Citizens,

I am announcing my resignation as Grefieir d'Abbavilla. There have been some warm-hearted concerns expressed about the toll the wide array of responsibilities I have taken on may take personally. I have heard them and taken them to heart. To remain focused on the most important priorities and discharge my responsibilities with competence and respect for the people I will leave this role to be assumed by someone else.

I assume I will be in a caretaker status until a new appointment is made. I share this notification with the Avocat-Xheneral @Baron Alexandreu Davinescu

Thank you,
Breneir

Quote from: Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB on April 13, 2023, 01:41:18 PM

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on March 11, 2023, 08:06:19 PMA new section 7.13 is added as follows:

Quote7.13 The Ministry of Immigration is encouraged to review catchment areas for potential updates no less than every five (5) years.

What if you said in this section something more like "The Ministry of Immigration shall review catchment areas and propose updates to the Ziu if required every even numbered Cosa." or something more like that? Ambiguity in laws is probably not a good way to go.

Thank you @Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB
@Baron Alexandreu Davinescu and Uc any objections to this proposal?

Change made. Any other folks have suggestions for revisions before this is clarked.

Quote from: Üc R. Tärfă on April 13, 2023, 11:03:00 AM

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on April 13, 2023, 10:46:57 AM

Quote from: Üc R. Tärfă on April 13, 2023, 10:31:55 AMI oppose the reporting/reviewing requirement you brought back in the encouraging language only when the bill arrived to the CRL to address Alexandreu concerns that can - and are - resolved by the simpler section he proposed (with the correction I made).

Thank you for clarifying.

Wasn't that clear enough on the 30th of March?

I will take that as a sideways yes...

Quote from: Üc R. Tärfă on April 13, 2023, 10:31:55 AMI oppose the reporting/reviewing requirement you brought back in the encouraging language only when the bill arrived to the CRL to address Alexandreu concerns that can - and are - resolved by the simpler section he proposed (with the correction I made).

Thank you for clarifying.
Are you saying that you can support the bill with the Baron's suggestion replacing the current 7.13?
If that is the case then while I would prefer the review requirement be explicit I will take on that revision and remove the current 7.13.

Quote from: Üc R. Tärfă on April 13, 2023, 10:17:49 AMJust to be clear: you asked if everyone had issues and I said yes.

And I also said that Alexandreu addition sounds good because it address a possible flaw in the law (even if very remote)- if the change I pointed out is made.

You are the one that declared that you were trying to make a bipartisan bill, and you are the one now that is saying that after all no, you are not interested at all.

I will restate for the third time. The section in question is to be included BUT if you have suggestions for edits that address your concern on principle then I am all ears. Ian opposed the reporting requirement and it was removed. Baron asked for language changed to be reflected and it was done. Miestra asked for feedback from a Vuodean and it happened. There have been multiple suggestions accommodated in this bill.

Quote from: Üc R. Tärfă on April 13, 2023, 09:14:12 AM

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on April 13, 2023, 09:09:52 AM

Quote from: Üc R. Tärfă on April 13, 2023, 09:07:36 AM

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on April 13, 2023, 08:58:11 AMYou typed many words without adding to the discussion. As I just stated I want that language included because we need to regularly review catchment areas not leave it to the whim of one superactive citizen.

And as I just stated I stand by the objections I already made and those made by Senator @Ian Plätschisch, you just need to click on the arrow below to read previous posts in this thread. I won't write again exactly what I and others already wrote.

Ok. So vote against the bill and let the people decide who is correct during the next election.

Or you can clark it without that section.

Or you can just split this bill in two if you really want to try to add that section: one with all the others sections and one with just that section.

Or I can clark a bill with the same text without that section, and you can vote against the bill and let the people decide who is correct during the next election.

Yes let the people decide. The section in question is staying. Reviewers are free to suggested edits to address purported concerns on principle but the reason for its inclusion is logical and based on principle as well. You are free to propose whatever you like.

Quote from: Üc R. Tärfă on April 13, 2023, 09:07:36 AM

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on April 13, 2023, 08:58:11 AMYou typed many words without adding to the discussion. As I just stated I want that language included because we need to regularly review catchment areas not leave it to the whim of one superactive citizen.

And as I just stated I stand by the objections I already made and those made by Senator @Ian Plätschisch, you just need to click on the arrow below to read previous posts in this thread. I won't write again exactly what I and others already wrote.

Ok. So vote against the bill and let the people decide who is correct during the next election.

Quote from: Üc R. Tärfă on April 13, 2023, 08:31:51 AM

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on April 13, 2023, 08:15:18 AM

Quote from: Üc R. Tärfă on April 13, 2023, 05:34:24 AM

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on April 13, 2023, 05:08:08 AM

Quote from: Üc R. Tärfă on April 13, 2023, 01:35:46 AMThe same issue I had with your proposed 7.13.

So no major issues then. This appears to be ready for clarking.

Well, a massive issue if you Clark it with that section as it stands now.

No

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on April 13, 2023, 06:59:42 AMPerhaps a new 7.14, reading, "The Ministry of Immigration shall have the discretion to determine appropriate provincial assignment when the statutory guidance is unclear or deprecated."  Or this could replace the proposed 7.13, if it suits the purpose.

Thanks Baron. I'll add a new 7.14. If someone has a better way to state 7.13 I am all ears but I would like to include some language that regularizes catchment area review. Ad-hoc and haphazard catchment area review is insufficient.

What does "no" means to you? I'm puzzled.

I said that there are massive issues if you'd Clark it with 7.13.

You replied "No".

And then you said that you are willing to include that section?

I appreciate Alexandreu addition, but I must stress that it is up to the Secretary of State and not the Minister of Immigration to determine the provincial assignment (Lexh.E.7).

However the issues on principle with 7.13 still stands, it's not only a problem of language.

You typed many words without adding to the discussion. As I just stated I want that language included because we need to regularly review catchment areas not leave it to the whim of one superactive citizen.

Quote from: Üc R. Tärfă on April 13, 2023, 05:34:24 AM

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on April 13, 2023, 05:08:08 AM

Quote from: Üc R. Tärfă on April 13, 2023, 01:35:46 AMThe same issue I had with your proposed 7.13.

So no major issues then. This appears to be ready for clarking.

Well, a massive issue if you Clark it with that section as it stands now.

No

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on April 13, 2023, 06:59:42 AMPerhaps a new 7.14, reading, "The Ministry of Immigration shall have the discretion to determine appropriate provincial assignment when the statutory guidance is unclear or deprecated."  Or this could replace the proposed 7.13, if it suits the purpose.

Thanks Baron. I'll add a new 7.14. If someone has a better way to state 7.13 I am all ears but I would like to include some language that regularizes catchment area review. Ad-hoc and haphazard catchment area review is insufficient.

Quote from: Üc R. Tärfă on April 13, 2023, 01:35:46 AMThe same issue I had with your proposed 7.13.

So no major issues then. This appears to be ready for clarking.

If there are any outstanding issues please let me know. I'm planning on submitting this for the third clark.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on April 12, 2023, 07:44:56 PMWhew, fun stuff!  Can't wait to get that to Breneir and see it up on YouTube.  I can't believe you went on that long-winded rant about how people need to be more open to furries in Talossa, Ian.  That's right, folks -- check out the episode if you want to see it!

 ;D

May the love of a lifetime shared together light the darkness of your grief. Manus, you and your family will be in my prayers.

11 April 2023 - BHAID sends aid to the White Helmets

---

---

The Bureau for Humanitarian Aid and International Development is nearing its 10-year anniversary so I want to thank Minister @Bråneu Excelsio for appointing me as its third Administrator. As my first act it is my pleasure to confirm the disbursement of aid funds (50 USD) to the Syrian Civil Defence (White Helmets) as Talossa's small but meaningful response to the devastating earthquakes in Türkiye and Syria. I have consulted with the Burgermeister of Inland Revenue @xpb that funds will be disbursed after the required statutory waiting period of fourteen (14) days.