Okay, we seem to have good consensus on some Constitution and Platform amendments. We have nominations for both President and Secretary. I would like to get to voting after the guest speech section, which will be this weekend. Anyone else want to speak / propose something / nominate someone?

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on February 17, 2024, 04:55:34 PMOkay, how about this: replace existing Plank B of our program:

QuoteB. CUTTING THE RED-AND-GREEN TAPE
Talossa's government and legal structure is top-heavy, unwieldy, hard to navigate and no fun. We support the repeal of all laws and abolition of all Government posts and procedures which are more trouble than they are worth to keep going. We want a smaller, consistently active Cabinet, a Ziu which offers active oversight of the Cabinet and intelligent scrutiny of laws, and a functioning Judiciary.

With this:

QuoteB. A POLITICAL SYSTEM FOR EVERYONE
Free Democrats want a political system where *democracy and expertise* balance each other. We want an end to "green-and-red tape"; our politics and laws have to be simple and straightforward enough that any citizen can become a political leader or seek justice in the Corts with minimal training. In turn, the Royal Civil Service should recruit those with specialist skills to work for the Kingdom independently but under political supervision.

I'd like some feedback on this

I kind of want to go through this to explain the process as I envisage:

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on February 18, 2024, 12:20:47 AMXIII.
a) The Party Leadership, upon petition of at least 1/2 of party members or at its own initiative by majority vote, shall suspend members for:
i) stated violations of this Constitution;
ii) publicly voting for or joining another nationally registered party;
iii) bringing the party into disrepute in a stated way.

b) A suspension decision, the justification for it, and the provisions for lifting this suspension (as contained in the rest of this section) shall be communicated to the suspended member as soon as possible and through all possible means of communication. A suspended member's rights under this Constitution shall cease to apply during their suspension, including the right to participate in Party discussion forums.

c) On the first day of the next Party Convention, the Party Leadership shall publicly announce a recommendation for every suspended member whether to lift their suspension, continue their suspension until the next Convention, or to expel the member. A recommendation to lift suspension shall be effected immediately. A recommendation to continue suspension or to expel shall take effect after 5 days, unless the suspended member addresses the Convention requesting a hearing.

d) A hearing shall be held in closed session and shall be chaired by a Talossan citizen agreed to by both the suspended member and the Party leadership. The Party Leadership shall make the case for continued suspension or expulsion, and the suspended member may make a case against this decision. Debate shall then ensue, in which other party members may make their own arguments or statements, moderated by the chair of the hearing. After no fewer than five days, the chair of the hearing shall call for a vote as to whether to accept or reject the Party Leadership's recommendation. A quorum of no less than 1/2 of current membership shall be required to endorse a motion to continue suspension or to expel. If the vote fails, the member's suspension shall be immediately lifted. The outcome of the hearing shall be immediately publicly announced.

e) An expelled member shall be eligible to rejoin the Free Democrats after two General Elections following the expulsion.

Basically, if the Party Leadership suspends someone (or is required to by petition of the membership) that suspension will last at least until the next Convention, i.e. the leadership won't be able to end it early. I think this is necessary to stop "wheeling and dealing", i.e a Leadership telling a suspended member "your suspension will be lifted if you toe the line". If a suspension happens it can't be a casual thing, it must have consequences, and its outcome should only be decided by a membership vote. Conversely, a suspension can't last beyond the next Convention (or turned into an expulsion) without that membership vote. So I'm trying to make sure the Leadership can hand out suspensions when necessary but to minimise the control they have over the process in favour of the membership as a whole deciding.

Oh, while I'm at it, change e) to read as follows:

Quotee) An expelled member shall be eligible to rejoin the Free Democrats after two General Elections following the expulsion. A member whose suspension is lifted at a Convention may not be suspended again for the same cause.

(This to stop a suspension expiring at a Convention and the party leadership just yelling HUTSCH-TÚ and reimposing it immediately.)

Sound good?

Quote from: Ian Plätschisch on February 18, 2024, 08:45:14 AM

Quote from: Bentxamì Puntmasleu on February 16, 2024, 03:38:51 PM"We stand against attempts by the King, Privy Council, or government, to expand the powers of the royal authority, or to fortify the position of the monarchy."

Not the biggest fan of this since I can't guarantee there would never be a time I could support more royal power on some issue. Also, what exactly does "fortifying the position of the Monarchy" mean? I certainly don't want it to get weaker.

Coming from the most monarchist party member so feel free to ignore.

As possibly the *least* monarchist party member, lol, the issue with this is that it's hypothetical. Neither the King, the Sabor nor the Government are currently trying to expand the powers of the monarchy. So this is kind of empty and voters might be excused for wondering what we're worried about. In contrast, I really strongly want us to adopt this for obvious reasons:

QuoteWe oppose any attempts to change the current provisions to replace or establish a successor to the Monarchy - that is, the standard provisions of Organic Law amendment - without a full reform and/or replacement of provisions for Talossa's Head of State.

Scuse me, but is this an actual legislative proposal? I'm confused by the "we support" stuff

All right, here are my suggested rewrites for @Antaglha Xhenerös Somelieir's constitutional amendments. I have rephrased her second suggestion as a rewrite to Section XIII of the Constitution, to which it properly pertains.

So, my suggestion is that Section IV be changed to read:

Quote"IV.
a, Membership shall be open to all Talossan citizens who agree to abide by this Constitution, endorse the Party Policy, and are not currently members of another nationally registered party. However, the rights of any party member in good standing to seek changes to the Constitution or Policy in accordance with this Constitution shall never be infringed.

b. A prospective member must provide such contact information to the Party Secretary as the Party Secretary may ask for. The Party Secretary shall keep this information confidential, to be shared only with the Party Leadership, and used only for party business.

c. The Secretary of the Party shall be entitled, no more than once a year, to conduct a Census of all party members to make sure they still see themselves as Party members and that their contact details are up to date. A Party member who does not reply to this census within 30 days shall be deemed to have offered their resignation, which shall be accepted at the discretion of the Party Leadership.

And Section XIII:

QuoteXIII.
a) The Party Leadership, upon petition of at least 1/2 of party members or at its own initiative by majority vote, shall suspend members for:
i) stated violations of this Constitution;
ii) publicly voting for or joining another nationally registered party;
iii) bringing the party into disrepute in a stated way.

b) A suspension decision, the justification for it, and the provisions for lifting this suspension (as contained in the rest of this section) shall be communicated to the suspended member as soon as possible and through all possible means of communication. A suspended member's rights under this Constitution shall cease to apply during their suspension, including the right to participate in Party discussion forums.

c) On the first day of the next Party Convention, the Party Leadership shall publicly announce a recommendation for every suspended member whether to lift their suspension, continue their suspension until the next Convention, or to expel the member. A recommendation to lift suspension shall be effected immediately. A recommendation to continue suspension or to expel shall take effect after 5 days, unless the suspended member addresses the Convention requesting a hearing.

d) A hearing shall be held in closed session and shall be chaired by a Talossan citizen agreed to by both the suspended member and the Party leadership. The Party Leadership shall make the case for continued suspension or expulsion, and the suspended member may make a case against this decision. Debate shall then ensue, in which other party members may make their own arguments or statements, moderated by the chair of the hearing. After no fewer than five days, the chair of the hearing shall call for a vote as to whether to accept or reject the Party Leadership's recommendation. A quorum of no less than 1/2 of current membership shall be required to endorse a motion to continue suspension or to expel. If the vote fails, the member's suspension shall be immediately lifted. The outcome of the hearing shall be immediately publicly announced.

e) An expelled member shall be eligible to rejoin the Free Democrats after two General Elections following the expulsion.

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on February 17, 2024, 05:00:13 PM@Miestră Schivă, UrN It may be too late but I would be interested in making a speech to the convention as a guest. I was reviewing the party's proboards site but was unable to see any activity so I assume most of it is happening here.

Thank you. This request will be considered by the party leadership. As you say, it may be too late and if it is accepted it will have to come after the guest speech we already have scheduled.

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on February 17, 2024, 03:54:18 PM@Miestră Schivă, UrN Has this bill been moved to CRL yet? As the main sponsor would you mind me moving it now?

... wow, I can't believe I actually forgot about this one! Please, move it to CRL.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on February 16, 2024, 03:53:21 PM

Quote from: Bentxamì Puntmasleu on February 16, 2024, 03:38:51 PMI propose that a clause be added to our Party Policy Section A:

"We stand against attempts by the King, Privy Council, or government, to expand the powers of the royal authority, or to fortify the position of the monarchy."

This is not a call for any immediate abolition of the monarchy. It is just demanding that the monarchy not become any more powerful or entrenched than the status quo. Unless, perhaps, such a change has undeniably overwhelming support among the governing parties, the opposition parties, and independents.

I've got my own ideas about amendments to the program which flesh out a specific FreeDems constitutional position: for the rule of law, for separation of powers, against bureaucracy. This proposal might fit nicely as part of that.

Okay, how about this: replace existing Plank B of our program:

QuoteB. CUTTING THE RED-AND-GREEN TAPE
Talossa's government and legal structure is top-heavy, unwieldy, hard to navigate and no fun. We support the repeal of all laws and abolition of all Government posts and procedures which are more trouble than they are worth to keep going. We want a smaller, consistently active Cabinet, a Ziu which offers active oversight of the Cabinet and intelligent scrutiny of laws, and a functioning Judiciary.

With this:

QuoteB. A POLITICAL SYSTEM FOR EVERYONE
Free Democrats want a political system where *democracy and expertise* balance each other. We want an end to "green-and-red tape"; our politics and laws have to be simple and straightforward enough that any citizen can become a political leader or seek justice in the Corts with minimal training. In turn, the Royal Civil Service should recruit those with specialist skills to work for the Kingdom independently but under political supervision.

The idea is to prevent the kind of debacle which recently happened where the TNC government couldn't find anyone to write their budget. I want to express the idea that that should never happen; either the budget legislation should be simple enough that anyone who gets elected can do it; or we should have some Civil Service person whose job it is to write budgets along the lines given by the elected Government.

The alternative to this is a system where you can only elect a Government who knows how to "work the system". On one hand this means that those in power have an incentive to keep things complicated so only they know how to work it and can't be voted out! On the other, it means that elections become non-political; you're voting for administrators not for political visions. I always thought (and respect to him if I got it wrong) that was AD's vision for how Talossan politics should work, and I've always opposed it.

The question I want you to answer is: does my suggested amendment get this idea across, in as few words as possible?

I also support Bentxamí's phrase being added to the end of Plank A of our platform, as a separate measure.

... and he's just told me by PM that he wants to join the FreeDems *shrug*

I renominate @Antaglha Xhenerös Somelieir as Party Secretary, btw

Quote from: Bentxamì Puntmasleu on February 16, 2024, 03:38:51 PMI propose that a clause be added to our Party Policy Section A:

"We stand against attempts by the King, Privy Council, or government, to expand the powers of the royal authority, or to fortify the position of the monarchy."

This is not a call for any immediate abolition of the monarchy. It is just demanding that the monarchy not become any more powerful or entrenched than the status quo. Unless, perhaps, such a change has undeniably overwhelming support among the governing parties, the opposition parties, and independents.

I've got my own ideas about amendments to the program which flesh out a specific FreeDems constitutional position: for the rule of law, for separation of powers, against bureaucracy. This proposal might fit nicely as part of that.

Why is a new citizen asking about joining the TNC at the same time he's talking to me via PM on joining the Free Democrats?

FREE DEMOCRATS CONVENTION IS NOW OPEN

I'll make an opening speech sometime in the next couple of days. If anyone wants to

a) make a speech
b) make a suggested amendment to the Party Constitution or Program;
c) nominate a Party President, Party Secretary or Provincial Branch Chair;

now is the time to do so.

The A-Xh is not a directly elected role, but acts as part of a collectively responsible Cabinet led by the Seneschal. I think it's right that the Government, represented by the Seneschal, should have the right to ask for an advisory opinion. If the A-Xh feels the need to act independently from (opposed to?) the rest of the Government, we are in constitutional crisis territory and they should resign.