Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on Aug 8, 2018 6:45:39 GMT -6
One thing that concerns me is how it concentrates so much responsibility in a single office--the civil service commissioner--which is essentially unproven. It makes this one office a single point of failure for much of our system, especially if the appointment of the SoS depends on the CSC and the administration of elections and the legislative process depends on the SoS. To maintain the apolitical nature of the Civil Service (or at least do so to the best of our ability), it’s important that the Commissioner stay out of the Ziu. However, given that sitting in the Ziu is what makes a lot of people stay active in Talossa, I was concerned that no one would want to be the Commissioner, or the Commissioner would become inactive, if that role was not given enough authority. I suspect that is why none of the previous Commissioners have managed to do much.
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on Aug 8, 2018 16:49:54 GMT -6
I would leave the College of Arms out as it is the one office with a function that is essentially personal to the monarch. The Monarch would still have all the control over the arms granting process: the Civil Service would just be responsible for day-to-day operation of the College.
|
|
|
Post by Gödafrïeu Válcadác’h on Aug 8, 2018 17:21:52 GMT -6
What software did you use to put together this graphic?
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on Aug 8, 2018 17:23:42 GMT -6
I used a website called Organimi. The watermark is annoying but otherwise it is great to use.
|
|
|
Post by Béneditsch Ardpresteir, O.SPM. on Aug 8, 2018 20:39:05 GMT -6
I would leave the College of Arms out as it is the one office with a function that is essentially personal to the monarch. The Monarch would still have all the control over the arms granting process: the Civil Service would just be responsible for day-to-day operation of the College. That would be a multiplicity of reportings and would result in data duplication with possible conflicts. The present induction and elimination of staff is based on a straight through process, the active ones take up projects as per their convenience. Sometimes projects gets a bit slow moving, but then again Arms are not only for one's lifetime, but for generations to come. The college endeavors to bring out the best. Further the King not only grants the Arms but also as an Pursuivant Emeritus shows the direction. If the MinCult is placed as the head, they may not be able to appreciate the nuances. (Not a reference to the present MinCult, but to all subsequent MinCult). I believe a day to day control would actually impede the otherwise smooth functioning of the College. Nothing personal, I'm just the Dean below the SKA/SVA. Let the King have FULL control of something atleast.
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on Aug 9, 2018 9:09:14 GMT -6
The Monarch would still have all the control over the arms granting process: the Civil Service would just be responsible for day-to-day operation of the College. That would be a multiplicity of reportings and would result in data duplication with possible conflicts. The present induction and elimination of staff is based on a straight through process, the active ones take up projects as per their convenience. Sometimes projects gets a bit slow moving, but then again Arms are not only for one's lifetime, but for generations to come. The college endeavors to bring out the best. Further the King not only grants the Arms but also as an Pursuivant Emeritus shows the direction. If the MinCult is placed as the head, they may not be able to appreciate the nuances. (Not a reference to the present MinCult, but to all subsequent MinCult). I believe a day to day control would actually impede the otherwise smooth functioning of the College. Nothing personal, I'm just the Dean below the SKA/SVA. Let the King have FULL control of something atleast. Perhaps I overstated the case when I said the Royal Civil Service would be responsible for day-to-day administration of the College. Nothing about how the College functions would change, except that instead of the Seneschal recommending to the King who he should appoint as the Squirrel King of Arms, the Commissioner of the Royal Civil Service would do so instead. The MinCult would be in no way the "head" of the College.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Aug 10, 2018 14:49:41 GMT -6
I agree with Cresti. The College should stay completely under the King, since it's a pure extension of his powers.
I also think we should abolish the Civil Service structure as it exists, including the Code and Commission, which are absurdly cumbersome. Let's add on to this bill to that effect and make the Commissioner a standing position appointed by the monarch upon the supermajority advice of the Ziu. That threshold should be enough to insulate the position from workaday politics without making it impossible to manage.
|
|
Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN
Seneschal
the new Jim Hacker
Posts: 6,635
Talossan Since: 6-25-2004
Dame Since: 9-8-2012
Motto: Expulseascâ, reveneascâ
Baron Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
Duke Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
|
Post by Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN on Aug 11, 2018 17:47:48 GMT -6
Okey-dokey, guys. Here is a draft which I believe will solve most of the issues raised:
- the College of Arms is removed from the Civil Service and retains its current status.
- the Chancery is a part of the Civil Service, but reports to the Ziu (as represented by the Chairs of both Houses) rather than to a Cabinet Minister.
===
WHEREAS the continuing and needless duplication between the functions of the Royal Household and the Civil Service has been a bugbear for ages; AND WHEREAS it has been credibly suggested that the lack of qualified applicants for the Civil Service is due to "Royal Household" simply sounding cooler; AND IN THE GENERAL SPIRIT of streamlining and reform of our Governmental structures shown by the Seneschál recent "house-cleaning";
BE IT ENACTED BY THE KING, COSA AND SENÄTS OF TALOSSA IN ZIU ASSEMBLED that:
A. Title C of El Lexhátx shall be REPEALED and replaced in its entireity by the following Title:
B. The following new section shall be added to Title F (Culture) of El Lexhátx:
C. The following new Title shall be added to El Lexhátx:
Ureu q'estradra sa: the Government of Talossa
|
|
|
Post by Viteu Marcianüs on Aug 11, 2018 21:17:16 GMT -6
Talossa is peculiar in that it virtually has four branches of government. The Royal Household is actually quite independent and that is definitely an asset rather than an issue. Not entirely accurate. There are two primary branches - the Judiciary and the Ziu. The Judiciary exists by virtue of Article XIV, and the UC is not subject to the whims of the Ziu except for appointment or to establish lower courts. The second branch, however, is the Legislature - "The Ziu is composed of the King, the Senäts, and the Cosâ" (Org.L.X.1). The Government, arguably, could be considered an "executive" branch but, in reality, it's an extension of the Ziu. So that leaves us with one really big branch that has different components. At most, the Royal Household is a quasi-branch existing under the King who is a member of the Ziu. So to be clear - the bulk of state functions already happen in one branch. We do not distinguish our executive from our legislature. To the extent that statutory law permits the Royal Household to function as a quasi-branch, as it is not an organic requirement that it be separate, it's not properly a branch.
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on Aug 13, 2018 20:25:25 GMT -6
I rewrote Title C to make the small edits I suggested earlier in the thread: And since we have to have a new Title L, we may as well put current sections C.6 and C.7 back into it:
|
|
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 Aug 28, 2018 10:18:15 GMT -6
The latest version of this bill is much improved. If it were up to me, I would put the College of Arms in Title L rather than F. I have some broader misgivings about the Civil Service, but will forgo quibbling about relatively minor points to make one big one. This bill would make appointment of a Secretary of State dependent on action by the Commissioner of Civil Service. It has been noted in the past how fortuitous current law is regarding the appointment of an SoS in terms of ensuring continuity of government. As Sir Alexandreu said regarding a previous proposal to change the mode of appointment of the SoS: I was speaking with some people about relatively recent history today, and the subject of the Great Abdication came up... the departure of King Robert I, also serving as Secretary of State, along with the Seneschal. It was a really rough time, and faced the Kingdom with a serious crisis. With the King, Chancery, and Seneschal all gone - decapitation - it was difficult to legally get the mechanisms of government back into place, to deal with the crisis and plan for the next election. A lot of our system depends on checks and balances that ensure that those institutions confirm each other's work, and can refuse confirmation if there's a problem. The only chief institution not touched by the departure of these three office-holders was the CpI. In this crisis, the CpI automatically became a Council of Regency, of course. And as regent, they could appoint a PM able to command a majority of the Cosa. And the appointed PM could appoint a Secretary of State to conduct legitimate elections, and continue the unbroken line of legal legitimacy through the Organic Law from its inception to today. It was an amazing example of the resiliency of our Organic Law - it was able to withstand the departure of so much centralized power thanks to safeguards placed in the system. So now I am rethinking this bill. I'm not spitting fire over it, but I think that we've already seen how the current system saved our bacon once. In the absence of a compelling reason otherwise, I'm hard-pressed to think why we would alter a mechanism that preserved the country. I understand the ideological basis for it, but in practical terms, I don't want to shoot out our own tires. The CSC requires supermajority approval of the Cosa to appoint, making it particularly vulnerable to extended vacancy. Suppose the SoS should go AWOL while the CSC position is also vacant and the Cosa is out of session or deadlocked. That would mean no more Clarks and no more elections, because it would be impossible to appoint a new SoS. Talossa would cease to exist as a functioning state. For this reason, I think you should at least consider having a failsafe provision allowing for the appointment of an acting SoS or something like that if there is no CSC or the CSC fails to act.
|
|
Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN
Seneschal
the new Jim Hacker
Posts: 6,635
Talossan Since: 6-25-2004
Dame Since: 9-8-2012
Motto: Expulseascâ, reveneascâ
Baron Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
Duke Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
|
Post by Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN on Aug 29, 2018 2:31:57 GMT -6
Here is a small but elegant "failsafe" provision: amend 1.2.3 to read
So everyone working in the Chancery would be able to take over in case of an emergency. To make things triple-secure, I could restore the Scribery and the Archives to being part of the Chancery, which would also put them in the "line of succession"?
Other points: - I don't see why a system which requires there being a CSC is less stable than one requiring there to be a Seneschál. - My real preference to include more redundancy in the system would be to make a reform which would bring Talossan practice in line with most other countries, although contrary to our traditions - hand over Ziu votes/the Clark to the Túischac'h and Mençéi and/or their civil service staff, leaving the SoS with only elections and citizenship records.
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on Aug 29, 2018 10:52:21 GMT -6
This highly unlikely scenario could easily be remedied via a Prime Dictate. We could implement the suggested change but I don’t think we need to.
|
|
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 Aug 29, 2018 15:03:28 GMT -6
I could restore the Scribery and the Archives to being part of the Chancery, which would also put them in the "line of succession"? I like this idea, but I think Ian is right about a PD too, so I suppose there's no urgent need for a further solution at this point. - I don't see why a system which requires there being a CSC is less stable than one requiring there to be a Seneschál. Well, appointing a Seneschal doesn't require a formal vote of the Cosa (which may not even be constituted), much less a supermajority vote.
|
|
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 Aug 29, 2018 15:05:51 GMT -6
This highly unlikely scenario could easily be remedied via a Prime Dictate. We could implement the suggested change but I don’t think we need to. Very good point. I expect there would be a convention that the Seneschal would only circumvent regular appointment processes via PD in extraordinary and urgent circumstances, such as we saw in 2004.
|
|