Illumination: the people deserve transparency from their government

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

The fact that there are no actual suspects is precisely what makes this a witch-hunt. If you don't have a suspect, what you are promising is to comb through years of immigration emails, and cross reference them against Wittenberg posts, to search for entirely hypothetical malfeasance. This simply cannot be done in any way that will get results - not least because I have no idea how many immigration emails are still available from before my and Þerxh's terms!

If this is *not* a fishing expedition against me, personally, then it cannot be done in any way that means anything. It is not serious, it is simple fearmongering for political capital. And no, the alternative is not to vote for your extremely flawed bill which was voted down for good reasons. Discussions on reforming ImmMin discretion will be good, but they need to start from zero.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

The fact that there are no actual suspects is precisely what makes this a witch-hunt.

Okay, just so I can get this straight:

In your eyes, this is a witch-hunt because we're not seeking to investigate a specific person?  Like... it's bad that we want to just make sure no one's been abusing this power, no matter who it might be?

I'm not sure I agree with that.  Or that a lot of other people would agree with it.  But you're certainly entitled to your opinion.

It's certainly possible that it will be a challenge to investigate past abuses.  I think it will actually be pretty easy, personally.  I mean, there's only like a hundred applications a year or so, and some years much less than that.  Put them into a spreadsheet, see which ones are missing replies with application postings, and I bet the list is not very long.

Even if it's a bit difficult... I mean, okay?  So?  Sometimes things are worth doing, even if it takes a bit of thinking.

[Françal I. Lux]

The stark contrast in tone between the campaigns aside...

Baron Davinescu is right in raising this issue. It is unacceptable that the minister of immigration has so much discretion with what they can do with prospective applications. You yourself agree in the opening paragraph of your statement below.

https://wittenberg.talossa.com/index.php?topic=4465.0

And as it pertains to 61RZ27, I would like to ask why the government torpedoed it. Given the increased level of scrutiny you were receiving about this, I would think the Reformists would be the first to come up with the idea that would easily remedy the problem especially given its tract record for democratization and transparency. Waiting until after the elections to resolve this issue is a mistake, in my opinion, and needlessly politicized the issue. It just looks bad especially when it could've been easily avoided.

I am, and have always been, unapologetically liberal and making sure the government functions efficiently and with all transparency will always be important to me. I will never be in support of any witch hunts or arbitrary targeting of any individuals whether they're private citizens or public servants because of principled disagreements. What I simply want is accountability and responsible governance.


F. I. Lux

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

I think it would be great to fix this issue as one of the first things next term.  My bill essentially makes the most minimal change imaginable, just saying that the public must be made aware of any applications that are rejected.

It adds in just this clause: "5.1. This decision may only be made after the application has been processed and posted, and the public must be informed of the minister's decision and the justification for the decision."

As mentioned, this would still allow for applications from spammers and bots to be rejected as incomplete by the minister under the existing provisions of the law.  And loathsome applications could still be halted by the Ziu, the King, or the Corts... or by the minister, as long as they did it with public disclosure.