[CQ1] Status of the Standing Committee

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

The TNC and FreeDems will set up a Standing Committee on Talossa's Constitution, with two members from each party, to discuss amendments to Talossa's constitution which have broad support. No legislation to amend the Organic Law, or to amend the functioning of the Chancery, will be proposed by either party without the prior unanimous approval of this Committee.

I am not a member of the Ziu so am not entitled to submit terpelaziuns but as a citizen I rise to submit a non-mandatory question to the Government. I understand that no answer is required and if none is provided then it will simply be something for the public to consider.

As highlighted above, the TNC and the FreeDems agreed to create a Standing Committee on Talossa's Constitution. I am particularly interested in this committee as it applies to restoring a method of royal succession.
We are now almost finished with the first Clark and I respectfully ask what is the status of preparations for this standing committee? And will a method of royal succession, such as choosing from the Sabor as endorsed by the RPP, be considered by this standing committee?
Thank you for your time and consideration.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

Not sure who moved it...but thanks.

[Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB]

Not sure who moved it...but thanks.

@Sir Lüc moved it.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

Not sure who moved it...but thanks.

@Sir Lüc moved it.

Thanks Txec for letting me know.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

Looks like my post on FB Witt got a laugh react from the current Leader of the Opposition. But I hope this, and future enquiries, don't get a similar response from the Government.

As commented on FB Witt, I know the Government is not obliged legally but a response would be welcome.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

As I mentioned in the Shoutbox a while back. it's an irony to be taken to ask for not asking enough TERPs by the former leader of the Government which took offence at our "flooding terps" and set up a Witt thread to try to shame us for it. Whatever we do, we will be lectured about how we are incompetent and/or immoral for doing it. One can only laugh.

Anyway, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is still on leave and the Free Democrats have made a conscious decision to "spread the TERPs around" so as not to put too much weight on my shoulders, so expect more TERPs sometime soon. As to the OrgLaw committee, I have asked the Government to provide an answer to this question, but if they don't want to, I'm happy to.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

As I mentioned in the Shoutbox a while back. it's an irony to be taken to ask for not asking enough TERPs by the former leader of the Government which took offence at our "flooding terps" and set up a Witt thread to try to shame us for it. Whatever we do, we will be lectured about how we are incompetent and/or immoral for doing it. One can only laugh.

Anyway, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is still on leave and the Free Democrats have made a conscious decision to "spread the TERPs around" so as not to put too much weight on my shoulders, so expect more TERPs sometime soon. As to the OrgLaw committee, I have asked the Government to provide an answer to this question, but if they don't want to, I'm happy to.

Sorry Miestra, my question was not submitted to cause emotional pain by poking any fresh wounds which you mentioned in the shoutbox. I am both glad that your shoulders are less burdened by party responsibilities and to hear that more terpelaziuns are coming soon as I mentioned in the shoutbox:

"There is no denying they are incredibly annoying when they start to add up but they are absolutely vital to good governance as I think both you and I have demonstrated through our use of them. I may still agree with the Government on most policy but I still hope you will use them to hold this Government to account as was done in the last term."

If the Government passes on an answer to this question, or future ones, then that would be unfortunate.

[Bråneu Excelsio]

Thank you for question!

The Committee has already been formed, I am currently in the process of defining topics and setting guidelines for the immediate coming months. At the moment, every issue and possibility remains open.

And please don't hesitate to make citizen questions, as you're aware, to some degree I'm actually fond of them.

Thanks!

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

Thank you for question!

The Committee has already been formed, I am currently in the process of defining topics and setting guidelines for the immediate coming months. At the moment, every issue and possibility remains open.

And please don't hesitate to make citizen questions, as you're aware, to some degree I'm actually fond of them.

Thanks!

I thank the Seneschal for this answer and his willingness to answer future enquiries.

Related to the good news in your answer I have a couple of simple follow-up questions. I do not intend to engage in broad collections of supplementary questions but these brief questions arose from the answer which is well-received.

Is the committee composed of representatives of all parties in the Cosa or only the TNC and the FreeDems? And when do you expect the committee to begin public deliberations?

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

Is the committee composed of representatives of all parties in the Cosa or only the TNC and the FreeDems? And when do you expect the committee to begin public deliberations?

This seems a disingenuous question as it could be answered by reference to the publicly-released TNC/FreeDem agreement. This latter says nothing about multi-party representation, nor about public deliberations.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

Is the committee composed of representatives of all parties in the Cosa or only the TNC and the FreeDems? And when do you expect the committee to begin public deliberations?

This seems a disingenuous question as it could be answered by reference to the publicly-released TNC/FreeDem agreement. This latter says nothing about multi-party representation, nor about public deliberations.

It was not intended to be a disingenuous question, Miestra. I did not take from the publicly released agreement that it would not be for all parties in the Ziu and not be public. But if that is what the Opposition says they agreed to then it is not for me to quibble. It does give me a new reason why I am glad I did not support the TNC-FreeDem agreement though.

@Bråneu Excelsio I hope you will respond too especially in light of the Opposition's contribution. And perhaps consider a request to make the Standing Committee deliberations public rather than private.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

@Bråneu Excelsio I wanted to follow up on my supplemental question from December 1st.
Will the Standing Committee on the OrgLaw that was agreed between the TNC and FreeDems be conducted in private or will the deliberations be accessible to the public?

[Bråneu Excelsio]

The Standing Committee is to be conducted in private, with scheduled updates presented to the parties involved. The deliberations, when done, will be made public and accessible to the general public.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

The Standing Committee is to be conducted in private, with scheduled updates presented to the parties involved. The deliberations, when done, will be made public and accessible to the general public.

Thank you!