Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on February 07, 2023, 06:54:46 AMIt has been the largest opposition party that gets the post in the past

Not true. Marcel Tafial was Túischac´h in the 56th Cosă.

Okay! Now that thanks to swift action by the King and the outgoing Seneschal the election procedure is back on the books, I am happy to formally open a petition under the restored H.21.1 that Lüc da Schir be Túischac'h for the 58th Cosa, and stake my 14 seats to it.
 

This time and only this time I'll let out a HUZZAH PER EL REGEU  ;D

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on February 06, 2023, 02:31:40 PM

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on February 06, 2023, 02:29:02 PMBut why do you even need a law? Previous Governments sent out the National Activity Survey without need of an authorising law, and with the Chancery's cooperation

It was the using the Census part that necessitated the approval of the Ziu. I figured using the Census would be more efficient but technical issues with the database and the Privacy Law have negated any potential gains in efficiency.s

Understood. My reaction is that the Census only has to be carried out once every 2 years so it's not that useful for collecting timely information on whether new citizens have skills. On the other hand, I understand the interest in making more use of the Census, which is at the moment something of a useless appendix, only really used to help inactive citizens avoid "striking out".

I'd suggest that this survey be enacted along the same lines as the old National Activity Survey, but that the incoming Government think more about how to make the Census more useful (and perhaps amend privacy law?)

But why do you even need a law? Previous Governments sent out the National Activity Survey without need of an authorising law, and with the Chancery's cooperation

Okay, outgoing Attorney-General chiming in here.

Given the current section of El Lexh:

QuoteC 1.2.2.3. Any information collected during the census that would individually identify any person or persons, including their contact information, shall be withheld from the public for to protect individual privacy, consistent with Lex.D.8. The only exception is that citizens may opt to have their e-mail address shared with party leaders, pursuant to Lex.D.8.5.4. Census information shall not be released under any "freedom of information" or "government transparency" requests, notwithstanding any other provisions of el Lexhatx.

It seems to me that the bolded bit is the crux here. I haven't seen that the TNC proposal requires any such information to be released to "the public" - but to the Government, confidentially. Is the Chancery's interpretation that "the public" means anyone who's not in the Chancery?

Would @the TNC leadership in the Cosă have any objections to a PD re-establishing the rules for electing a Túischac'h? Time is pressing if we want a Túischac'h to preside over a Living Cosă on the 25th.

That used to be how it worked in Talossa. The King could simply veto judicial decisions as well as acts of the Ziu. The "good old days" if you're a monarchist, or if the King is on your side.

I mean, I should note that I have a suggestion for the incoming Túischac'h - one conforming to the tradition that the Túischac'h should come from the opposition parties - and that suggestion is Lüc da Schir. But the majority will have the final say.

Estimadas es estimats MCs: I intended at this point to be calling for the election of a Túischac'h, as required by OrgLaw IV.12. However, the procedure for electing a Túischac'h - as previously provided in El Lexhatx - was deleted, by accident. A stuff-up which I take partial responsibility for, because I honestly didn't read that the procedure for electing the Túischac'h was in the part of El Lexh I wanted deleted.

Since we have to elect a Túischac'h anyway, does anyone mind if we use the previous method? I understand that maybe the incoming Cosa majority might have different ideas of how to do it, but I thought it worked well.

QuoteThe Cosa shall elect the Túischac'h as follows. (54RZ21) repealing both (50PD01) (52RZ3)

17.1. At any time between the Election Deadline and the following Dissolution of the Cosa, any Member of the Cosa shall be empowered to publish and open for signatures a petition nominating an eligible person for the office of Túischac'h. (54RZ21) repealing both (50PD01) (52RZ3)
17.2. Once a petition is published, any eligible Member of the Cosa shall be empowered to second the nomination by countersigning the petition in public. (54RZ21) repealing both (50PD01) (52RZ3)
17.3. Members may not second multiple nominations concurrently; if a Member wishes to support a different petition, he/she shall first publicly retract the earlier countersignature. (54RZ21) repealing both (50PD01) (52RZ3)
17.4. Following any number of petitions, presented as above and supporting the same candidate, being signed or counter-signed by members currently representing an absolute majority of seats in the Cosa, the candidate named in the petition(s) shall be declared by the Secretary of State to be the Túischac'h. (54RZ21) repealing both (50PD01) (52RZ3)
17.5. Petitions may not be carried over from one vacancy in the office of Seneschal to Túischac'h. Once a Túischac'h is elected as above, all petitions shall be made moot. (54RZ21) repealing both (50PD01) (52RZ3)

I would be advising the Free Dems to support this, but I can't abide by this provision:

QuoteFURTHERMORE, the Scribe is directed to eliminate from el Lexhatx all "empty" provisions, as when a provision has been deleted but left empty, and to renumber the Titles in question in a sensible fashion.

As I've said before, but I can't find where, there are too many places where cross-references in El Lex have been rendered inoperative due to renumberings. "This section intentionally left black" works well in some cases.

We should probably consider this a bit more

Going to advise the FreeDems majority in the Senäts to reject this useless new bureaucracy cluttering up El Lexhatx. Although there's nothing that stops the incoming Government handing out whatever bogus certificates they see fit

Going to advise the FreeDems majority in the Senäts to reject any changes to this ancient, quirky Talossan tradition

Anyway, this needs to be discussed more