|
|
Post by James R. Kennedy on May 7, 2024 23:58:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Prince Maximilian on May 8, 2024 17:12:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Jacob H. Montreux on May 9, 2024 4:47:50 GMT -5
Honourable Nobles,
I do not support this bill, simple as that.
This bill is rushed by the looks of it, it seems that the bill is not well thought. No disrespect to the His Majesty, who wrote this bill, but it is flawed.
My first issue, Article 3.01.
If the First Councillor can only be evicted by being removed by the council, then what about loss of citizenship, resignation and that sorts? Can a First Councillor not resign from his position? Does the First Councillor keep on serving even after his citizenship was taken from him? This is not detailed at all, hence ends my first point of disagreement.
Second issue, Article IV and V.
I don't know, this should just be an act for the executive branch as a whole. Everyone in that branch is elected. Perhaps this needs to be tabled an rewritten to be for the whole Executive Branch. But I will be voting against this bill.
|
|
|
|
Post by neodvcepietro on May 9, 2024 14:40:42 GMT -5
Honourable Nobles, I do not support this bill, simple as that. This bill is rushed by the looks of it, it seems that the bill is not well thought. No disrespect to the His Majesty, who wrote this bill, but it is flawed. My first issue, Article 3.01. If the First Councillor can only be evicted by being removed by the council, then what about loss of citizenship, resignation and that sorts? Can a First Councillor not resign from his position? Does the First Councillor keep on serving even after his citizenship was taken from him? This is not detailed at all, hence ends my first point of disagreement. Second issue, Article IV and V. I don't know, this should just be an act for the executive branch as a whole. Everyone in that branch is elected. Perhaps this needs to be tabled an rewritten to be for the whole Executive Branch. But I will be voting against this bill. I support your critics against article 3.01, vice versa not for the other two articles you mention, in my opinion we may write a second bill that clarify the duties of other involved roles, if it is really needed. |
|
|
|
Post by neodvcepietro on May 9, 2024 14:42:56 GMT -5
I have another issue btw:
"The First Councilor shall be subject to an ANNUAL review by the council "
Your honor obviously mean during the official lenght of a term and not a real life year right?
Edit:
Wait does the first councillor has an official duration of their term, or they will be always first councillor until the they doesn't receive a vote of no confidence?
|
|
|
|
Post by James R. Kennedy on May 11, 2024 14:14:29 GMT -5
Honourable Nobles, I do not support this bill, simple as that. This bill is rushed by the looks of it, it seems that the bill is not well thought. No disrespect to the His Majesty, who wrote this bill, but it is flawed. My first issue, Article 3.01. If the First Councillor can only be evicted by being removed by the council, then what about loss of citizenship, resignation and that sorts? Can a First Councillor not resign from his position? Does the First Councillor keep on serving even after his citizenship was taken from him? This is not detailed at all, hence ends my first point of disagreement. Second issue, Article IV and V. I don't know, this should just be an act for the executive branch as a whole. Everyone in that branch is elected. Perhaps this needs to be tabled an rewritten to be for the whole Executive Branch. But I will be voting against this bill. If the First Councilor loses citizenship or is convicted of a crime, it is the duty of the executive council to remove them from the office. If they can’t, my office is constitutionally obliged to step in. As for Article IV and Article V, the charter defines the responsibilities of the executive council. I left it vague for the First Councilor because I felt it was understood that they were the head of government. That unfortunately hasn’t happened so this bill defines what the office of First Councilor should do. |
|
|
|
Post by James R. Kennedy on May 11, 2024 14:16:01 GMT -5
I have another issue btw: "The First Councilor shall be subject to an ANNUAL review by the council " Your honor obviously mean during the official lenght of a term and not a real life year right? Edit: Wait does the first councillor has an official duration of their term, or they will be always first councillor until the they doesn't receive a vote of no confidence? Changed to match the timetable. I was going to set up the terms as Kodiak does but decided not to. |
|
|
|
Post by neodvcepietro on May 12, 2024 7:41:24 GMT -5
Honourable Nobles, I do not support this bill, simple as that. This bill is rushed by the looks of it, it seems that the bill is not well thought. No disrespect to the His Majesty, who wrote this bill, but it is flawed. My first issue, Article 3.01. If the First Councillor can only be evicted by being removed by the council, then what about loss of citizenship, resignation and that sorts? Can a First Councillor not resign from his position? Does the First Councillor keep on serving even after his citizenship was taken from him? This is not detailed at all, hence ends my first point of disagreement. Second issue, Article IV and V. I don't know, this should just be an act for the executive branch as a whole. Everyone in that branch is elected. Perhaps this needs to be tabled an rewritten to be for the whole Executive Branch. But I will be voting against this bill. If the First Councilor loses citizenship or is convicted of a crime, it is the duty of the executive council to remove them from the office. If they can’t, my office is constitutionally obliged to step in. As for Article IV and Article V, the charter defines the responsibilities of the executive council. I left it vague for the First Councilor because I felt it was understood that they were the head of government. That unfortunately hasn’t happened so this bill defines what the office of First Councilor should do. In my opinion the first councilor should automatically lose its position in certain situations like when they lose their citizenship. |
|
|
|
Post by Jacob H. Montreux on May 12, 2024 13:19:06 GMT -5
Honourable Nobles, I do not support this bill, simple as that. This bill is rushed by the looks of it, it seems that the bill is not well thought. No disrespect to the His Majesty, who wrote this bill, but it is flawed. My first issue, Article 3.01. If the First Councillor can only be evicted by being removed by the council, then what about loss of citizenship, resignation and that sorts? Can a First Councillor not resign from his position? Does the First Councillor keep on serving even after his citizenship was taken from him? This is not detailed at all, hence ends my first point of disagreement. Second issue, Article IV and V. I don't know, this should just be an act for the executive branch as a whole. Everyone in that branch is elected. Perhaps this needs to be tabled an rewritten to be for the whole Executive Branch. But I will be voting against this bill. If the First Councilor loses citizenship or is convicted of a crime, it is the duty of the executive council to remove them from the office. If they can’t, my office is constitutionally obliged to step in. As for Article IV and Article V, the charter defines the responsibilities of the executive council. I left it vague for the First Councilor because I felt it was understood that they were the head of government. That unfortunately hasn’t happened so this bill defines what the office of First Councilor should do. If they lose citizenship, they are inelligible to continue as being without a citizenship is basically making them invalid within our region. It's not customary and careless to make the Executive Council remove the person themselves. |
|
|
|
Post by James R. Kennedy on May 20, 2024 0:17:07 GMT -5
If the First Councilor loses citizenship or is convicted of a crime, it is the duty of the executive council to remove them from the office. If they can’t, my office is constitutionally obliged to step in. As for Article IV and Article V, the charter defines the responsibilities of the executive council. I left it vague for the First Councilor because I felt it was understood that they were the head of government. That unfortunately hasn’t happened so this bill defines what the office of First Councilor should do. If they lose citizenship, they are inelligible to continue as being without a citizenship is basically making them invalid within our region. It's not customary and careless to make the Executive Council remove the person themselves. I believe it’s the responsibility of the Executive Council to elect a First Councilor who is not going to cease to exist. This bill is a huge extension and redefines what the First Councilor should be. |
|
|
|
Post by Jacob H. Montreux on May 20, 2024 12:04:09 GMT -5
If they lose citizenship, they are inelligible to continue as being without a citizenship is basically making them invalid within our region. It's not customary and careless to make the Executive Council remove the person themselves. I believe it’s the responsibility of the Executive Council to elect a First Councilor who is not going to cease to exist. This bill is a huge extension and redefines what the First Councilor should be. I understand, but it is best that it was included so as to not complicate the Executive Council and so that no future issues in regards to this could possibly arise. |
|
Iris
