Whilst I understand the above about being disrespectful, which is something we do need to do our best not to be, i cant help but notice that the criticisms, that Miestra has put forward in her first comment, and her follow up comments on how this will HELP the TNC, have not been address, yes you have every right to call out what you see as disrespectful behaviour, but not at the cost of avoiding valid political points, and using that as a Deflection.

So with the above said, what is, in your opinion, there to gain from this alliance, especially given Mximo's pattern of flip flopping, and valid points about why Mximo left the ZRT, that Miestra raised? These are valid points that i believe warrant a response from the TNC

The Ministry is still interested in pursuing with the College

I thank the senator for the Question
The past month has, on my part, been fairly quiet with the MinCulture, partly with mh issues, partly with nothing being drawn to my attention. I will see what the ministry is able to do over the coming month to improve activity in the ministry. Although (i had planned to announce this soon) from the 26th - 11/12th November i will be away (end dates might change (on holiday to finland) internet might be available, but not reliable, and will ask my deputies to be active on behalf in that period, which will mean if the next months terp is around the same timing as this month, i will not be able to guarantee i can reply within the period required by law, but will arrange that someone in the Ministry would do so on my behalf

Another point i wish to raise with the Baron, is that you already knew what the Free Democrats and other parties had come to as a compromise position ourselves, which we has stated previously, represented a lot of red lines on our side, and yet, you bring up a proposal, calling it a solution, with prior knowledge of what i have already said, and no negotiations with us, so i ask, how did you think this being proposed would go? As, as far as i can see it, based on the current makeup of the Ziu, i cannot see this passing. Also, i am not saying i am not interested in a compromise, as you have suggested above, also having red lines, despite your position, does NOT mean that the individual is opposed to negotiations, it means that there is a base line of principles they can't go past, i concede that my own views and the views in the bill proposed i dont think can be bridged, especially if, by your own admission, you have little room to manoeuvre yourself. So it is a little rich saying you cant change my mind on things, when your own position is essentially the same. But i honestly feel that the honest middle of the road of positions was the compromise bill we have been proposing, but the goalposts kept being moved in a monarchist direction. But a monarchy without democratic accountability, without being able for the Ziu to dismiss them outside of extreme circumstances, is just not something most of the people, if not all, of the Free Democrats, which holds and represents a large percentage of the views in Talossa, can accept. And that idea is basically being dismissed almost out of hand. So, whilst this might be a compromise amongst the monarchists, i do ask you, how is this a true compromise with people on our side of this debate? Because honestly, i cannot see that it is.

Also, i have one more question, do you know who, if this does somehow pass, the King might present as an heir? As another issue i can see, is that even if this is passed, somehow, is who a possible heir might be, in line with this bill, as if it is someone not palitible to one side of talossa, and that somehow is shoehorned through, a large portion of the population will be alienated in the country. Which is why i said what i said earlier, without some democratic safeguards from the Zui in this matter, as that makes it more likely a cross party support is reached. Also it doesn't solve the fact that a large portion of people would like some sort of term limits on the monarchy too (and your previous arguments dismissing the concept of elected monarchies when they have existed for millenia, and the fact that the current monarch was ELECTED, doesn't have much grounding in facts) is something that i cant see something like this being passed without. This just feels like alot of the concerns raised just by having the compromise bill we have been proposing have been dismissed and ignored as unimportant in the eyes of your party, which makes it harder to support this. So i ask, why the step BACKWARDS from what we were proposing, and not an olive branch towards our side? As i believe if you were serious about reaching a middle ground, these things should have been addressed with us before such a proposal was made. But it wasnt. So i just dont understand how this can honestly be thought of as a "middle of the road" proposal when is is so far from the middle its like a speck of dust in the far distance.

Ok, whilst I can appreciate that this is some movement from the TNC on this front, i in all good conscious vote for, nor support a bill that will give the Monarch a say over their successor, or any possible veto, In all honesty, i don't feel comfortable straying away from the compromise too much, but that doesn't seem like it can go anywhere at the moment. But my personal absolute red line, is that the ZUI proposes and votes (with a 2/3 majority in each chamber) on a successor, and that person is confirmed by the people in a referendum. Separate from the Monarch and institution of the Monarchy. IF it will help, i would concede to it happening before the monarch abdicates, dies etc, but that is the most i feel i could personally support, also this is not an attack on these proposals, and i appreciate that something has been proposed, i am just stating my own personal boundaries with proposed changes on this

I thank the Senator for his question and i would ask my deputy @Miestră Schivă, UrN to answer on the ministries behalf this being in her Portfolio

Quote from: Mic'haglh Autófil, MoFA on July 22, 2022, 07:39:34 PM

Quote from: Antaglha Xhenerös Somelieir on July 22, 2022, 07:02:25 PM

Quote from: Mic'haglh Autófil, MoFA on July 22, 2022, 06:57:43 PM

Quote from: Antaglha Xhenerös Somelieir on July 22, 2022, 06:46:48 PM
My apologies for a delayed reply to this, REH was correct in using the topics above as examples, and i welcome that the college is eager to help with this, and as we have already talked about letters patent, that i think may as well be the first project, whilst i work out what other projects can be worked on, and once designs have been made, then will hopefully have further ideas to bring to the college.

As I envision it, the letters patent form the template that gets more specialized for other purposes, but I'll leave the determination of whether that's acceptable up to the Minister.

- TLF

That is true, and what i am thinking in regards of that, is that perhaps different categories are made under the umbrella of letters patent, with each sub category having a seperate template to use for the needed purpose?

Basically, yes. "Letters patent" is sort of a broad category that includes a bunch of other things we're thinking of, that can include grants of arms, honors, letters of credit (ambassadors), etc.

I am aware of the above, i think maybe, to start letters patent on the issuance of Arms can be done first, then honours, and after which we can look into other options but yeah if we start with one template, at least then the ball would have started to roll. (Also, i apologise for not replying earlier, i forgot that i hadn't, and after checking just now, i realised my mistake), but yes, if we start on Letters patent re Arms then we can move onto other areas, after further discussion

Quote from: Mic'haglh Autófil, MoFA on July 22, 2022, 06:57:43 PM

Quote from: Antaglha Xhenerös Somelieir on July 22, 2022, 06:46:48 PM
My apologies for a delayed reply to this, REH was correct in using the topics above as examples, and i welcome that the college is eager to help with this, and as we have already talked about letters patent, that i think may as well be the first project, whilst i work out what other projects can be worked on, and once designs have been made, then will hopefully have further ideas to bring to the college.

As I envision it, the letters patent form the template that gets more specialized for other purposes, but I'll leave the determination of whether that's acceptable up to the Minister.

- TLF

That is true, and what i am thinking in regards of that, is that perhaps different categories are made under the umbrella of letters patent, with each sub category having a seperate template to use for the needed purpose?

My apologies for a delayed reply to this, REH was correct in using the topics above as examples, and i welcome that the college is eager to help with this, and as we have already talked about letters patent, that i think may as well be the first project, whilst i work out what other projects can be worked on, and once designs have been made, then will hopefully have further ideas to bring to the college.

Hello all,
This is to let everyone know tht on Tuesday 12th July 2022 @Mic'haglh Autófil, MoFA will be hosting the first trivia night stream, and i will leave it for Mic'haglh to announce times and how this will take place in replies to this announcement.

But the date of Tuesday 12th July is set, sorry for the short notice, this was only confirmed recently.
I hope as many as possible are able to join.

Antaglha Xhenerös Somelieir
Ministră dal Cúltură/Minister for Culture

Túischac'h
I thank the Senator for his question, we are due to announce details on this in the next few days, as things are being worked out behind scenes still, but we are almost ready to announce something on this in the next few days. The main progress has been fairly recent, but progress is being made with an announcement coming soon.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on June 26, 2022, 11:36:10 PM

Quote from: Antaglha Xhenerös Somelieir on June 26, 2022, 08:00:43 PM

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on June 25, 2022, 05:27:06 PM

Quote from: Ian Plätschisch on June 11, 2022, 04:42:54 PM

[li$i] Creating physical items of Talossanity: 33¤20 ($50)
[/li][/list]

Sorry I'm only seeing this now, but a question: to what does this refer?  As far as I can tell, this could refer to just about any physical object

Hi, the Senechal has asked myself to respond to this, with this, it refers to costs of making physical trappings of monarchy, as per the coalition agreement, and is something have approached the CoA in designs for, but yes, this is for costs pertaining to making such items. What these are and final costs are not known yet, as those plans are in early stages, so we are reserving a sum in the budget for such a time where we are in a position to make physical items that we come up with. I know this is still vague, but the concepts are still in early stages.[/list]

That seems like a really complicated way of not answering the question.  I read that through three times, and I can't find any sort of answer beyond repeating the phrase "physical trappings of monarchy."

What are some of the things that you might have in mind?  Are we talking about a crown or does this refer to a ream of nice paper?

I am pretty sure, that most people will understand what i put as "We are reserving a fund for the future, as we are still figuring things out, and dont have any concrete plans yet", as that was the heart of what i had said, I currently dont have an answer behind this, as those discussions are still taking place.