|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2012 9:31:35 GMT -6
Well, I feel safe in thinking that if a Cosa member of the CSPP votes NON on the VoC that Lundescu won't be fired from his cabinet position, based on the fact that MinImm is a non-political post. That said, like Gluc, we don't plan on voting NON just for the sake of voting NON. The government will need to convince me that they are doing a bad job first. The only person saying the CSPP is in coalition with the RUMP is other opposition members. The RUMPers on here have explicitly said no coalition exists. There is no obligation to vote with the government. The only obligation that exists is the individual cabinet member to vote YES on a VOC. Really, why is this a difficult concept?
|
|
|
Post by Ián B. Anglatzarâ on Jul 24, 2012 9:39:33 GMT -6
The CSPP is not in government just because Lundquist is serving in an apolitical cabinet post. In that case he should be an apolitical non-cabinet secretary and not a cabinet minister. Cabinet = government.
|
|
Glüc da Dhi
Secretary of State
Posts: 6,112
Talossan Since: 5-14-2009
|
Post by Glüc da Dhi on Jul 24, 2012 9:40:02 GMT -6
I didnt say the CSPP is part of the government. Im saying MCs representing the opposition should not be required by the government to vote a certain way on anythin including the VoC. Otherwise, they are not fully representing an opposition party.
|
|
Üc R. Tärfâ
Talossan since 3-8-2005
Deputy Fiôván Secretary of State
Posts: 760
|
Post by Üc R. Tärfâ on Jul 24, 2012 9:40:07 GMT -6
The CSPP is not in government just because Lundquist is serving in an apolitical cabinet post. In that case he should be an apolitical non-cabinet secetary and not a cabinet minister. Cabinet = government. Exactly, like the SoS.
|
|
Hooligan
Squirrel King of Arms; Cunstaval to Maricopa
Posts: 7,325
Talossan Since: 7-12-2005
Motto: PRIMA CAPIAM POCULA
Baron Since: 11-20-2005
Count Since: 9-8-2012
|
Post by Hooligan on Jul 24, 2012 9:40:16 GMT -6
This is a cool conversation. From the point of view of the current Seneschal, I would say: - Should any government-sponsored bills be Hoppered (i.e., with the sponsorship marked as something like "Baron Hooligan, Seneschal, For His Majesty's Government"), members of this Cabinet would not be required to vote PER on such bills. I am sure it goes without saying that no such bills will be offered unless an overwhelming majority of the Cabinet indicates that they would support them and that the government should be listed as a sponsor, but the cabinet members are, as always, free to vote their own conscience on any bill, be it government-sponsored or otherwise.
- Concerning the Vote of Confidence, I do expect that all Cabinet members vote ÜC. Any vote of no-confidence in the government made by a member of the government is a contradiction since it is condemns the very government within which they are working. Simple principles, I believe, dictate that any cabinet member who loses confidence in the government should resign from that government before voting against it, and if he or she does not do so, will be asked to resign thereafter. A government should always be confident in itself, and never be dragged down or burdened by any members who do not believe that the government is worthy of his or her confidence. It is perhaps this expectation and principle which prevented ZRT members from accepting Cabinet posts, decisions and principles that are well-respected by the government.
The appointments to the Cabinet were not engineered in any way to secure votes on any upcoming bills or anything. As I hope the nation knows, the interests of the government are only to propose and sponsor bills that will be acknowledged as good for Talossa across the board and that will receive broad-based support from all parties (witness the government tag having been put on "Curtain" and "Oil" and "Too Much Fun"). Cosa members who are not themselves involved in government are free, of course, to vote in whatever way on the VOC to comment upon the job the government is doing. The government hopes and will work to earn the confidence of the entire Cosa, but welcomes all detractors and their constructive criticism as a way in which Talossa can be strengthened and improved. Hool
|
|
Glüc da Dhi
Secretary of State
Posts: 6,112
Talossan Since: 5-14-2009
|
Post by Glüc da Dhi on Jul 24, 2012 9:43:16 GMT -6
[/li][li]Concerning the Vote of Confidence, I do expect that all Cabinet members vote ÜC. Any vote of no-confidence in the government made by a member of the government is a contradiction since it is condemns the very government within which they are working. Simple principles, I believe, dictate that any cabinet member who loses confidence in the government should resign from that government before voting against it, and if he or she does not do so, will be asked to resign thereafter. A government should always be confident in itself, and never be dragged down or burdened by any members who do not believe that the government is worthy of his or her confidence. [/quote] Why then allow opposition members as ministers? Why not form a government with the CSPP and CeR?
|
|
Hooligan
Squirrel King of Arms; Cunstaval to Maricopa
Posts: 7,325
Talossan Since: 7-12-2005
Motto: PRIMA CAPIAM POCULA
Baron Since: 11-20-2005
Count Since: 9-8-2012
|
Post by Hooligan on Jul 24, 2012 9:51:13 GMT -6
[Why then allow opposition members as ministers? Why not form a government with the CSPP and CeR? This is an interesting question. If the fact that the CSPP and CeR have adherents in the Cabinet (and the MRPT has a voter in the Cabinet too) means that there is technically a coalition between the three (or four) parties, this is perfectly fine with me. I would, in fact, be extremely happy to call this government a coalition government. In Talossan terms, there is really no established "coalition" mechanics (that I know of). This is a discussion I have had with others -- "what exactly does it mean for Talossan parties to be in coalition?" Does having membership in the Cabinet mean that the word can be applied to the parties involved? I don't know. It seems to me that the only answer as to what "coalition" means is that both parties have said so, and will support and assist the government. If any of the parties having members represented in the government wishes to claim a coalition with RUMP, then, speaking as the leader of my party, I see absolutely no reason not to embrace that claim and return it, and assert that such a coalition does exist, and will be happy for it. My own ignorance of the semantics and mechanics (if any) of a coalition, and a wish not to unduly or accidentally offend my fellow party leaders and their partners — who may have different understandings of the term — was the only reason why I have avoided using the word "coalition". Hool
|
|
|
Post by Eðo Grischun on Jul 24, 2012 10:16:48 GMT -6
Based on what happens in the UK, a coalition government, in the strictest sense of the term, has not been formed. Let's use CeR as an example.
Just as Gluc says, the RUMP would have to have made concessions with their own platform and adopted some of CeR's platform for a true coalition to exist. I would add that for a RUMP-CeR coalition to exist then S:r Blasius (being the junior party leader of the coalition) would be Distain and not a Minister.
This is based on what I see in the UK. However, as Hool says, the actual mechanics of a coalition government in Talossa has never been worked out.
|
|
Glüc da Dhi
Secretary of State
Posts: 6,112
Talossan Since: 5-14-2009
|
Post by Glüc da Dhi on Jul 24, 2012 10:22:06 GMT -6
Well, in theory coalitions could decide not to have its own platform and let the cosa decide, which mean the RUMP would get its way on everything. If the other parties would still be prepared to accept that the agreement requires its MC's to be loyal to the government, it could still happen. Whether this would be a good thing for the CSPP to do is another debate/
|
|
|
Post by Ián B. Anglatzarâ on Jul 24, 2012 12:08:55 GMT -6
Just as Gluc says, the RUMP would have to have made concessions with their own platform and adopted some of CeR's platform for a true coalition to exist. No, a coalition exists when the cabinet is formed of ministers from more than one party. What has been pointed out is that in real countries the largest party has to make concessions to the smaller parties to get their support. That they in this case have given away their support without recompensation doesn't mean that it isn't a coalition.
|
|
Üc R. Tärfâ
Talossan since 3-8-2005
Deputy Fiôván Secretary of State
Posts: 760
|
Post by Üc R. Tärfâ on Jul 24, 2012 12:15:45 GMT -6
Just as Gluc says, the RUMP would have to have made concessions with their own platform and adopted some of CeR's platform for a true coalition to exist. No, a coalition exists when the cabinet is formed of ministers from more than one party. What has been pointed out is that in real countries the largest party has to make concessions to the smaller parties to get their support. That they in this case have given away their support without recompensation doesn't mean that it isn't a coalition. Indeed. And by definition parties in coalition aren't in the Opposition but they are part of the Majority. This leaves only 2 parties in the opposition because the CSPP that was one of the 3-parties has entered in the governing coalition with RUMP and CeR.
|
|
Hooligan
Squirrel King of Arms; Cunstaval to Maricopa
Posts: 7,325
Talossan Since: 7-12-2005
Motto: PRIMA CAPIAM POCULA
Baron Since: 11-20-2005
Count Since: 9-8-2012
|
Post by Hooligan on Jul 24, 2012 13:36:25 GMT -6
Well, call it a coalition, or choose not to; it doesn't matter to me. I would never ask anyone to vote against their own principles for the sake of any "coalition" in name or not. I'm glad that we have a Cabinet composed of good and talented people excited and enthusiastic about helping our nation, and that's all that matters to me. The time for politics is over; it's time again to work together for Talossa.
Hool
|
|
|
Post by Ián B. Anglatzarâ on Jul 24, 2012 13:55:38 GMT -6
The time for politics is over; it's time again to work together for Talossa. I shake my head at this. Elections really don't mean anything to the RUMP, do they? They're just a month of meaningless arguments until we go back to "everyone who wants can be part of the Cosâ and government if they want to, regardless of their ideology or lack thereof"? A far cry from the "in Talossa we behave as real nations do" that once tempted me to join. Honestly, this is more like a club than a nation. But of course, if that's what the majority of Talossans want... after all, everyone has a vote and this is seemingly what they vote for. I will just have to figure out my own place and how I can square this with what I came to micronationalism for in the first place.
|
|
Hooligan
Squirrel King of Arms; Cunstaval to Maricopa
Posts: 7,325
Talossan Since: 7-12-2005
Motto: PRIMA CAPIAM POCULA
Baron Since: 11-20-2005
Count Since: 9-8-2012
|
Post by Hooligan on Jul 24, 2012 14:20:08 GMT -6
I admit I'm surprised at your head-shaking. I suppose I don't know what life in Sweden is like, but at least here in the U.S., political leaders make exactly that kind of noise about "the time for politics is over, let's get back to work on improving our nation" and there's always at least lip-service being given to wanting to serve and benefit all citizens no matter their ideology. That's all I was saying, and at least for me, it's not just lip-service.
I guess I don't understand the objection. Should I, as leader of the RUMP and organiser of the government, simply have thumbed my nose at the 46% of Talossan voters that voted for parties other than the RUMP and not offered them any voice in the government, and made a speech saying "we, the government, will serve the voters of RUMP and only RUMP"? I fail to see how that could be good for Talossa.
Even in the U.S. (where there are really only two parties of consequence), members of the opposition party are appointed to executive posts by the President all the time. It doesn't mean that the U.S. doesn't have an active and vociferous opposition. It just means that even the President realises that there are talented people in all (both) parties.
Forming a talented Cabinet is not in any way meant to homogenize the nation or anything. It's meant to serve Talossa best, which is what any government is elected to do.
Hool
|
|
Owen Edwards
Puisne Justice
Posts: 1,400
Talossan Since: 12-8-2007
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Jul 24, 2012 14:25:28 GMT -6
Hey guys,
You all get to share a big cake for telling me what the CSPP is doing! I mean, silly me, here I was thinking we weren't in a coalition, but we are! Do I get a shiny Quisling hat? Maybe after some more rhetoric, Daph can take me out to be shot by a firing squad of angry bears (but not Deet).
Coalition - that which has been formed of those who coalesce. In parliamentary democracies, coalitions are formed of those who will back, with main force (ie votes), the policies of the proposed government. The CSPP and the CeR have not agreed - well, at least, I as the CSPP leader have not agreed - to vote for the government on their policies or in the VOC; if we do it will be for our own reasons.
Now, I did not know of the approach made to S:reu Lundescu, but I should disclose that I served as MinImm whilst leading an opposition party. There were no Cabinet meetings; I was never pressured politically; I did an apolitical job. Those who say it might fruitfully be separated from the Cabinet are right. If S:reu Lundescu were to vote NON on the VOC - as his party might ask him to - and if the Seneschal were to ask him to step down, I would criticize the Seneschal's attitude trenchantly. However, S;reu Lundescu's vote on the VOC is, in the final account, his own decision; it does not tie the rest of the CSPP to it.
Basically, the tone of conversation in this thread has been stupid, you should all be ashamed of yourself and wash your own mouths with soap (well, not all of you), thanks, goodnight.
(re: S:reu Anglatzara's observation that Talossa is unlike macronations in many ways...you're right...that is...Peculiar...isn't it?)
|
|