|
Post by Owen Edwards on Feb 3, 2008 14:27:56 GMT -6
The US does not have a parliamentary system of government.
The Home Secretary of the United Kingdom is also an MP; most of the Cabinet is, except where they are Lords (eg members of Parliament anyway).
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Feb 3, 2008 14:33:24 GMT -6
I'm a Senator and a Minister, in the legislature and the executive. And I'm pretty okay with that idea. England does pretty well with it, and so do we.
|
|
|
Post by Dréu Gavárþic'h on Feb 3, 2008 14:34:43 GMT -6
I have NO problem with MC's being Ministers. In fact... that's how it should be. But the SoS is a very different position.
This is not about me disliking the current SoS (I quite like him) or even about me wanting to change the system into a more U.S. type of thing.
This is about the fact that the SoS is a member of the executive branch, which is controlled by the King. King John just put out a bill that says the King can't hold seats right? And the RUMP put it's full weight behind that bill. I am saying the King's representative should not be allowed to have seats in the Cosa, just as the MC of a majority party (a representative of the Seneschal) should not also be a King
EDIT: Also... Mick, I know you can't veto things.
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Feb 3, 2008 14:42:46 GMT -6
Executive in the sense of running the election? In what other way? Producing the Clark? That's not an executive action.
|
|
|
Post by Dréu Gavárþic'h on Feb 3, 2008 14:45:53 GMT -6
Executive as in head of state. His boss is the head of state i.e. executive branch, that makes him a member of the executive branch.
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Feb 3, 2008 14:56:22 GMT -6
My boss is the King, too. Shizzle!
|
|
Trotxâ
Talossan since 10-17-2005; Knight since 11-5-2006
Deo duce, ferro comitante
Posts: 1,574
|
Post by Trotxâ on Feb 3, 2008 15:05:15 GMT -6
You're right Sir Trotxa! Hell, I think I'll nominate George Bush for senator in NY, even though he's the president. Why not? Why do you insist on making the Kingdom of Talossa into the United States of America? Isn't it obvious that these are two different systems? If nothing else - please consider this: in Talossa, you (Dreu) can vote. If I'm not mistaken, that's not true in New York. PS: I was going to mention that neither George Bush (41, 43 or Jeb's son) is a resident of New York, but then I remembered that you all voted Hillary in without residency. With apologies to all normal citizens of the Empire State, I'm not sure that New York's politics are the best model for ANY country.
|
|
Capt. Sir Mick Preston
Capitán of the Zouaves
Posts: 6,511
Talossan Since: 9-21-2006
Knight Since: 10-12-2010
Motto: Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
|
Post by Capt. Sir Mick Preston on Feb 3, 2008 15:14:59 GMT -6
The SoS's boss is the King AND the Seneschal.
One can fire, but not hire the SoS. One can hire, but not fire the SoS.
Your analogy doesn't quite fit the Talossan government.
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Feb 3, 2008 15:19:56 GMT -6
Given the SoS cannot directly give himself a seat in the Ziu, and given the traditionally blurred exec/legis lines in constitutional monarchies etc...I don't see an issue.
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Feb 4, 2008 9:54:21 GMT -6
King John just put out a bill that says the King can't hold seats right? That's been the law for a while. The main effects of King John's proposal are to prevent members of the Ziu from serving on the Cort, and prevent members of one house of the Ziu from serving in the other. Good points have been made on both sides in this debate. It is true that the concept of separation of powers as understood by Americans isn't very applicable to a constitutional monarchy such as Talossa. It's too simplistic to say the Ziu is the legislative branch, and the King controls the executive branch. In reality, the King is theoretically part of the Ziu alongside the Cosa and Senäts (like the British concept of the Crown-in-Parliament), and executive power is divided between the King and the Seneschal and cabinet (who are generally members of the Ziu), with the balance tipped strongly in favour of the Seneschal in practice. King John's new amendment and the previous amendment prohibiting the monarch from serving in the Senäts and Cosa are not really about separation of powers in the American sense. They're about promoting two principles: 1) maintaining the distinction between the three components of the Ziu -- crown, Cosa, and Senäts, and 2) preserving judicial independence. On the other hand, even systems that do not recognise a clear separation between legislative and executive power often recognise that the administration of elections raises special concerns. The principal executive officers of the United Kingdom (the PM and other cabinet ministers) also sit in Parliament, true, but elections are supervised by an independent Electoral Commission, and the election commissioners may not serve in any elected office (or even belong to a political party). It's also worth noting that historically, the position in Talossa most subject to abuse has not been that of King, but Secretary of State. Ben's problem, in an official sense, is not that he abused his powers as King per se, but that by simultaneously serving as Secretary of State or Deputy Secretary of State he undermined confidence in Talossa's electoral process. To understand this is to understand why so many Talossan Secretaries of State ended up becoming arch-enemies of Robert I (Adiens Glaça, Ian Anglatzara, M-P Furxheir, etc). We have been extremely fortunate over the past few years to have had the Chancery run by a series of men of unquestioned integrity without an overbearing monarch to drive them crazy.
|
|
Capt. Sir Mick Preston
Capitán of the Zouaves
Posts: 6,511
Talossan Since: 9-21-2006
Knight Since: 10-12-2010
Motto: Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
|
Post by Capt. Sir Mick Preston on Feb 4, 2008 10:25:37 GMT -6
"We have been extremely fortunate over the past few years to have had the Chancery run by a series of men of unquestioned integrity without an overbearing monarch to drive them crazy."
(chuckles) ;D
|
|
|
Post by Dréu Gavárþic'h on Feb 4, 2008 16:01:51 GMT -6
WoW Sir Cresti...
Withdrawn
|
|