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 January 02, 2026, 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 January 02, 2026, 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.

How about simply "no one can be cunstaval and a provincial leader of any province at the same time"

Oh, 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.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC on December 31, 2025, 05:11:16 PMThere is a great example, which I wrote about once, where I compared the same chapter about former Seneschál Tamorán dal Navă before and after he fell out with King Robert.

That was one of the issues of Qator Itrins, if I remember my Talossan reading correctly.