I repeat: Maybe the recall petition would be enough, but I'd have to see the details. And I can't imagine I'd vote for any process (either for removal or for nominating a successor) which is too complicated/has too many steps.

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on September 23, 2022, 07:18:37 AMChanges to the removal criteria were not a part of internal discussions so I can't speak for the party. But, personally, as an alternative to the confidence votes, I am open to it. I am also, personally open to the Ziu's involvement with the King making the final call.

Miestra, are these measures which would garner significant FreeDem support?

Mmmmmmmmaybe? As I said above, this has to be better for Free Democrats than the status quo to get our support. For me, a way to democratically remove a non-performing King might be enough of a sweetener to swallow a less-democratic way of choosing a successor. That way there would be something in it for Monarchists as well as Republicans, if you see what I mean. We will get nowhere if either side has an incentive to simply block any reforms because the status quo is preferable.

Quote from: Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă, GST on September 22, 2022, 07:29:13 AMI will state for the record that I agreed to co-sponsor before I knew you wanted the job, which frankly puts me in a tough spot.

But anyway, my objection is this is not necessary. The SoS can hire and fire a Deputy already on the same principle as any other member of the Royal Civil Service.

Well, as for me, all my objections as stated last week - which had nothing to do with the unfounded accusations of political bias which were stirred up by the Opposition against Dr Nordselva - still stand.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on September 21, 2022, 05:24:26 PMI'm increasingly wary of this bill because it's more "red-and-green tape". To make myself clear: I think it would be a great thing for the SoS to recruit a Deputy to the Chancery. But I'm not sure about the point of forcing him to under penalty of law - in a situation where there might not be a qualified candidate.

I've also noticed that the appointment of the Deputy by the same means as the Principal Office - rather than the Principal Office appointing their own Deputy - may well set up a scenario where the SoS and their Deputy don't get on. It's like in those US states where the Lieutenant Governor is elected separately from the Governor, rather than on a joint ticket. They might be political opponents or even from opposite parties, thus making the situation less efficient. The more I look at this, the less I like it.

PER

I can only say that you should watch the outcome of the upcoming FreeDems convention. I will only say at this point that, if this bill was conceived on the assumption that the current SoS was intending to co-hold that position indefinitely with the Presidency of the Free Dems, it was misconceived.

I should point out that, as it stands, I see no incentive for Republican Talossans - or those who want an elective monarchy - to vote for his bill, because it would be a step back (for us) from the status quo. The status quo is: on the demise or abdication of the King, the Ziu would have to name a successor by the normal OrgLaw proposal. That would be better for us than the King naming a successor.

So I don't think this bill is going anywhere this Cosa (or at any time Republicans or reformists have 67 Cosa seats) unless it has a "sweetener". Thankfully the Seneschal has started the discussion on possible sweeteners.

Hello, yes. Please to be Clarking:

• Sense of the Ziu: Living Cosa for November
• The Finance Law Reform (Here We Go Again) Bill
• The Cutting Red and Green Tapes (Domain Names) Bill

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on September 22, 2022, 10:08:38 PMthis represents a pretty careful months-long effort to bring together a number of stakeholders with very different views.

... not including any Free Democrats or Reformistàes, of course! Seriously - this is a partisan proposal, a Monarchist proposal. It's not the worst one imaginable but let's not pretend it's a new Compromise.

However, if the TNC (and, behind them, the King) were interested in actually taking a step towards compromise, we might want to consider taking the Seneschál's concerns into account by lowering the bar for removing the King as contained in the current II.4.

I must say that the track record of the King, nominating a Regent who was guaranteed to outrage majority opinion, does not give me any confidence that the incumbent could name a successor who wouldn't be bogged down in a series of divisive referenda, under this proposal. I humbly suggest that the idea of allowing the Ziu to pick a slate of possible successor, with the King making final call, would minimise the chance of a literal War of Succession.

Wait, I'm confused. Is the purpose of the bill to "ensure smooth succession in case something happens to the SoS"? Or is it "I think the SoS is politically biased, so I want to force the nomination of a Deputy from a different party to keep an eye on him"?

It is interesting that the Free Democrats convention starts in a week. If Txec dal Nordselva is no longer part of the FreeDems leadership team after that, does the whole purpose for this legislative initiative - and the other one that was voted down on this Clark - simply vanish?

Go into detail on the last section: "If the confirmation referendum described in section 5 should fail to achieve a majority any three times". Does this mean for one particular candidate, i.e. the King gets three goes at trying to impose a successor? Or, the King picks 3 different successors and each one get rejected?

I wonder whether there's merit in an opposite approach. If there's no Crown Princess, the Ziu picks a slate of 3 candidates, and the King chooses one?

In accordance with the Constitution of Fiova s.9 and Standing Orders of the General Assembly s.7, I am very pleased to nominate @Bråneu Excelsio to succeed me as Secretary of State of the Free Province of Fiova.

You have seven days to vote PER, CONTRA or AUSTÁNEU on this.

I'm increasingly wary of this bill because it's more "red-and-green tape". To make myself clear: I think it would be a great thing for the SoS to recruit a Deputy to the Chancery. But I'm not sure about the point of forcing him to under penalty of law - in a situation where there might not be a qualified candidate.

I've also noticed that the appointment of the Deputy by the same means as the Principal Office - rather than the Principal Office appointing their own Deputy - may well set up a scenario where the SoS and their Deputy don't get on. It's like in those US states where the Lieutenant Governor is elected separately from the Governor, rather than on a joint ticket. They might be political opponents or even from opposite parties, thus making the situation less efficient. The more I look at this, the less I like it.

Under El Lexhátx C.1.1, as Minister of Technology, I recommend to the King that @Lüc da Schir be appointed to the following role:


Permanent Secretary in the Office of Backend Admin, Ministry of Technology

FURTHERMORE, I notify the Crown and the Nation that the following terms of contract have been agreed between the Ministry of Technology and the recommended Permanent Secretary:

(i) The Permanent Secretary in the Office of Backend Admin shall be responsible for all back-end maintenance on the Kingdom's National Webspace, including talossa.com and TalossaWiki; including performing system backups when required, assisting in troubleshooting of system errors and any other tasks required by the Ministry of Technology in relation to the ongoing upkeep of the Kingdom's web infrastructure.

(ii) The Permanent Secretary in the Office of Backend Admin shall be responsible for maintaining at all times the passwords to the National Webspace and to the national social media accounts, and granting/removing access to these websites and accounts for the Seneschal, the Minister of STUFF, and such other responsible officials as may be named by the Government, as and when necessary.

(iii) The Permanent Secretary in the Office of Backend Admin shall also take on the role of Wittmeister, responsible for all back-end maintenance of Wittenberg as described in El Lexhatx J, under the direction of the Chancery.

Something just occurred to me about this bill. Does the bill's proposer have a suggestion for who would be the Deputy SoS? Because I'm not sure I can think of many candidates who're not overburdened with all sorts of other duties, right now.