Quote from: Dr. Txec Róibeard dal Nordselvă, Esq., O.SPM, SMM on March 31, 2021, 07:49:30 PMI understand entirely. You are saying that you would refuse this request because it is impractical... even if the sponsor requested it, you couldn't do it. That is why you declared that it was too late for her to agree, since in practical terms it's not possible for you to comply. Your job is difficult and you are doing it well, so I wouldn't presume to second guess you about this. Since you would refuse to grant such a request, this discussion is moot. Thank you for letting us know! :-)Quote from: Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on March 31, 2021, 07:44:14 PMQuote from: Dr. Txec Róibeard dal Nordselvă, Esq., O.SPM, SMM on March 31, 2021, 07:39:12 PMYou are correct, the thing I did not say would be wrong for me to say. As serving regent, I do not have the power to demand anything be stricken from the Clark or anything of the sort. The straw man is well and truly thrashed.Quote from: Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on March 31, 2021, 07:16:16 PM
I hope you will reconsider. This new solution is unethical and inorganic. And if you decide the discussion is going nowhere or you get frustrated, you can always clark it again. It will be ready to go at any time.
With respect, I should mention that is is your opinion that this bill is unethical and inorganic. The CpI ultimately is the arbiter of what is or is not inorganic. As Secretary of State I can also choose not to Clark a bill if I believe it is inorganic on its face. Nowhere in either Statute or Organic law do I see a provision that allows the King (and by extension the Regent) to demand a bill be removed from a Clark.
I review all bills before I place them on the Clark and I found no cause for concern. I'm not saying the bill is a good bill, but it does not seem to be inorganic in my estimation and since it modifies the covenants it has the highest passage requirements of any bill so far this entire Cosa term.
Dame Miestrâ is correct in that this bill is already Clarked. The 6th Clark begins tomorrow and it is too late for me by law to adjust or amend the Clark. All bills must be submitted (or I presume unsubmitted) 24 hours in advance.
Yes, it is my opinion that this bill is inorganic. The bill's sponsor herself agrees that its passage would leave it impossible for citizens to know exactly what was against the law, which is a violation of the Covenants of Rights and Freedoms.
If you are declaring that you would refuse the Seneschal's request to withdraw her bill, then of course she is out of time to reconsider. This discussion is mooted.
It's not so much that I would refuse to remove it from the Clark as it would be impractical to do so given the current form of how a Clark is conducted. I don't have the ability to on my own remove a bill. It would require me getting the DB administrator to do so also. I cannot know if that could happen in time.
As an example, I made an error on the current Clark and didn't mark a bill as being an amendment. I had to wait a few days to get it fixed due to the schedule of MPF.