Finance Law Reform

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

As part of my commitment in the Justice portfolio, my next step on legal reform will be a spring-cleaning of the Finance section of our law (El Lex D.2.8, C.1.5. and similar). The need for this was brought up in June/July, when it became clear that our budgeting procedure as set down in law was not sufficiently flexible to deal with last-minute changes in prices from our Internet provider. An additional need for this has arisen given the current Burgermeister's apparent personal problems.

Before I go too deep in writing a draft, I suppose I'd better call for public input. Two major questions:
- does the current budgeting procedure provide the correct balance between making sure no money is spend without democratic accountability; and making sure that money *can* be spent for necessary items without too much red tape? (One major issue is that emergency spending can currently only happen through a PD, which requires that the King actually be paying attention.)

- a major, major flaw in our procedures is a lack of safeguarding over the Royal Treasury. At the moment, the Burgermeister of Internal Revenue is the only person with any actual authority over the Royal Treasury - i.e. he's the only name on the bank accounts and on the PayPal account. It's increasingly becoming clear that this is a potential catastrophic point of failure that needs to be legislatively amended. Could the answer be as simple as to require the King to be a co-signatory on all Treasury accounts?

Comments?

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Could the answer be as simple as to require the King to be a co-signatory on all Treasury accounts?

This is a superlative idea that fully embraces one of the key strengths of the monarchy, and I fully support it.  It's clever and simple.  Well-done!

[Ian Plätschisch]

"One is none, two is one"

Having two people with the account details is a great idea.

Also, perhaps we could have a list of things the Government can spend money on without the two week waiting period (like webhosting)

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

As I've mentioned before, the "two week waiting period" is NOWHERE specified in Organic or Statute Law! It's just something we started doing in the 50th Cosa Budget, and we seem to have just copy-pasted that provision in subsequent budgets. There's no reason it has to be included in future budgets.

If there are no further contributions, I hope to have a draft by end of month.

[Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB]

2.8.2.9 might need to be updated as I don't think we refer to the Royal Civil Service as the King's Household any longer.
C.1.5 looks fine to me.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

Wokay, I've got a preliminary version of the bit on dual signatures. Add El Lexhatx C.1.5.5:

1.5.5. All accounts and other monies held by the Royal Treasury shall be held in the name of both the King and the Burgermeister, in such a way that the King shall be able to perform the functions of the Burgermeister in case of the Burgermeister's absence, on his own initiative or upon request of the Minister of Finance. The Burgermeister shall not, after 60 days after enactment of this provision into law, hold any funds of the Royal Treasury in an account to which the King does not have access, on penalty of the offence of theft.

I want to put a transition period there but with a firm end date so we don't drag out the transfer indefinitely, but make it clear that it has to happen.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

The other substantive change I think is necessary is to delete a couple of sections which IMHO blatantly contradict other sections.

D.2.8.2.8:

Economic Policy and Investment of Royal Funds. The Royal Bank & Post is responsible for determining and enacting economic policy of the Kingdom of Talossa. Funds kept in the Royal Treasury shall be made available by the Burgermeister of Inland Revenue to the Royal Bank & Post for the purpose of making foreign investments calculated to wisely augment the value of the said Treasury. The Minister of Finance shall be responsible to the Prime Minister and the nation for the policies implemented.

This contradicts 2.8.1.1, which gives responsibility over economic policy to the Minister of Finance directly; and also states that it is the Burgermeister who invests Royal Treasury funds, under direction from the Minister of Finance.

D.2.8.2.10:

Except when forbidden or restricted by legislation, the government of the day is empowered to requisition funds from the Royal Treasury to provide for the operation of the Royal Bank & Post, the other Cabinet Ministries, and the Prime Ministry. The amount requisitioned for the operation of each such ministry shall not in any way or for any reason increase during such time as the sitting government continues in office following having lost the confidence of the Cosâ, except it be by royal fiat and to provide for the necessary defence and preservation of the realm.

This seems completely redundant, simply repeating the authority given to Finance in D.2.8.3 to budget for State expenses.

Also D.2.8.2.9, on the Burgermeister's auditing powers, should be in the section on the Burgermeister, not Finance Ministry.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

Since I'm getting no pushback on this, I shall continue.

I just thought of a very simple reform that would avoid the near-crisis we got into recently re: our webhosting bills. The current law provides for the Talossan Web Registrar to pay out of their own pocket for our webhosting, if necessary, and get paid back later. But what if... we enabled the Burgermeister to pay any vital web bills to come due, even if there's no budget or PD authorisation? For the last little while the Burgermeister and the TWR have been the same person, for ease of admin, and I see no reason for this not to continue.

So, new section D.2.8.4.1.

The Burgermeister of Internal Revenue may authorise spending from the Royal Treasury to prevent any interruption to the Kingdom's online services. If such spending has not been provided for in the Budget, other legislation or Prime Dictate, the Burgermeister shall provide a full report on such spending to the Ziu within 7 days of such spending. Subsequent to this, if the spending is not authorised in retrospect via legislation or Prime Dictate, the Burgermeister shall be liable for a crime against state property under El Lexhatx A.7.2.6.1.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Since I'm getting no pushback on this, I shall continue.

I just thought of a very simple reform that would avoid the near-crisis we got into recently re: our webhosting bills. The current law provides for the Talossan Web Registrar to pay out of their own pocket for our webhosting, if necessary, and get paid back later. But what if... we enabled the Burgermeister to pay any vital web bills to come due, even if there's no budget or PD authorisation? For the last little while the Burgermeister and the TWR have been the same person, for ease of admin, and I see no reason for this not to continue.

So, new section D.2.8.4.1.

The Burgermeister of Internal Revenue may authorise spending from the Royal Treasury to prevent any interruption to the Kingdom's online services. If such spending has not been provided for in the Budget, other legislation or Prime Dictate, the Burgermeister shall provide a full report on such spending to the Ziu within 7 days of such spending. Subsequent to this, if the spending is not authorised in retrospect via legislation or Prime Dictate, the Burgermeister shall be liable for a crime against state property under El Lexhatx A.7.2.6.1.

I am strongly opposed to this. Specific and complicated procedures should only be used when necessary. This is absolutely 100% not necessary. Just pass a spending bill that allocates money for 5 years or 10 or whatever for this specific purpose. Very simple, requires no new gimmicks or invented crimes, and gets the job done.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

I'd like the Minister of Finance's feedback on this issue in particular

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Since I'm getting no pushback on this, I shall continue.

I just thought of a very simple reform that would avoid the near-crisis we got into recently re: our webhosting bills. The current law provides for the Talossan Web Registrar to pay out of their own pocket for our webhosting, if necessary, and get paid back later. But what if... we enabled the Burgermeister to pay any vital web bills to come due, even if there's no budget or PD authorisation? For the last little while the Burgermeister and the TWR have been the same person, for ease of admin, and I see no reason for this not to continue.

So, new section D.2.8.4.1.

The Burgermeister of Internal Revenue may authorise spending from the Royal Treasury to prevent any interruption to the Kingdom's online services. If such spending has not been provided for in the Budget, other legislation or Prime Dictate, the Burgermeister shall provide a full report on such spending to the Ziu within 7 days of such spending. Subsequent to this, if the spending is not authorised in retrospect via legislation or Prime Dictate, the Burgermeister shall be liable for a crime against state property under El Lexhatx A.7.2.6.1.

I am strongly opposed to this. Specific and complicated procedures should only be used when necessary. This is absolutely 100% not necessary. Just pass a spending bill that allocates money for 5 years or 10 or whatever for this specific purpose. Very simple, requires no new gimmicks or invented crimes, and gets the job done.

I wrote the bill to authorize the cost and just omitted any horizon at all: https://wittenberg.talossa.com/index.php?topic=1730.msg14291#msg14291q

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

WHEREAS it is part of the incumbent Government's programme to simplify legislation and "cut red and green tape" where-ever practical;

AND WHEREAS certain inefficiencies and dead-ends were revealed in the Kingdom's budgeting process due to the recent unavailability of the Burgermeister of Internal Revenue;

AND WHEREAS a read-through of the appropriate legislation suggested other fixes for readability and sense, in particular separating out the functions of the Royal Treasury from the Ministry of Finance;

BE IT ENACTED by the King, Cosa and Senäts of Talossa in Ziu assembled that:

1. The following new paragraphs shall be added to the end of El Lexhatx C.1.5:

1.5.5. audit the reported financial condition of His Majesty's investments at any time.

1.5.6. provide, upon request of the Minister of Finance and any other time stated in law, a Financial Report containing the following information:
1.5.6.1. the amount, location, liquidity, and availability of all funds held by or for the Royal Treasury,
1.5.6.2. a detailed list of all changes in the account balances of the Royal Treasury since the last Report,
1.5.6.3. a balance sheet which clearly lists all expenses linking them to the relative sheet items in the budget bills approved in the Cosa,
1.5.6.4. the total amount of louise and postal items in circulation;

1.5.7. All accounts and other monies held by the Royal Treasury shall be held in the name of both the King and the Burgermeister, in such a way that the King shall be able to perform the functions of the Burgermeister in case of the Burgermeister's absence, on his own initiative or upon request of the Minister of Finance. The Burgermeister shall not, after 60 days after enactment of this provision into law, hold any funds of the Royal Treasury in an account to which the King does not have access, on penalty of the offence of theft.

2. El Lexhatx D.2.8.1 is amended to read in its entirety (all subsections to be deleted):

The Ministrà dal Finançù (Ministry of Finance) is responsible for setting and implementing the economic policies of the Kingdom, for drawing up the national Budget, and directing the Burgermeister of Inland Revenue as to the investment of that portion of the Royal Treasury set aside by said Budget.

3. In El Lexhatx D.2.8.2.4, the misspelled word "demonination" shall be correctly spelled as "denomination".

4. El Lexhatx D.2.8.2.8 is deleted, as contradicting El Lexhatx D.2.8.1.

5. El Lexhatx D.2.8.2.9 is deleted, its provisions being reinstated in the new El Lexhatx C.1.5.5.

6. El Lexhatx D.2.8.2.10 is deleted, as redundant and repeating provisions contained in El Lexhatx D.2.8.3.

7. El Lexhatx D.2.8.3.1 is amended to read:

2.8.3.1. a Financial Report as provided in El Lexhatx C.1.5.6;

8. The following new subsection shall be added to El Lexhatx D.2.8.4:

2.8.4.1 The Ziu hereby authorizes the annual and ongoing expenditure of 60 louis by the Burgermeister of Internal Revenue for the specific and sole purpose of paying for the annual domain name registration of talossa.com and for associated webhosting services as selected by the Seneschal or their designated representative.  All payments made under direction of this authority should be reported as according to normal procedure by the Burgermeister.

9. The existing paragraph, currently duplicatively numbered El Lexhatx D.2.8.9, which reads:

The Finance Minister shall create a Register of Talossan Enterprises, available to all Talossan citizens. Any Talossan who produces goods and services, whether commercially or as a hobby, may provide a description, no longer than 100 words, of their enterprise together with their contact details, for the purposes of advertisement and information. An enterprise shall be removed from the register at the request of the registrant; or by a determination by the Finance Minister that the enterprise is no longer active, or not of a character with which the Kingdom of Talossa wishes to be associated. Such determinations shall be subject to judicial review.

shall be renumbered D.2.8.10.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

1.5.7. All accounts and other monies held by the Royal Treasury shall be held in the name of both the King and the Burgermeister, in such a way that the King shall be able to perform the functions of the Burgermeister in case of the Burgermeister's absence, on his own initiative or upon request of the Minister of Finance. The Burgermeister shall not, after 60 days after enactment of this provision into law, hold any funds of the Royal Treasury in an account to which the King does not have access, on penalty of the offence of theft.

Thinking of removing the bolded bit. I wanted to add some "incentive" when the old Burgermeister became unavailable. But now I fear that the real blockage if we do this will likely be on the King's end.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

1.5.7. All accounts and other monies held by the Royal Treasury shall be held in the name of both the King and the Burgermeister, in such a way that the King shall be able to perform the functions of the Burgermeister in case of the Burgermeister's absence, on his own initiative or upon request of the Minister of Finance. The Burgermeister shall not, after 60 days after enactment of this provision into law, hold any funds of the Royal Treasury in an account to which the King does not have access, on penalty of the offence of theft.

Thinking of removing the bolded bit. I wanted to add some "incentive" when the old Burgermeister became unavailable. But now I fear that the real blockage if we do this will likely be on the King's end.

This seems like a reasonable change, but only because it's criminalizing something that someone might not have any control over.