Wittenberg

WHEREAS we should make it possible for people to create publicly-verifiable contracts to accommodate our unique style of digital governance, allowing for the creation of private corporations and non-governmental organizations in a way that has an official sheen to it, and

WHEREAS the Register of Talossan Enterprises does not appear to exist and has never even been promoted and I doubt that more than two or three people know it hypothetically exists, so it had its shot over the last two years and hasn't made it,

THEREFORE the tenth subsection of the eighth subsection of the second section of Title D of el Lexhatx, which currently reads as follows:

Quote2.8.10 The Finance Minister shall create a Register of Talossan Enterprises, available to all Talossan citizens. Any Talossan who produces goods and services, whether commercially or as a hobby, may provide a description, no longer than 100 words, of their enterprise together with their contact details, for the purposes of advertisement and information. An enterprise shall be removed from the register at the request of the registrant; or by a determination by the Finance Minister that the enterprise is no longer active, or not of a character with which the Kingdom of Talossa wishes to be associated. Such determinations shall be subject to judicial review.

shall be replaced by the following subsections:

Quote2.8.10 The Finance Minister will make available a system for the public registration of articles of incorporation.  They or their designated representative will ensure that these articles are available for public perusal.

Uréu q'estadra så:
Baron Alexandreu Davinescu

Just wondering whether the proposer thinks this is ready to go before the CRL yet?

In my humble opinion this is exactly the kind of bureaucracy we are trying to get rid of.

Doing fancy official registrations of things is fun and cool.  So far the slash-and-burn policy hasn't exactly been paying us dividends, so maybe we should try to encourage people to do fun and cool things, instead.

Last term, this bill was blocked due to the Government legislative blockade.  Legally, I was thus barred from reintroducing it during the same session.  I intend to reintroduce it in the coming term in something akin to its current form.  I will note that there is no Register of Talossan Enterprises anywhere I could find: the status quo is not working.

I'm going to vote against this again, if I'm an MC again. Pointless busywork and bureaucracy-building.

People actually did this, though. They were actually interested.  I had a license.  MPF had a license.  And this provides a vehicle to start to build institutions that extend beyond personal networks and have legal backing!

The current law is emphatically not working.  The Register of Talossan Enterprises doesn't exist and never has!

You keep going on at me about how passing laws means nothing for real Talossan activity. Well: handing out miéida da toro "licences" means nothing either. Pointless.

I'm old enough to remember precisely this same debate in Penguinea, more than 20 years ago. The argument was that handing out licences would encourage Talossan enterprises to flourish. No, it didn't. "Legal backing" means absolutely nothing. It's just busywork.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on January 03, 2023, 03:00:42 PMYou keep going on at me about how passing laws means nothing for real Talossan activity. Well: handing out miéida da toro "licences" means nothing either. Pointless.

I'm old enough to remember precisely this same debate in Penguinea, more than 20 years ago. The argument was that handing out licences would encourage Talossan enterprises to flourish. No, it didn't. "Legal backing" means absolutely nothing. It's just busywork.

I mean, woe, woe upon the poor, exhausted official who must hit CTRL+C and then CTRL+V one or possibly even two times a year, am I right?

I know that the Register of Talossan Enterprises was your idea, years ago, but my proposal is definitely not more work... in both cases, people submit stuff and it's posted publicly.  My proposal just also allows people to build up a legal structure that can be binding, too.  It's almost the same amount of work.

I am reintroducing this act for the new term.  It replaces the "Register of Talossan Enterprises" in the law, which doesn't exist and never has, with the ability for businesses to request licenses and create enforceable contracts.  There were two registered corporations previously -- this opens the door for that to start happening again.

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

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on February 04, 2023, 02:47:32 PMGoing 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

The "Register of Talossan Enterprises" already exists in the law.  This would just be replacing that function, which has never been used (the responsible ministers never even bothered to create it!) with a similar function that actually was used.

This bill has already been submitted to committee, but I must point out that the relevant subsection in the Lexhatx is § D.2.8.10 and not § D.2.8.9

Moreover, I'd like to suggest to modify the last subsection proposed.

The «For example [...] discouraged» part is written in a language suited for a resolution and not a law. I'd suggest to remove it altogether.

The last sentence I suggest to modify it in this way:

QuoteThe Bureau might provide a fancy certificate to any registered business.

Should I make the latter change, would you vote for the bill?

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on March 25, 2023, 09:45:40 PMShould I make the latter change, would you vote for the bill?

I made suggestions to improve a small part of the language of the bill, it doesn't change anything on how your system will work of its substance.

That is a true statement, but it doesn't answer my question.  If I make the change, will you be voting in favor of the bill or not?

I can't really tell you: I'm part of a team and we'll decide together as a caucus on what we will do.

What I can tell you is that we don't like excessive bureaucratic structures, especially if they are not really needed. We need "bureaucracy" in some fields to keep the structure going, but I'd say that is generated in response to demand of "order" which could be gradually enlarged as more demand of order is necessary, but I don't believe in the opposite: that an excessive bureaucracy supply could generate demand for it. I do believe that the overall purpose of your bill, which seems to me a pretty big change from what the current law says, can be achieved with less bureaucracy.

And I do know that we don't like laws that "encourages" part of the State to act within their powers and prerogatives.

Quote from: Üc R. Tärfă on March 31, 2023, 03:21:26 AMI can't really tell you: I'm part of a team and we'll decide together as a caucus on what we will do.

That is interesting, although unfortunate; obviously the FDT isn't going to vote for this if you're voting as a bloc, since Dama Miestra doesn't like it. There isn't much reason to change a bill to accommodate your preferences, unless you point out something with which I happen to agree -- you don't have any votes to offer!  That said, your feedback is always welcome, and I'm glad of it, and you have a sharp eye for editing legislation.  Plus, I'm not going to Clark this right now, anyway -- on the Seneschal's request -- so there's a bit more time to fix up the language and make it read more smoothly.

Quote from: Üc R. Tärfă on March 31, 2023, 03:21:26 AMWhat I can tell you is that we don't like excessive bureaucratic structures, especially if they are not really needed. We need "bureaucracy" in some fields to keep the structure going, but I'd say that is generated in response to demand of "order" which could be gradually enlarged as more demand of order is necessary, but I don't believe in the opposite: that an excessive bureaucracy supply could generate demand for it. I do believe that the overall purpose of your bill, which seems to me a pretty big change from what the current law says, can be achieved with less bureaucracy.

It's barely a change at all from the current law in terms of bureaucracy.  The minister is still just making a public list, but this one is a list of licenses, rather than an advertising list.  The only additional bureaucratic elements are sending the license information to the business, as well as possibly keeping track of articles of incorporation.  Heck, it doesn't even mandate this, so it's arguably less bureaucracy... right now I'm required to make a public list of businesses, even though it's empty since no one's used this provision at any point since it was created three years ago.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on June 01, 2022, 10:37:08 PMDoing fancy official registrations of things is fun and cool.  So far the slash-and-burn policy hasn't exactly been paying us dividends, so maybe we should try to encourage people to do fun and cool things, instead.

I haven't really been paying attention to all the back and forth, but I'm curious if you even had any ideas what kind of businesses might even be viable in Talossa. What kind of fun and cool things do you imagine or dream of?

What an awesome question!

So obviously, my first thoughts would go to the companies that previously registered: Beric'ht Talossan, the newspaper I used to run, and MPF's web business that he was trying to make friendly to Talossans in particular.  Those are actually two good examples of the most likely possibilities: businesses that are entirely local to Talossan interests, and those which are Talossa-adjacent.

What could that look like?
- An enterprising person who starts making and selling Talossan flags.
- Someone who wants to start an NGO in the country -- maybe a private version of BHAID or SIGN -- with publicly verifiable articles of incorporation, and wants that official sanction to reassure donors or create structure.  There can't be dispute about the agreed terms under which they will operate if those terms are registered officially with the government.
- An author who writes their own books, directly selling and shipping autographed copies to Talossans as a small business, and who wants to promote that business within our small market (and potentially larger exposure to the world, someday soon).

And that's just off the top of my head!

Anyone who thinks that things like the above is "fun and cool" probably also has an intense love of vanilla.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on March 31, 2023, 06:31:39 AMThere isn't much reason to change a bill to accommodate your preferences, unless you point out something with which I happen to agree -- you don't have any votes to offer!

I'd rather say the contrary: we have many votes, especially in the Senäts  ;)

QuotePlus, I'm not going to Clark this right now, anyway -- on the Seneschal's request -- so there's a bit more time to fix up the language and make it read more smoothly.

So maybe there's room for changes, isn't it?

Quote from: Üc R. Tärfă on April 01, 2023, 04:36:54 PM

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on March 31, 2023, 06:31:39 AMThere isn't much reason to change a bill to accommodate your preferences, unless you point out something with which I happen to agree -- you don't have any votes to offer!

I'd rather say the contrary: we have many votes, especially in the Senäts  ;)

That's great to hear! If you can make a deal on behalf of your whole party like that, then I'll be very happy to work towards a bill you can support.

You know what our concerns are, try to come up with a more palatable version, and we will see if there are margins to find a compromise.

The fact that no-one used that provision in 3 years is a good example of the fact that maybe there's no demand for that? And increasing the bureaucracy behind it it's the contrary to encourage people. I don't see any private ongoing initiative that can be an "enterprise" which justify the need of that structure... so I don't really see any real reasons why we should do that.

Quote from: Üc R. Tärfă on April 02, 2023, 02:30:19 AMYou know what our concerns are, try to come up with a more palatable version, and we will see if there are margins to find a compromise.

Just so there's no unfortunate misunderstandings, are you saying that you can indeed make a deal on behalf of your whole party, if we figure out a compromise that is to your liking?

The circumstances under which the Party President can "whip" the Free Democrats caucus in the Ziu into voting as a bloc are given in FreeDems Constitution Section XII (https://wiki.talossa.com/Free_Democrats_of_Talossa). But short of that, of course the Party Leader is entitled to negotiate on behalf of the party, subject to ratification of his approach in internal discussions.

The Free Democrats of Talossa are very conscious that - assuming we work as a team - no legislation can be passed against our wishes in this Cosa.

Then I guess you have your answer, Uc.  If you guys are going to vote against this as a bloc, then there's not any real reason to accommodate your preferences.  Better to try to pass legislation that I like and that appeals to voters, instead.  It's not possible to compromise with the uncompromising.

Again, I love any and all feedback, especially to improve form and function.  Even if I don't agree with all of it, I try to always keep an open mind.  If necessary, I'll change a bill, delay it, or yank it entirely!  Sometimes there are clever orthogonal solutions that only arise when there's a sharp discussion on an issue.  So I hope that you will still offer your thoughts and opinions on bills, even if a compromise isn't possible on your end.

Look, any time you want to pass a law to enact "fun and cool" things that don't involve setting up a form-filling bureaucracy and imposing more work on Government and Civil Service officials, we're all ears

It's true: my proposal would have probably led to more work for future Ministers of Finance.  No minister has ever had to spend a moment on adding a business to the Register of Talossan Businesses, after all.

Anyway, this is moot for the time being.  A new version is being worked up.