Wittenberg

Thanks to all regarding this discussion.  I am formulating options for consideration on how to make reporting easier, by in turn making future transitions easier -- as well as more compliant to existing banking and organizational laws for the Kingdom of Talossa within the economic system of the United States.  As noted on the first line of Talossa.com

"The Kingdom of Talossa is an independent, sovereign nation in North America, which seceded peacefully from the United States in 1979 (but we're not sure the United States noticed)"

X Pol Briga
Burgermeister of Inland Revenue
Burgermeister@talossa.com

Quote from: Üc R. Tärfâ on Today at 09:04:05 AMYou keep talking about transparency, but in your posts (I added the underlines in the quotes above) there's always this part about the Government making the report: how there can be any transparency at all if a Government is required to report on itself?

"Government" is being used here to refer to the entire governing apparatus, including civil servants, not "the Government" (ie the elected and politically-appointed Cabinet).

And you're reinforcing what we're saying: it would be good to have the Burgermeister be obligated to give a Financial Report at the end of the term, rather than passing it through Finance and presenting it concurrently with the budget after the election.  This is another point in favor of the proposal.

Quote from: Üc R. Tärfâ on Today at 09:04:05 AMI can assure the Ministreu that we will not allow him to take transparency away from the Kingdom's money and put the Government in charge of the duty to report on itself on how it spent the money, like it is always implied in all his comments and actions.

You seem to actually understand what we mean when we refer to the government reporting, and you have already noted that the bill itself refers to the Burgermeister.  I don't think anyone has proposed differently here.

Quote from: Üc R. Tärfâ on Today at 09:04:05 AM

• keep the Civil Service, the Burgermeister,  (and not the Government) in charghe of Reporting and supervising how money are spent, just like we have the Civil Service, the Secretary of State, (and not the Government) in charge of the elections;
• detach the final report from the budget (the Government won't have to attach the report to the budget bill);
• add a compulsory preliminary report at the end of the Cosă term (by the Burgermeister) before the Election to give people voting the opportunity to have a report on how money were or werent' spent by the outgoing Government;
• the final report will cover the period from one budget to the other as accounting practice requires.

I don't quite understand why this is a compromise.  This is pretty much just exactly what @Tric'hard Lenxheir proposed.  Two mandatory financial reports: one at the end of the Cosa, and one at the time of the budget.  It looks like the only difference is that you want the second one issued independently of the budget, by the Burgermeister alone.  A return to the system from back in the day works great for me, lol - in for a penny, in for a pound!  @Tric'hard Lenxheir , would this be okay with you?

Quote from: Üc R. Tärfâ on Today at 09:04:05 AMI see the good faith of the Senator, if these concerns are our common and shared goals I'd be more than happy to consponsor a new bill and write it together.

I don't know why we'd abandon this bill when we're making such good progress![/list]

Quote from: Tric'hard Lenxheir on Today at 09:52:07 AMI am okay with your plan, it does what I am suggesting and words it better, like I said I got it wrong by saying "the government" that was simply because whether the Burgermeister (or the Sec of State for that matter) are elected officials or not they are still part of the government.

Wonderful news!

I'll write back at you soon - in less than 24 hours  - with a starting point proposal ☺️

Quote from: Üc R. Tärfâ on Today at 09:04:05 AM

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on Today at 06:56:33 AMThe most useful and relevant time to give a financial statement is when it will keep a government accountable to the people.  It is more transparent and democratic.  It should be required of a government, not optional.  It's the people's money.

Quote from: Tric'hard Lenxheir on Today at 07:26:13 AMAbsolutely, my proposal was not intended to remove the responsibility of the incoming government to also do a financial report prior to or with the new budget (especially after taking out the freeze on spending)

You keep talking about transparency, but in your posts (I added the underlines in the quotes above) there's always this part about the Government making the report: how there can be any transparency at all if a Government is required to report on itself?

We are all for transparency and democratic oversight: that's why it is and it must continue to be the job of the Burgermeister and not the Government.

Quoteit was simply an effort to make the transition easier so that the incoming government wasn't coming in blind trying to figure out where we were financially. Basically I want to keep the country financially open and make the transition easier on everyone.

The Government "was coming in blind" because it tried to be something he must not be: the reporter and not the receiver of the report.

I recongise that the Senator proposal - as it stands at the moment I'm writing this (C.1.5.8 The burgermeister shall be required to submit a Final Financial Report 30 days before the end of the Cosa to include all expenditures during the Cosa.) - sounds different from his comments: he talks about government reporting but in the proposal says the Burgermeister.

QuoteI understand that this might bother accountants. We can budget some money for counseling for them, if it gets severe. But I think they will be assuaged if a supplemental report is required in the case of any further expenditures (which almost never happened in that period of time anyway).

Excpet that the only assured and constant flow of revenues to our Treasury comes exactly in the period between the end of the term and the new budget.

Use that money in better counseling and not for accountants, it will be more useful.

I can assure the Ministreu that we will not allow him to take transparency away from the Kingdom's money and put the Government in charge of the duty to report on itself on how it spent the money, like it is always implied in all his comments and actions.

I offered a four point common sense compromise:

• keep the Civil Service, the Burgermeister,  (and not the Government) in charghe of Reporting and supervising how money are spent, just like we have the Civil Service, the Secretary of State, (and not the Government) in charge of the elections;
• detach the final report from the budget (the Government won't have to attach the report to the budget bill);
• add a compulsory preliminary report at the end of the Cosă term (by the Burgermeister) before the Election to give people voting the opportunity to have a report on how money were or werent' spent by the outgoing Government;
• the final report will cover the period from one budget to the other as accounting practice requires.

The above plan keeps and adds real transparency and democratic oversight, responds to requests from both the majority and the opposition and has a chance to be approved.

I see the good faith of the Senator, if these concerns are our common and shared goals I'd be more than happy to consponsor a new bill and write it together.

I am okay with your plan, it does what I am suggesting and words it better, like I said I got it wrong by saying "the government" that was simply because whether the Burgermeister (or the Sec of State for that matter) are elected officials or not they are still part of the government.

We are all for transparency and democratic oversight: that's why it is and it must continue to be the job of the Burgermeister and not the Government.

This is simply a misunderstanding, I realize that the Burgermeister is a "civil servant" however a civil servant is simply an employee of the government so I admit I am getting it wrong when I say "the government" needs to do a financial report, it is already in the law that it is the burgermeisters responsibility and my proposal is not trying to change that, it is simply trying to change, or rather add when the financial report is done.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on Today at 06:56:33 AMThe most useful and relevant time to give a financial statement is when it will keep a government accountable to the people.  It is more transparent and democratic.  It should be required of a government, not optional.  It's the people's money.

Quote from: Tric'hard Lenxheir on Today at 07:26:13 AMAbsolutely, my proposal was not intended to remove the responsibility of the incoming government to also do a financial report prior to or with the new budget (especially after taking out the freeze on spending)

You keep talking about transparency, but in your posts (I added the underlines in the quotes above) there's always this part about the Government making the report: how there can be any transparency at all if a Government is required to report on itself?

We are all for transparency and democratic oversight: that's why it is and it must continue to be the job of the Burgermeister and not the Government.

Quoteit was simply an effort to make the transition easier so that the incoming government wasn't coming in blind trying to figure out where we were financially. Basically I want to keep the country financially open and make the transition easier on everyone.

The Government "was coming in blind" because it tried to be something he must not be: the reporter and not the receiver of the report.

I recongise that the Senator proposal - as it stands at the moment I'm writing this (C.1.5.8 The burgermeister shall be required to submit a Final Financial Report 30 days before the end of the Cosa to include all expenditures during the Cosa.) - sounds different from his comments: he talks about government reporting but in the proposal says the Burgermeister.

QuoteI understand that this might bother accountants. We can budget some money for counseling for them, if it gets severe. But I think they will be assuaged if a supplemental report is required in the case of any further expenditures (which almost never happened in that period of time anyway).

Excpet that the only assured and constant flow of revenues to our Treasury comes exactly in the period between the end of the term and the new budget.

Use that money in better counseling and not for accountants, it will be more useful.

I can assure the Ministreu that we will not allow him to take transparency away from the Kingdom's money and put the Government in charge of the duty to report on itself on how it spent the money, like it is always implied in all his comments and actions.

I offered a four point common sense compromise:

• keep the Civil Service, the Burgermeister,  (and not the Government) in charghe of Reporting and supervising how money are spent, just like we have the Civil Service, the Secretary of State, (and not the Government) in charge of the elections;
• detach the final report from the budget (the Government won't have to attach the report to the budget bill);
• add a compulsory preliminary report at the end of the Cosă term (by the Burgermeister) before the Election to give people voting the opportunity to have a report on how money were or werent' spent by the outgoing Government;
• the final report will cover the period from one budget to the other as accounting practice requires.

The above plan keeps and adds real transparency and democratic oversight, responds to requests from both the majority and the opposition and has a chance to be approved.

I see the good faith of the Senator, if these concerns are our common and shared goals I'd be more than happy to consponsor a new bill and write it together.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on Yesterday at 09:40:52 PMWell, the actual whole point is realizing that it doesn't make sense to report on our financial state right after elections.  Money is almost never spent in the interim period except on emergencies or scheduled items, so why are we settling accounts after that, rather than in the useful time where it will be visibly linked to the probity and activity of a government?  It's not transparent and it's not useful.

So I think you're largely wrong, but it would seem make sense to require a supplementary report included with the budget, detailing any further expenditures, if any, and providing new final figures in such a case.  @Tric'hard Lenxheir , would you be open to adding that to your bill?

Absolutely, my proposal was not intended to remove the responsibility of the incoming government to also do a financial report prior to or with the new budget (especially after taking out the freeze on spending) it was simply an effort to make the transition easier so that the incoming government wasn't coming in blind trying to figure out where we were financially. Basically I want to keep the country financially open and make the transition easier on everyone.

The most useful and relevant time to give a financial statement is when it will keep a government accountable to the people.  It is more transparent and democratic.  It should be required of a government, not optional.  It's the people's money.

I understand that this might bother accountants. We can budget some money for counseling for them, if it gets severe. But I think they will be assuaged if a supplemental report is required in the case of any further expenditures (which almost never happened in that period of time anyway).

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on Yesterday at 09:40:52 PMWell, the actual whole point is realizing that it doesn't make sense to report on our financial state right after elections.  Money is almost never spent in the interim period except on emergencies or scheduled items, so why are we settling accounts after that, rather than in the useful time where it will be visibly linked to the probity and activity of a government?  It's not transparent and it's not useful.

Because final balances/statement are made up to the day when a new budget starts to be useful and relevant. A final balance made before the election is a balance that covers not one budget but two part of two different budgets (and governments).

Can we get real on that part? It's like the first thing taught in accounting 101. The final balance should be on the budgeted period.

You want the Burgermeister to be required by law to report before the election (Which btw it can be done today with the existing law, it only requires the minister to request a report - or the ziu to approve a sense of the ziu to bind the minister to request it)? Fine, but we can't reinvent how accounting has always worked since it was invented 😅

Should I make the latter change, would you vote for the bill?