Second Incorporative Act

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

Anyone who thinks that things like the above is "fun and cool" probably also has an intense love of vanilla.

[Üc R. Tärfă]

There isn't much reason to change a bill to accommodate your preferences, unless you point out something with which I happen to agree -- you don't have any votes to offer!

I'd rather say the contrary: we have many votes, especially in the Senäts  ;)

Plus, I'm not going to Clark this right now, anyway -- on the Seneschal's request -- so there's a bit more time to fix up the language and make it read more smoothly.

So maybe there's room for changes, isn't it?

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

There isn't much reason to change a bill to accommodate your preferences, unless you point out something with which I happen to agree -- you don't have any votes to offer!

I'd rather say the contrary: we have many votes, especially in the Senäts  ;)

That's great to hear! If you can make a deal on behalf of your whole party like that, then I'll be very happy to work towards a bill you can support.

[Üc R. Tärfă]

You know what our concerns are, try to come up with a more palatable version, and we will see if there are margins to find a compromise.

The fact that no-one used that provision in 3 years is a good example of the fact that maybe there's no demand for that? And increasing the bureaucracy behind it it's the contrary to encourage people. I don't see any private ongoing initiative that can be an "enterprise" which justify the need of that structure... so I don't really see any real reasons why we should do that.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

You know what our concerns are, try to come up with a more palatable version, and we will see if there are margins to find a compromise.

Just so there's no unfortunate misunderstandings, are you saying that you can indeed make a deal on behalf of your whole party, if we figure out a compromise that is to your liking?

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

The circumstances under which the Party President can "whip" the Free Democrats caucus in the Ziu into voting as a bloc are given in FreeDems Constitution Section XII. But short of that, of course the Party Leader is entitled to negotiate on behalf of the party, subject to ratification of his approach in internal discussions.

The Free Democrats of Talossa are very conscious that - assuming we work as a team - no legislation can be passed against our wishes in this Cosa.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Then I guess you have your answer, Uc.  If you guys are going to vote against this as a bloc, then there's not any real reason to accommodate your preferences.  Better to try to pass legislation that I like and that appeals to voters, instead.  It's not possible to compromise with the uncompromising.

Again, I love any and all feedback, especially to improve form and function.  Even if I don't agree with all of it, I try to always keep an open mind.  If necessary, I'll change a bill, delay it, or yank it entirely!  Sometimes there are clever orthogonal solutions that only arise when there's a sharp discussion on an issue.  So I hope that you will still offer your thoughts and opinions on bills, even if a compromise isn't possible on your end.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

Look, any time you want to pass a law to enact "fun and cool" things that don't involve setting up a form-filling bureaucracy and imposing more work on Government and Civil Service officials, we're all ears

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

It's true: my proposal would have probably led to more work for future Ministers of Finance.  No minister has ever had to spend a moment on adding a business to the Register of Talossan Businesses, after all.

Anyway, this is moot for the time being.  A new version is being worked up.