|
|
Post by M.T. Patritz da Biondeu on Apr 22, 2013 17:32:16 GMT -6
Please withdraw my sponsorship at this time. I'd like to see what happens in lightof the cabiney act.
|
|
|
|
Post by C. Carlüs Xheraltescù on Apr 24, 2013 4:52:43 GMT -6
I have updated the text of the bill; allow me to draw attention to the major changes:
1. The Büreu del Glheþ Talossán is removed from the Cabinet Refinishing Act
2. A new body called the Translator's Corps is created. I decided to revert to the original name so as not to confuse its duties with that of the CUG or label it as another governmental bureau when it is not one.
3. The duties of the current Büreu del Glheþ Talossán are transferred to the proposed duties of the Corps.
Thoughts?
|
|
Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă
Puisne (Associate) Justice of the Uppermost Court
Fraichetz dels punts, es non dels mürs
Posts: 4,063 
Talossan Since: 9-23-2012
|
Post by Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă on Apr 24, 2013 6:54:15 GMT -6
The bill says anyone may be nominated by the Ziu or PD. that implies someone else then actually decides if they get to be in the corps or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by C. Carlüs Xheraltescù on Apr 24, 2013 7:56:54 GMT -6
It's an official organisation regulated by the Ziu, any Talossan is eligible.
|
|
Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă
Puisne (Associate) Justice of the Uppermost Court
Fraichetz dels punts, es non dels mürs
Posts: 4,063
Talossan Since: 9-23-2012
|
Post by Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă on Apr 24, 2013 7:59:11 GMT -6
The word nominated does not mean the same as appointed, that is what I am getting at.
|
|
|
|
Post by C. Carlüs Xheraltescù on Apr 24, 2013 8:05:14 GMT -6
Well the definition of nominated that I have in front of me is "appoint to a job or position", so I'm sticking with the language I've used.
|
|
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 Apr 24, 2013 19:01:34 GMT -6
In light of recent discussions about revitalizing the Civil Service through the creation of permanent secretaries, I question the need for this bill at this point. Once the secretary bill is worked out, there need be no question that translators working for the Büreu del Glhetg are civil servants, not politicals. So the effect of this bill would be to 1) increase the Büreu's focus on translation, 2) give it a new misleading name (because it will retain a general language-promotion role but be named so as to suggest that it is just a translation service), and make staffing it much more cumbersome. I agree with only #1 of the above list, and that can be done with a minor change to the existing Büreu del Glhetg clause in 36RZ17.
|
|
Ián Tamorán S.H.
Chief Justice of the Uppermost Court
Proud Philosopher of Talossa
Posts: 1,401
Talossan Since: 9-27-2010
|
Post by Ián Tamorán S.H. on Apr 25, 2013 11:02:20 GMT -6
Well the definition of nominated that I have in front of me is "appoint to a job or position", so I'm sticking with the language I've used. |
|
|
|
Post by C. Carlüs Xheraltescù on Apr 25, 2013 11:36:37 GMT -6
Mine was from the Collins English Dictionary. I have no interest in debating semantics - I think the bill is quite clear on what is meant.
EDIT: Sorry, that wasn't supposed to sound so scathing!
|
|
|
|
Post by C. Carlüs Xheraltescù on Apr 25, 2013 11:40:21 GMT -6
In light of recent discussions about revitalizing the Civil Service through the creation of permanent secretaries, I question the need for this bill at this point. Once the secretary bill is worked out, there need be no question that translators working for the Büreu del Glhetg are civil servants, not politicals. So the effect of this bill would be to 1) increase the Büreu's focus on translation, 2) give it a new misleading name (because it will retain a general language-promotion role but be named so as to suggest that it is just a translation service), and make staffing it much more cumbersome. I agree with only #1 of the above list, and that can be done with a minor change to the existing Büreu del Glhetg clause in 36RZ17. Feel free to suggest another name; I changed if from the Büreu, because that's a name for a sub-division of a ministry and I didn't want people to confuse the two. Regarding the Civil Service bill, I don't think it makes this unnecessary - the whole purpose of this bill is to provide autonomy from the government (and Civil Service). The people who will fill the Corps/Guild/Society/Organisation are not going to be Civil Servants but private citizens wishing to provide their services as translators, but with a tighter focus on translation than what the CUG offer (which I believe to be more of a ruling body on the language than a taskforce as envisioned by this bill). |
|
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 Apr 25, 2013 21:27:50 GMT -6
Regarding the Civil Service bill, I don't think it makes this unnecessary - the whole purpose of this bill is to provide autonomy from the government (and Civil Service). The people who will fill the Corps/Guild/Society/Organisation are not going to be Civil Servants but private citizens wishing to provide their services as translators, but with a tighter focus on translation than what the CUG offer (which I believe to be more of a ruling body on the language than a taskforce as envisioned by this bill). I understood the desire for the translation service to be non-governmental. But Miestra (for example) has said she has no problem being a civil servant. So why independence from the Civil Service? |
|
|
|
Post by C. Carlüs Xheraltescù on Apr 26, 2013 1:39:56 GMT -6
Whenever culture is administrated by civil servants and government, then a country knows its culture is in danger.
|
|
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 Apr 26, 2013 5:29:17 GMT -6
Whenever culture is administrated by civil servants and government, then a country knows its culture is in danger. 1. Is anything related to the Büreu del Glhetg, or the Ministry of Culture as a whole, more suitable for being done by public officials (whether governmental or civil service) than translation of official documents? 2. If culture should not be promoted by civil servants or government, do you support eliminating the Ministry of Culture? 3. The bill transfers the Büreu´s general responsibility for promoting the use of the Talossan language to the Translator´s Corps. If culture should not be promoted by civil servants or government, what is the material difference between having the language promoted by a body of civil servants and having the language promoted by a body "directly responsible to the Ziu" with members appointed by the Ziu or by prime dictate? 4. You mention that members of the Corps will not be civil servants but private citizens. But as mentioned above, the Corps is "directly responsible to the Ziu" and members are appointed by the Ziu or by prime dictate. In what real sense would members thus appointed be less public officials than are members of the civil service or current appointees of the PM or ministers? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2013 10:48:29 GMT -6
Whenever culture is administrated by civil servants and government, then a country knows its culture is in danger. How is the task of translating official documents, which is the very task you assigned in the bill you wrote, not a government/civil service job? |
|
|
|
Post by C. Carlüs Xheraltescù on Apr 26, 2013 13:59:43 GMT -6
Because its remit is a little wider than that. I envisage it as being a form of quango or something of the like.
|
|
