Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on Today at 11:31:39 AMI think probably the choice of where we donate the Kingdom's cash should probably rest in the hands of the voters, right?

The choice would remain there. Civil service members implement policy but do not create policy. Oversight would come from the Foreign Affairs minister but the Administrator would be more enduring between governments. A long-term Administrator would also probably be a better source of advice (to the Government) on to whom we should donate as well.

I think probably the choice of where we donate the Kingdom's cash should probably rest in the hands of the voters, right?

Quote from: Antaglha Xhenerös Somelieir on Today at 11:18:33 AM

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on Today at 07:44:19 AMOh, I see. Well, that wouldn't be closing a loophole, that would be a significant change. In the past, some provinces have chosen to have their Constable also serve as the ceremonial head of state or the head of their government. So I don't want to prevent provinces from doing that. Provinces will already be now enabled to pass their own restrictions on who can hold the office, and they can add this restriction if they so choose.

That isn't exactly trye as the current convention in appointments of Cunstavals are supposed to be from a separate province.
As having a cunstaval also be the head of government in a province seems like a dangerous position with one person having too much power.

So doing so would be closing a loophole and formalising the principals behind currently conventions

Actually, there was a specific reform enacted to change the rule that Cunstavais need to be from a different province, since some people resented it.

I think provinces are probably the best judges of how to distribute power in their own province, right?  Most of them have chosen a weak executive.  They can decide to have any role or restriction that they want.

Quote from: King Txec on Today at 11:25:27 AMYeah I'm not really in favor of allowing Cunstavals to also be provincial heads of government. I also believe they should be from a different province.

-Txec R

I believe the former should be up to provinces, and the latter should be up to you, Your Majesty.

I'm open to suggested amendments, but the fundamental purpose of this bill is to eliminate the military governorship aspect and otherwise allow provinces to choose for themselves -- not invent new strictures for them.

Yeah I'm not really in favor of allowing Cunstavals to also be provincial heads of government. I also believe they should be from a different province.

-Txec R

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on Today at 07:44:19 AMOh, I see. Well, that wouldn't be closing a loophole, that would be a significant change. In the past, some provinces have chosen to have their Constable also serve as the ceremonial head of state or the head of their government. So I don't want to prevent provinces from doing that. Provinces will already be now enabled to pass their own restrictions on who can hold the office, and they can add this restriction if they so choose.

That isn't exactly trye as the current convention in appointments of Cunstavals are supposed to be from a separate province.
As having a cunstaval also be the head of government in a province seems like a dangerous position with one person having too much power.

So doing so would be closing a loophole and formalising the principals behind currently conventions

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on December 20, 2025, 03:40:14 PMWhat is the advantage of having a permanent secretary do this?

The primary goal is to move the BHAID (and the administrator position) into the Civil Service as a part of making more use of the civil service, lessening any politicization of our work on humanitarian assistance, and allowing for a more permanent occupant of BHAID leadership. I was moved to do this after the former Seneschal stated the BHAID Administrator is a political position and due to the inaction of the former Minister of Foreign Affairs after appointing herself to the position of BHAID administrator.

I was further disappointed by the lack of government action to mark an important milestone (the BHAID's first decade).

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on December 29, 2025, 07:13:41 PMIf you would be willing to defer this bill, I have some ideas about reforming the whole process.

Sure, I look forward to seeing those ideas.

Quote from: xpb on Today at 09:37:16 AMI have always voted in public on Witt.  I appreciate that you have taken the proper step not to comment within the official voting thread.

Of course, that thread is only for voting and comments explaining the votes by the MC. I appreciate you sharing your reason for voting against the bill. I hope we can continue the progress toward an open and outward looking foreign policy despite that vote.

Because provinces have sometimes had that as their local government, and I don't want to prohibit that.  We should leave it up to them.

I have always voted in public on Witt.  I appreciate that you have taken the proper step not to comment within the official voting thread.