ready to second your bill.
Last edited:
I had thought that the investment by the financial institutions in the preferred stock would have covered the start-up costs, but agree to amend the impact assessment to incorporate the 0.1% of the budget for one term, just in case. This would be an increase in expenditures for the Minister of Finance. I will away for a couple of days, and so will post the revised version when I get back provided the GA is then ready to hear it. In the meantime, I would second the Shipping, Transportation, and Maritime Construction Stimulus Bill to get the debate going, but I would be hestitant to vote for it in its current form. I would ask whether there shouldn't be some growth in employees required to qualify for the tax reduction, so we don't give a tax break for just being in the right industry. Shouldn't they have to do something to qualify? Hiring more workers would be something that I could support as a reason.
"I could agree to some reasonable qualifications to ensure the benefits of the tax breaks are not simply pocketed, though an increase in employees should not be the only possible way to qualify. Investment in modernization, expansion, or other capital improvements would also be qualifiers."
"Obviously, any start up companies would not have to meet these to be eligible for the tax breaks - since by virtue of starting up they are expanding their workforce and expanding their operations."
"Per Park, just for the record is that an official second?"
"Obviously, any start up companies would not have to meet these to be eligible for the tax breaks - since by virtue of starting up they are expanding their workforce and expanding their operations."
"Per Park, just for the record is that an official second?"
Yes it is an official second.
Would you consider amending your bill to make the tax cuts contingent on having more employees, measured as FTEs (full time equivalents) on average that the prior year, and/or that that the amount of the tax break is limited to the amount of additional investment?
Would you consider amending your bill to make the tax cuts contingent on having more employees, measured as FTEs (full time equivalents) on average that the prior year, and/or that that the amount of the tax break is limited to the amount of additional investment?
"Thank you, Per Park."
"I'd consider including some sort of qualifiers for the tax break, but it would not be limited to merely expanding the work force. I don't think tying the tax break to amount invested is a good idea, just for the sake of simplicity. Qualifiers should be enough to ensure the money is being spent to expand the economy."
"How does this look for a revised version?"
"I'd consider including some sort of qualifiers for the tax break, but it would not be limited to merely expanding the work force. I don't think tying the tax break to amount invested is a good idea, just for the sake of simplicity. Qualifiers should be enough to ensure the money is being spent to expand the economy."
"How does this look for a revised version?"
That looks quite good, except I wouldn't want us to get into the details of approving or disapproving tax cuts for individual companies. Therefore I would suggest leaving it to MoF and delete the part "...subject to review by the General Assembly".
"The reason I included that clause was in case the MoF used his power to decide the exact qualifers to pursue a personal agenda. For instance, if he made the qualifiers for capital improvements so low anyone could reach them, but made the labor qualifiers so stringent they were punitive and impossible to reach. That clause allows us to overrule a minister who clearly is not acting in the best interest of the economy."
"I have no interest in individually approving every qualifying company."
"I have no interest in individually approving every qualifying company."
Subject to your explanation that the review would be rarely if ever used, except in the case of misfeasance by a minister, then I can live with your wording of the amendment, and would be willing to support a bill that was so amended. Could you circulate an updated draft?
"Certainly, Per Park. Here is an updated version. If there are no further comments, I believe we can bring this to a vote."
Very well then, we'll move to a vote on the Shipping, Transportation, and Maritime Construction Stimulus Bill.
Next order of business is the Eutopian Federal Mortgage Guarantee Corporation Establishment Act. Per Park, since it is your bill, I assume you have a few words. The floor is yours.
Next order of business is the Eutopian Federal Mortgage Guarantee Corporation Establishment Act. Per Park, since it is your bill, I assume you have a few words. The floor is yours.