I will state this clearly, as it may have been missed,  although ideas have been mentioned, I have stated that until the treaty has been ratified (should it be) we won't be discussing said proposals. Only should this be ratified will we discuss them in any detail.

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on Yesterday at 04:43:24 PM

Quote from: Antaglha Xhenerös Somelieir on Yesterday at 04:41:40 PMAlso as I said earlier there is more than jsut this specific nation of Carossa to consider with thinking to accept this treaty. Which I have noticed that neither you or AD have mentioned or responded too.

Minister Somelieir, I look forward to knowing more about these joint projects if they are not secret as the King states. I, for one, do not have enough information as was expressed in a terpelaziun and here now, to vote in support of this treaty. [Restating should it be necessary]

I have already stated that I would rather the king not have mentioned the specific projects yet.

Also you seem so concerned about the ministry's position on not announcing thing before they are ready, which I am perfectly entitled to do by law, as was stated in the terp post you mentioned earlier.

And it isn't like you have refuted the reasons I have given to not announce things yet (for credibility of and for the sake of Talossa and trust in out nation from the international community). Can I ask you, what is the issue you have with this? It just sounds like you're throwing a tantrum for not being a part of the discussions and are refusing to listen to reason. And keep on making the same tired points without offering anything new.


Also, I made a whole post about other benefits to the internal infrastructure of Talossa and this as a good trial case for our nation which was just ignored. And is revelevant to the discussion of this treaty, in a broader sense.

I will also say, the king and we are working on this. I would rather the ideas not have been mentioned, but they are the same proposals I was thinking of when I made my earlier comments.

And as the king said, we are just being extra careful in our approach for both our reputation on the world stage, and to put forward proposals that we can back as a ministry and nation, instead of presenting half baked ideas to the nation which is not good for the credibility of ministry of foreign affairs or Talossa in general. And can make the ministry look foolish, announcing something ahead of time, when it isn't ready.

Also as I said earlier there is more than jsut this specific nation of Carossa to consider with thinking to accept this treaty. Which I have noticed that neither you or AD have mentioned or responded too.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on Yesterday at 04:16:25 PMThere are specific proposals for joint activities, but you won't tell us until after we've already voted?!

I don't understand the secrecy here. Finding out information about these people has been like pulling teeth, and I have no idea why.

The proposals are in too early stages to be made public, and need to discuss things with Carcosa and internally with cabinet before making any announcement, and until the treaty is ratified or rejected, no future discussions will be held on our end in the projects. It's not a fact of keeping it secret per se but it is more about being careful as it's better to present a completed proposal than a half baked idea to the Ziu and our people.

With getting information from them, I understand and share your frustrations there. But I hope that they respond satisfactory before this goes up for a vote.

Although I still think my earlier points make sense from a logistical stand point for the foreign ministry.

If I may, I think that adopting this treaty would be a great learning experience for Talossa. We are fairly new to having relations witb micronations, and honestly we do have issues with activity ourselves.

I believe we need to proceed with ratifying this, under the assumption that, it will help us to gauge what we are prepared for as a nation. And that we can help prepare for relations with larger and better known micronations one day. But right now we don't know what we may need or how that might go. So I believe this is a good way to test our current capabilities and help us to prepare for future relations.

Yes this may end up failing, but in that case there is nothing to stop the Ziu from revoking the treaty and the recognition in the future. However that is on the assumption of things failing.

We have had a proposal from them to discuss a specific joint venture already, although those details will be discussed and disclosed later if this is ratified.

Indications so far is that they are interested and are responding to people here, if a bit delayed. And are committed to making this work. As I believe we would should this be ratified.

It is a risk and an unknown, yes, but that will always be the case with international treaties so it's better to learn and make mistakes now with a smaller nation than later with a larger more well known one

[Disclaimer] Whilst I disagree with the legal need for this to be hoppered, The SoS disagrees so in this instance I will go along with what is asked to not delay the ratification, but will look into working with the SoS to clear things up for future cases. [end of disclaimer]

WHEREAS there has come before the Kingdom of Talossa an opportunity for mutual respect and recognition with another micronation; and

WHEREAS the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, working together with the King, have found the people and government of Carcosa to be lively and worth our notice; and

WHEREAS it is an express wish of the King that Talossa establish relations with nations of worth;

BE it resolved therefore by the King, Cosa, and Senäts assembled that the Treaty between The Kingdoms of Talossa and Carcosa shall be ratified.

Uréu q'estadra så:

Antaglha Xhenerös Somelieir (Minister of Foreign Affairs/Senator ¡Avant!)
Txec Regeu (King of Talossa)
Mic'haglh Autófil (Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs/MC ¡Avant!)

Quote

Treaty Between The Kingdoms of Talossa and Carcosa

"Be is resolved by our joint respective governments, that The Kingdom of Talossa and the Kingdom of Carcosa by ratification in our respective governments do hereby declare in this joint treaty:-

1. The kingdoms of Talossa and Carcosa (from now on referred to as Talossa and Carcosa respectively) do formally recognise each others sovereignty for as long as our respective governments consent
2. Each nation of Talossa and Carcosa shall set up "Embassies" and appoint ambassadors to represent our nations, and to create a point of contact for each nation. Whilst formally maintaining diplomatic relations
3. Talossa and Carcosa shall look into mutual projects and cooperation on a case by case basis, and shall present such agreements to our respective governments approval

Be it resolved that this is ratified upon passage of both our respective governments.


Signed on behalf of Talossa by:-

His Majesty King Txec of Talossa
Txec R

Antaglha Xhenerös Somelieir
Minister of Foreign Affairs of Talossa

On behalf of Carcosa:-

Hastyr Aldebaran
His Majesty the King in Yellow of Carcosa

Cormac KT
Secretary of State of Carcosa"


Should the Ziu ratify this treaty, and Carcosa's government does the same, the treaty shall come into force.

However if after my above explaination the SoS still thinks it needs to be hoppered, although I personally would disagree, I will hopper it as the SoS asks (although I also think that getting an objective legal advice from the Cort on this might be useful for the future so we have a clear answer on what is required by law) and hopper this as asked.

Quote from: Sir Lüc on June 06, 2025, 02:17:16 AMI do not agree that "items that are not legislation" should skip the Hopper. The Hopper does contain items that do not have the force of law - Senses of the Ziu are the easiest example of a resolution that doesn't seek to make or amend legislation.

In any case, this is not even a nonbinding resolution, as its passage is not inconsequential (on the contrary, it is required) for the treaty to take effect.

As such, a simple resolution adopting the treaty will need to be Hoppered, same as any other item on the Clark. It might skip the CRL according to Lexh.H.2.1.2.2, depending on its interpretation.

The reason I believe that this is something that is something that shouldn't need to be hoppered isn't because it "isn't legislation" but due to the section of law I quoted at the start. The treaty only requires ratification from the Ziu. Which is a different process than senses of the Ziu or legislation. Also I have already stated that this isn't something that the text of the treaty can be changed one sidedly. But yeah all that i understand that needs to happen is that the Ziu approves of the treaty by a ratifying the treaty. As it is specifically mentioned in a section of its own in law. Which only says it needs to be "ratified" by the Ziu, which is the reason I believe it is legally different than items than need to be hoppered,

Quote from: King Txec on June 02, 2025, 08:20:16 AMAzul Florencia. It is with pleasure that I hereby appoint as Cunstaval the Right Honourable Antaglha Xhenerös Somelieir. Thank you for agreeing to serve in this vital role and to represent the Crown.

-Txec R

I thank his majesty for the trust shown in appointing myself to the position of Cunstaval for Florencia.

To the people of Florencia, I shall do my best in my role to fulfill my responsibilities and duties to the best of my ability and I shall be available for the citizens of this province to contact me should they feel the need too. And please ping me when I am needed.

Antaglha Xhenerös Somelieir
Cunstaval of Florencia

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on June 05, 2025, 12:41:23 PM

Quote from: Antaglha Xhenerös Somelieir on June 05, 2025, 12:32:22 PM2. Each nation of Talossa and Carcosa shall set up "Embassies" and appoint ambassadors to represent our nations, and to create a point of contact for each nation. Whilst formally maintaining diplomatic relations

I'm unable to find a website for Carcosa just a Discord link. Where would the embassies be located?

This is something that we shall discuss with Carcosa once this treaty is ratified (should it be ratified)

And as per their operations this is a quote from their Mandator (head of government) on their operations for transparency

" I'd like to clarify that our micronation is not solely represented by our Discord server—it serves more as an outreach platform. Our true governance, territory, and land management take place within the core of our micronation. Please understand that any inactivity you might observe on the server doesn't reflect the full scope of our operations, as we focus on real-world matters that demand our attention."

So location of an embassy would need further discussion as I have earlier stated

As per El lex
2.6.4. Any Treaty or agreements with any nation, micronation or organisation, that
a) has the force of law in Talossa;
b) relates to the official recognition of a foreign nation; or
c) relates to forming or joining any sort of alliance with another nation or micronation,
will only be valid upon ratification by the Ziu.

I present to the Ziu the agreed treaty between the Kingdom of Talossa and the Kingdom of Carcosa for ratification. So I ask that the Secretary of State @Sir Lüc to include this in the July (or next) Clark with the exact text as follows for the Ziu to ratify the treaty.

The treaty is as follows:-

"Be is resolved by our joint respective governments, that The Kingdom of Talossa and the Kingdom of Carcosa by ratification in our respective governments do hereby declare in this joint treaty:-

1. The kingdoms of Talossa and Carcosa (from now on referred to as Talossa and Carcosa respectively) do formally recognise each others sovereignty for as long as our respective governments consent
2. Each nation of Talossa and Carcosa shall set up "Embassies" and appoint ambassadors to represent our nations, and to create a point of contact for each nation. Whilst formally maintaining diplomatic relations
3. Talossa and Carcosa shall look into mutual projects and cooperation on a case by case basis, and shall present such agreements to our respective governments approval

Be it resolved that this is ratified upon passage of both our respective governments.


Signed on behalf of Talossa by:-

His Majesty King Txec of Talossa
Txec R

Antaglha Xhenerös Somelieir
Minister of Foreign Affairs of Talossa

On behalf of Carcosa:-

Hastyr Aldebaran
His Majesty the King in Yellow of Carcosa

Cormac KT
Secretary of State of Carcosa"


Should the Ziu ratify this treaty, and Carcosa's government does the same, the treaty shall come into force.

Antaglha Xhenerös Somelieir
Minister of Foreign Affairs

(As this is not legislation and isn't something that can easily be amended without reopening negotiations, I do not believe under the law this needs to go to the hopper, but it is something that requires a vote in the Ziu hence asking the SoS to Clark this on the next available Clark)

It appears that the member missed when I said this :-

" But for others. We will happily engage with reasonable questions and feedback from other members other than the member who brought this terp except in mandatory terp responses which won't be to this members liking I imagine"

I never said I would not be answering terps from the member, just that they won't be to the members liking going forward.

I clarify that the above is only in reference to the above member and not the Ziu or my official duties as minister

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on June 04, 2025, 06:02:25 PM

Quote from: Antaglha Xhenerös Somelieir on June 04, 2025, 05:34:45 PM

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on June 04, 2025, 05:18:55 PM

Quote from: Antaglha Xhenerös Somelieir on June 04, 2025, 04:52:42 PMI thank the member for their question, The ministry is currently looking into options of what would work for Talossa and we are working on possible nations to form relations with. But we are not yet ready to announce any details as things are being worked out.

Specifically with events or groups, these are currently on lower priority but is something we are looking into and will update the nation if there is any progress.

I will advise the member that until details are ready to be made public on relations or events, it will often be difficult to provide much information on, as by nature of any discussions needed to take place to participate in events/groups, or cooperation with other micronations, such discussions are required to remain confidential until such a time where the ministry is able to announce an agreement of some kind has been made. Due to the nature of having to work with other nations in order to participate on a larger stage.
I hope the member can understand this and exercise patience until the ministry is able to make such announcements

I thank the Minister for her very rapid response. But note very little information is included in it beyond a request for patience unfortunately. I will check in again in July, which will be Month 3 of this term, and will expect more than a request for patience or that discussions are confidential when reporting to the Ziu.

If I may respond to this, What I have said, is in line with how pretty much all foreign ministries operate around the world. Especially as a lot of foreign affairs handle matters that cannot be made public until agreements are made from Talossa and foreign nations. I have answered in the way I have as it would go against to interests of Talossa and the foreign ministry's ability to work on such agreements if a blow by blow account is needed each month. It is not as simple as a ministry operating solely within Talossa as the ministry of foreign affairs handles relations and negotiations with other nations. As such, confidentiality is a needed element of the ministry, even before the Ziu, until such a time when things can be disclosed.

And the members assertion that confidential matters should be disclosed before they are ready, is against the interests of Talossa on a global stage. Which the member should be aware of and able to understand the ministry's position on this matter.

Mr. Speaker,

This is a change in the answers from the Foreign Affairs Ministry during just the last term. When a similar terpelaziun was lodged last term, S:reu Puntsmasleu was able to answer with specific information without concern for harming Talossa on the global stage.

For Minister Somelieir's assistance, here is how a Minister is able to answer the question without hiding behind confidentiality or requests for patience:

Quote"A new approach being considered to augment, not replace, the current is to ask of our new friends in Aerica to put us in contact with other nations. Another approach being considered is to apply for membership in an intermicronational organization (perhaps LoSS, as we had a role in forming that, or GUM). There is also the possibility of working on a joint project with other micronations in order to 1.) build our reputation in the micronational community and 2.) do general goodin the world. The cabinet has discussed a project involving climate change in Antarctica, given our territorial claims there. A logical partner for us would be Westarctica, although we would have to put aside, at least temporarily, our competing claims."

Notice, the answer includes actual organizations and the name of at least one micronation demonstrating some ministerial activity. And Talossa's global image did not appear to suffer any great damage with this disclosure. The Opposition expects actual answers to enquiries and not requests for patience or appeals to confidentiality which do not allow for insight into the activities of the Ministry nor for accountable government. We will enquire in July, and as suggested, expect an answer that does more than request patience.

I remind the member that although this may have been the policy in the past to respond as the previous minister, I will point out that I am not said minister and I am following international precedent in my role.
Also I may also point out that the response from the previous minster quoted is a perfect example of why we shouldn't announce things before they are ready, as to my knowledge very little, if any at all of those things mentioned in the quote from the member actually came to be.

It is much better to present something tangible to the Ziu than empty promises that have made no progress since they were made.

And as the member has little to offer in understanding, it will be our policy from now on in this ministry to give only the bare minimum, mandatory responses to the member in question. As there has been a breakdown in respect and understanding between this ministry and said members, we shall simply interact as little as possible.

But for others. We will happily engage with reasonable questions and feedback from other members other than the member who brought this terp except in mandatory terp responses which won't be to this members liking I imagine