The Under Cabinet & Interior Redesign Amendment

[Þon Txoteu É. Davinescu]

Any input on getting this one ready to Clark as well?

[Glüc da Dhi]

I agree with Sir Crestis point about 2.3 not being consistent with how civil service works.

Why the change from deputy minister to secretary? I feel it would become easily confused with permanent secretaries which aren't appointed by ministers, but by the civil service.

I do agree with removing the bureau of Cestour affairs from El Lexhatx.

I also agree 2.4 needs to be cleaned up, but under the current proposal it would seem to make the secretary of Defence a cabinet level position considering Lex D.2. reads: "2. The Cabinet shall consist of the officers listed below:" Maybe scrap the proposed first sentence of 2.4, so it starts with "During..." and put the command of the armed forces under 2.3 c)

[Þon Txoteu É. Davinescu]

Jul 28, 2017 7:38:34 GMT -6 Glüc da Dhi said:

I agree with Sir Crestis point about 2.3 not being consistent with how civil service works.

Why the change from deputy minister to secretary? I feel it would become easily confused with permanent secretaries which aren't appointed by ministers, but by the civil service.

I do agree with removing the bureau of Cestour affairs from El Lexhatx.

I also agree 2.4 needs to be cleaned up, but under the current proposal it would seem to make the secretary of Defence a cabinet level position considering Lex D.2. reads: "2. The Cabinet shall consist of the officers listed below:" Maybe scrap the proposed first sentence of 2.4, so it starts with "During..." and put the command of the armed forces under 2.3 c)

2.3 - Doesn't have to include the Civil Service at all. They could be just Permanent Secretaries appointed to the positions. The reason for the change from Deputy Minister to Secretary is to keep in line with proper structure. When Defence & Immigration was axed from the Cabinet, their Areas of Responsibility (AoR) should have had their structure/hierarchy changed over to Departments, but was not. Bureaus should be under Cabinet level officials, next tier down is Departments. The Interior Minister Secretary of Defence, heading the Ministry of Interior Department of Defence, who shall command the armed forces of the Kingdom during peacetime and during times of declared war, subservient in these duties only to the King in his majesty's organic role as Leader of the Armed Forces.

Cestour Affairs needs to go

D 2.4. During periods of war, the Interior Minister Secretary of Defence shall be elevated to Cabinet-Level for the duration of the crisis and is to be referred to as "War Minister" until such time as the threat to the Kingdom has passed, and at said time will revert back to Secretary-Level. The Ministrà dal Interior (Ministry of Interior) Taslossan to match (Secretary of Defence) shall also marshal and provide the Invincible Moral Support of the nation to the good and right side of any international conflict, as determined by the government, conveying to the combatants our proud "we would stand with you, but it's safer to stand behind you" stance. 

It would make it a Cabinet Level position, appropriately so... but ONLY in a time of declared war. I don't see that happening anytime soon but it should be clarified.

[Ian Plätschisch]

I agree that we should not style political officers as Secretaries, since that would be confusing. We can use a different styling, since we are Talossa and can use whatever naming scheme we want. I'm not sure what is wrong with "Deputy Interior Minister for [insert]" though