Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on February 23, 2024, 03:40:59 PM

Quote from: Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB on February 23, 2024, 03:38:46 PMThis bill cannot be submitted to the Clark until it is properly formatted. The bill talks about a modification to El Lex D.8.9, and how certain information must be transmitted in a certain format. However, for the bill to actually take any effect, the provisions of El Lex. D.8.9 should be specifically modified to include the specific information to be transmitted.

For example, you could modify 8.9.1 to state "All internal government communications on Government-owned fora, including discussions by any Standing Committee, shall be...." (you get the point).

This bill would just be floating about in the ether if it were to pass as it does not modify existing law in any way.

I'm sorry but it clearly states the information to be transmitted under the same procedure already specified in the previous act. I need to check, will this change allow it to be clarked?

@Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB
I know you're just doing your job, Txec. Thanks for your help. I have edited as you suggested and hope it can now be clarked.

Quote from: Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB on February 23, 2024, 03:38:46 PMThis bill cannot be submitted to the Clark until it is properly formatted. The bill talks about a modification to El Lex D.8.9, and how certain information must be transmitted in a certain format. However, for the bill to actually take any effect, the provisions of El Lex. D.8.9 should be specifically modified to include the specific information to be transmitted.

For example, you could modify 8.9.1 to state "All internal government communications on Government-owned fora, including discussions by any Standing Committee, shall be...." (you get the point).

This bill would just be floating about in the ether if it were to pass as it does not modify existing law in any way.

I'm sorry but it clearly states the information to be transmitted under the same procedure already specified in the previous act. I need to check, will this change allow it to be clarked?

Quote from: Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB on February 23, 2024, 03:21:11 PMBrenier you are not the main sponsor so it must be Clarked by Miestra. It also has not been approved by the CRL.

Thanks Txec, to clarify it was approved by myself (when I was a member) and Ian so it has CRL approval.

@Miestră Schivă, UrN looks like it is your call as to clarking it.

@Sir Lüc and @Ian Plätschisch
I think the SoS may need for one or both of you to explicitly indicate your approval. Sorry Luc, I know you are a co-sponsor but I wanted to be safe.

Update: removed the bill where I'm not the main sponsor.

Hellooooo Mr. Secretary, I am pleased to clark the following:

The Florencia <3's Vuode Act
The Grandfathered Transparency Act
BHAID: Effective Altruism Act
The A-X's Little Helper Act
CpI Advisory Opinion Expansion Amendment
The Seneschal Uber-Active Clarification Act

Y'all may be surprised but...I approve.

Thanks again @Sir Lüc
When you are able, this final bill is ready to be moved to the CRL.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on February 19, 2024, 01:40:07 PMScuse me, but is this an actual legislative proposal? I'm confused by the "we support" stuff

No no, not ready for consideration to send to CRL.
Just to get the conversation started. I want to know if this is something people might support.

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on February 15, 2024, 10:16:22 AMPrivy Council changes can be achieved by amending statute Title L, I think. According to my review of internal discussions this proposal had significant support on both sides. Everyone knows who I personally recommend as the Designated Successor.

---

We support a new method of royal succession wherein the Monarch is asked to ensure there are always no less than five appointees to the Sabor (Privy Council). Upon a vacancy on the throne without a Designated Successor, the Ziu selects a new Monarch from the membership of the Sabor. Selection by the Ziu is successful with a two-thirds majority in both the Cosa and the Senats. Approval, by simple majority, is then required by nationwide referendum. A sitting Monarch may choose a Designated Successor from amongst the Sabor who will also need approval under the same process. The Designated Successor may be removed by the same process as the Monarch.
Connected to this, we support King John giving the nation a timeline for a transition for his Designated Successor. Or the instituting of a mandatory retirement age of 75 years for the Monarch of Talossa.

@mximo thank you for suggesting that change.
I am hoping others will chime in too.
When I proposed the idea in the Florencian Nimlet my review of communications leads me to believe there were some cross-party discussions.
As was suggested, I have removed the reference to Txec as the DS but I do still support his elevation. To answer a specific concern, relayed in review of those communications, no I am not seeking to replace Txec.

@Ian Plätschisch what do you think?

Quote from: Sir Lüc on February 19, 2024, 08:15:26 AMThere's a small thing that needs fixing, D.2.1 doesn't read as it currently stands on the bill, that's only the final sentence. Otherwise I'd say this version works, sign me up.

Thanks Lüc, edited and add you as a co-sponsor.

Quote from: Sir Lüc on February 19, 2024, 08:29:44 AMPersonally, the A-X should not only have the right to request an advisory opinion from the CpI -- if anything they should probably be the one Government official that's primarily in charge of those, just as the MinFin (and not the Seneschal) has been in charge of the Budget for a few years now. Besides, the Seneschal has the implicit right to also request an advisory opinion by D.2.1.

(Also, there's a typo in that section of the OrgLaw -- Seneschal)

Thank you very much @Sir Lüc
I didn't want to argue with people about it but really believed that it should be the A-X. So I will add it back.

Quote from: mximo on February 18, 2024, 09:00:56 PMI will sponsor this if it's still ok for me to do it ;)

Mximo Carbonèl
Senator from Florencia

@Miestră Schivă, UrN OK with you?

Quote from: mximo on February 18, 2024, 09:03:19 PMI will cosponsor this.

Mximo Carbonèl

Awesome Mximo! Thanks, I will add you now.

Quote from: Ian Plätschisch on February 18, 2024, 02:51:22 PMMaybe this doesn't matter, but the way this is currently written, the Mencei could appoint an MC or vice versa. Is that the intent?

Yes, it was intentional to allow a larger pool of parliament members as replacements but if we would like to keep to the Tui and the Mencei appointing a member of their respective bodies that is fine too.

Thanks @Ian Plätschisch I have also removed the A-X from the new parties allowed to request an opinion. I disagree that it would be unnecessary for the A-X to have the ability to do so but it is not a fight I am interested in having. And expanding it so that a collection of the Ziu can too is sufficient.