Azul, I am pleased to post for preview a transcript of the January 2026 Informal Joint Session of the Ziu, containing the Terpelaziuns that were asked and the debate on the Clark that took place. A PDF will be generated later to be stored on the Wiki for posterity, as well as potentially creating a Wiki page.

Provisional transcript: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1o0Q0h8O3ppAll2pqWB32S-Vjm2z32FvtmvIx2h1pDp4/edit?usp=sharing

The time allotted for voting on the Clark has expired.

The Cosă and Senäts have passed the following bills and resolutions, which are sent to His Majesty @King Txec for Royal Assent:

62RZ01 - The Public Process Act Redux
Agreed to by the Cosă 180-0, by the Senäts 8-0

62RZ03 - The Túischac'h Casual Vacancy Act
Agreed to by the Cosă 133-27 (20 abstained), by the Senäts 7-1

62RZ05 - Sense of the Ziu: Big Neighbor Democratic Backsliding
Agreed to by the Cosă 98-47 (35 abstained), by the Senäts 7-0 (1 abstained) 


The Cosă and Senäts have both rejected the following bills and resolutions:

62RZ02 - Advisory Opinion Removal Amendment
Rejected by the Cosă due to missing the required supermajority 90-70 (20 abstained), rejected by the Senäts 3-5

62RZ04 - Sense of the Ziu: Restoration of National Honour
Rejected by the Cosă 63-117, by the Senäts 1-6 (1 abstained)


The Cosă passed a Vote of Confidence in the incumbent Government 82-78 (20 abstained).


Baroness Litz Cjantscheir (MC-PROG) and Andrïeu Cabischabuerg (MC-URL/NC) did not vote.




Sir Lüc da Schir, UrB
Secretary of State

I'm surprised nobody mentioned that having a Cunstaval from another province implies at least three positive things:

1. It gives typically short-staffed provincial governments one free additional warm body;

2. It provides an external arbiter to provincial politics;

3. It brings provinces closer together, by giving Cunstavais the chance to familiarise themselves with the culture of another province.


Many years ago I was advocating for a Belacostan Cunstaval in Belacosta, but that was mostly as a reaction to the very inactive Cunstaval of the day, and the equally inactive King who never returned our petitions. With term limits and the Cunstaval roster finally getting refreshed, I think the status quo is pretty satisfactory and doesn't really need reform.

Quote from: þerxh Sant-Enogat on January 17, 2026, 10:35:51 AM@Sir Lüc , sorry for the disturbance, could you please move this bill back to the Hopper ?

Sure!

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC on January 16, 2026, 02:28:07 PM

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on December 21, 2025, 01:34:28 PMI'm not familiar with any provision transferring administration of the wiki to the Chancery.  I'm fairly sure that it's a Propaganda or Technology issue, unless I missed a significant legal change.

The Government has never, to my knowledge, administered TalossaWiki. The Government is in charge of "official pages", but TalossaWiki has always been administered by the Chancery not by the Government. There has been no legal change because the Government has never done this, and it has been the Chancery that keeps it ticking on in the background.

Actually, I'm quite surprised to note that apparently there is no legal establishment for TalossaWiki - I don't even know who set it up! Quite apart from the noxious and authoritarian s.7 of this bill, another weakness it shows is that s.4 is entirely in the passive voice - it doesn't say who administers Talossawiki.

If the Government does want to end the ambiguity and place TalossaWiki administration within its competences, this might be a good thing - if it means setting up effective moderation and surveillance, thus removing any excuse for Government Ministers to take citizens to court for disfavored speech.

TalossaWiki has never been administered by the Chancery, it actually was a MinStuff project and theoretically was administered by the same, as long as that ministry existed anyways, although it's always been a pretty hands off thing. In the end, it's mostly been me and the King and a few other changing admins doing the little admin work there was to do.

Done for both bills you requested to be moved.

Happy birthday your Majesty!

Quote from: Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP on January 12, 2026, 11:50:26 AMI believe D:nă Schivă voted PER on RZ05 during the Joint Session.

Thank you for reminding me of that, I inadvertently skipped over that line in my notes. The record has been corrected.

The following votes were cast during yesterday's Informal Joint Session and added to the Database shortly afterwards:

Béneditsch Ardpresteir: RZ1: Per, RZ2: Contră, RZ3: Per, RZ4: Per, RZ5: Per
Alexandreu Davinescu: RZ1: Per, RZ2: Per, RZ3: Per, RZ4: Contră, RZ5: Per

The following votes were cast during yesterday's Informal Joint Session and added to the Database shortly afterwards:

Miestră Schivă: RZ1: Per, RZ2: Contră, RZ3: Per, RZ4: Contră, RZ5: Per, VoC: Non
Garth Spencer: RZ1: Per, RZ2: Contră, RZ3: Per, RZ4: Contră, RZ5: Per, VoC: Non
Marcel Tafial: RZ1: Per, RZ2: Contră, RZ3: Per, RZ4: Contră, RZ5: Per, VoC: Non

MCs Mic'haglh Autófil and Breneir Tzaracomprada re-stated the same votes they had already cast beforehand.

The State Opening and Joint Informal Session is underway! https://unipd.zoom.us/j/88582238457?pwd=lrVZ5swd4T9ULUrviBoeHx9HjeiNm3.1

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on January 10, 2026, 08:08:02 AMThe King may debate, but not vote. The Secretary of State may do neither. No one else can speak unless invited to do so, which is what a terpelaziun does.

While I mostly agree with you, as long as we don't have precedents or rules governing it, what you said is opinion and not fact - moreso because the Seneschal doesn't and shouldn't have any particular authority over the Ziu's operations.

Parliaments worldwide handle this stuff in wildly different ways and since the Ziu is not based on any individual one, we just can't make gut-feeling assumptions.

Quote from: Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP on January 10, 2026, 08:56:20 AMIt's an interesting question, actually. In Germany, ministers who aren't MPs are allowed to participate in debates when the bill in question is on a topic that's part of their portfolio, in order to represent Government policies. I would be in favour of allowing something like this in Talossa, too.

And this is precisely a perfect example of what I was getting at.

The Chancery is in receipt of this request and hereby confirms it has reassigned Iac Marscheir to be a citizen of Belacostă, pursuant to Lex.E.7.3, E.7.3.1 and E.7.5.



Sir Lüc da Schir
Secretar d'Estat / Secretary of State

A multi-part question came up as I was writing the mailer.

• The King can not hold any seats in either house, but he is Organically a member of the Ziu as the Crown-in-Parliament. He can also Hopper and Clark bills. As such, can the King take part in debate on bills? As a kind-of-MZ, should the King be able to vote on procedural issues?
• The Secretary of State also can not hold any seats in either house, and is not a member of the Ziu either; but he is the other non-MC and non-Senator who can Hopper and Clark bills. As such, can the SoS take part in debate on bills?
• Ministers are not required to hold seats in the Ziu and historically some didn't, as is the case of the current MinTech. Can any such non-MZ ministers take part in debate, or are they restricted to only answering Terpelaziuns, or are they barred from speaking altogether?

(This kind of boils down to how strict floor privilege is considered to be in Talossa, which is an unexplored matter. It's not too important an issue, but it would be helpful to know for sure beforehand.)

Right, the meeting link will be https://unipd.zoom.us/j/88582238457?pwd=lrVZ5swd4T9ULUrviBoeHx9HjeiNm3.1. See you all there on Sunday!

If that's fine by @Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP , I'll take care of it. I don't know if Zoom requires accounts for everyone involved though, that could be a barrier to participation.

My own advice:

• 1b could make sense because, if Marcel has to take an unexpected break while the Mençei is not attending, the only recourse is recess. I disagree a temporary deputy would have arbitrary powers.
• 2b's second sentence is unclear - does it say that the motion to add an item requires a second to be voted on, or that an item can be added to the agenda by a proponent and a second, without a vote? In the first case, the second sentence should read "to be voted on" rather than "to be added"; in the second case, referring to the mechanism as a motion is probably incorrect, and either way the second sentence should say "such an item" instead of "such a motion"
• In 2c, I am not too sure why the shortest a recess can be is 10 minutes and not something unspecified or simply shorter
• 3b might allow for a deputy to the Tanaischteu in case they can't attend during Terps or at all
• 4b has a typo ("another member to speaker")

• I agree 5e's 2/3rds requirement to end debate is potentially dangerous on its own, unless the motion to start debate includes a time limit
• 6a has a typo ("billed")

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on January 08, 2026, 07:01:36 PM@Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP , we should probably see if anyone has a version of zoom or teams or something that can do long meetings, so we're not limited to the free 40 minutes.

I have the full Zoom version, if necessary. Last time we had a State Opening, I was Túischac'h and I picked meet.jit.si (jitsi.org) as the videocall tool. I don't remember if three were any issues with it, but it is completely free and doesn't require accounts.

Two things:

1) I plan on sending a reminder to MZs and non-MZ Cabinet ministers, and a separate invitation for the wider citizenry, ideally on Saturday at the latest. The people in charge should let me know, here or somewhere more convenient, about as many details as they wish me to put in the mailers (eg. videocall link, final/tentative program, time and date, etc.)

2) The Chancery would be happy to assist with putting together a PDF version of an Order Paper, for reference and as a memento. Material like that is probably under the whole purview of the Ziu's presiding officers, actually, since it's something separate from the Clark; but since I don't think I have much else to do besides just showing up on the videocall to tally votes, I am happy to help if it's something people would like.

Voting on the January 2026 Clark (the first of the 62nd Cosă) is now open, until the 21st of the month, at 19h30 TST.

You can find the Clark at: https://database.talossa.com/ziu/clark (database) or at https://wiki.talossa.com/images/e/eb/January2026Clark.pdf (pdf)

MCs and Senators can all vote on the new Database using the credentials you already had (for returning members) or those I sent you a few days ago (for new members): https://database.talossa.com/ziu/clark/vote

If you wish to vote on Wittenberg, MCs can vote here and Senators can vote here.

A State Opening followed by a quasi-Living Cosă is scheduled for the 11th of January at 11 AM TST. You will all be able to cast your votes on the Clark on that occasion as well.




Sir Lüc da Schir, UrB
Secretary of State