- Welcome to Wittenberg.
Recent posts
#21
Wittenberg / Re: The Progressive Alliance d...
Last post by þerxh Sant-Enogat - Yesterday at 04:40:22 PMQuote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on Yesterday at 04:29:39 PMFair play to you, great comeback :DThat's exactly the contrary of what I explained above about nomination of cross-party experts ministers, as I wanted to do this last Cosā with MinSTUFF. Thanks for this opportunity to stress on this important promise made by the Progressive Alliance.
But more seriously: if I'm reading your program right, the question of why the Database reform didn't happen is "AD was going to do it, so it didn't happen because he went on leave, but it'll happen this time". So it seems that every election or so there's an AD Will Be Minister of Everything party, just under different names.
#22
Wittenberg / Re: The Progressive Alliance d...
Last post by Miestră Schivă, UrN - Yesterday at 04:29:39 PMFair play to you, great comeback :D
But more seriously: if I'm reading your program right, the question of why the Database reform didn't happen is "AD was going to do it, so it didn't happen because he went on leave, but it'll happen this time". So it seems that every election or so there's an AD Will Be Minister of Everything party, just under different names.
But more seriously: if I'm reading your program right, the question of why the Database reform didn't happen is "AD was going to do it, so it didn't happen because he went on leave, but it'll happen this time". So it seems that every election or so there's an AD Will Be Minister of Everything party, just under different names.
#23
Wittenberg / Re: The Progressive Alliance d...
Last post by þerxh Sant-Enogat - Yesterday at 04:16:28 PMQuote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on Yesterday at 03:56:08 PMDon't change a winning team !Quote from: þerxh Sant-Enogat on Yesterday at 04:41:59 AMI took some good advice from Baron Alexandreu Davinescu
#24
Wittenberg / Re: Miestră Schivă's attitude ...
Last post by Miestră Schivă, UrN - Yesterday at 04:09:57 PMQuote from: þerxh Sant-Enogat on Yesterday at 03:49:31 AMI do not understand all the fuss about the answer given by the Minister of Defense to this TERP.
So I'm just making sure I understand. As leader of the Progressive Alliance, you think it's fine for Ministers to give aggressive and rude non-answers to polite TERPs.
If Mximo had said "we haven't accomplished very much in the Foreign Affairs apartment", that would have been an end of the matter. But instead he decided to bait the opposition with "it's a secret" and "I'll tell you later". If you don't see the problem here, then Polite Government is going to be a major election issue.
Quote from: þerxh Sant-Enogat on Yesterday at 03:53:29 AMQuote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on June 04, 2024, 06:07:32 PMCertianly, if the FreeDems had been asked to provide a Deputy Foreign Minister, we would have jumped at the chance, as we did to provide a Deputy Minister of Stuff.When ?
Ah, I see, there may be a misunderstanding. I didn't realise you'd moved Home Affairs to Foreign Affairs (which seems very odd). Okay: we DID a Deputy Foreign Affairs minister. I'll ask Bentxhamì but I'm pretty sure Mximo didn't ask for his help.
#25
Wittenberg / Re: The Progressive Alliance d...
Last post by Miestră Schivă, UrN - Yesterday at 03:56:08 PMQuote from: þerxh Sant-Enogat on Yesterday at 04:41:59 AMI took some good advice from Baron Alexandreu Davinescu
You cannot view this attachment.
#26
Wittenberg / Re: [OPEN] Open Society policy...
Last post by Breneir Tzaracomprada - Yesterday at 01:12:41 PMQuote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on May 31, 2024, 01:24:01 AM31 May 2024:
An apolitical Chancery: Some call it a crusade, some call it a hobby horse. I call it defending the norms that underpin Talossan democracy. And that is something for which I will never tire. In the absence of any internal policy to address the precedent set by the current Secretary of State I will resubmit previous legislation concerning an apolitical Chancery. If it comes, as a part of broader Civil Service rules, all the better but this issue ain't going anywhere just like me.
We just might reach some agreement on this issue?
#27
Wittenberg / Re: [PdR] Partì da Reformaziun...
Last post by Breneir Tzaracomprada - Yesterday at 12:45:13 PMQuote from: Sir Lüc on Yesterday at 12:40:44 PMWhat I'd much rather do is move Senate seats from 8 province-based single seat constituencies to a single nationwide constituency, so that in each GE we all vote for four of eight Senators, with 4 votes per voter and the top 4 vote getters being elected. This would solve provincial malapportionment, unbind provinces from the Senate so they get to be more than mere senatorial voting clubs, and thus remove the incentive to keep eight provinces because nobody wants to give up a Senate seat.
Barring abolition of Senate I really like this idea.
#28
Wittenberg / Re: [PdR] Partì da Reformaziun...
Last post by Sir Lüc - Yesterday at 12:40:44 PMYup. I agree with Mic'haglh that the fact the provinces serve as Senatorial constituencies hampers efforts at reducing the numbers of provinces so that activity does not get diluted; but I disagree that abolishing the Senate is at all necessary, and despite my past "tepid consideration" ("support" is a bit much) of it, I feel that MMP is too needlessly complicated. EM200 still feels somewhat wrong, but I can live with it.
What I'd much rather do is move Senate seats from 8 province-based single seat constituencies to a single nationwide constituency, so that in each GE we all vote for four of eight Senators, with 4 votes per voter and the top 4 vote getters being elected. This would solve provincial malapportionment, unbind provinces from the Senate so they get to be more than mere senatorial voting clubs, and thus remove the incentive to keep eight provinces because nobody wants to give up a Senate seat.
What I'd much rather do is move Senate seats from 8 province-based single seat constituencies to a single nationwide constituency, so that in each GE we all vote for four of eight Senators, with 4 votes per voter and the top 4 vote getters being elected. This would solve provincial malapportionment, unbind provinces from the Senate so they get to be more than mere senatorial voting clubs, and thus remove the incentive to keep eight provinces because nobody wants to give up a Senate seat.
#29
Wittenberg / Re: The Progressive Alliance d...
Last post by Breneir Tzaracomprada - Yesterday at 12:29:41 PMQuote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on Yesterday at 11:36:20 AMBut you literally spent an entire term upholding something that you now admit was an error. Seeing now that the Agreement was indeed used to block the Ziu's consideration of Chancery Reform and that historic Organic Law reform was achieved outside of that Agreement, Open Society would welcome the Progressive Alliance's support for our effort to ensure an apolitical Chancery/Civil Service.
Reposting for the operative part which was ignored. Ahem.
#30
Wittenberg / Re: The Progressive Alliance d...
Last post by Sir Lüc - Yesterday at 12:20:48 PMQuote from: þerxh Sant-Enogat on Yesterday at 04:44:11 AMSystematically voting for the fall of a Government when in opposition must not be a principle.
A small quasi-philosophical note on this; even if the government of the day was performing well, an opposition party that wished to lead a future government should by definition vote against Confidence, as otherwise they would essentially publicly admit they don't believe they could do a better job.