Announcing ¡AVANT! - the Multi-Party Accord

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

¡AVANT! - THE MULTIPARTY ACCORD

The outgoing Government of Talossa was marked by infighting and inactivity.

The party which formed that Government is no more; but many of the people involved are standing again, for new parties. They are not taking responsibility for what went wrong, or giving real answers why it won't happen again.

Talossa needs a serious and broad-based alternative to that.

The undersigned parties agree:
   

• to be each other's preferred partners for government in the 60th Cosa.
• to ensure that there will be a new King of Talossa before the end of the 60th Cosa, who will be culturally active, non-political, and friendly to all shades of Talossan opinion.
• to start a wide-ranging and open-ended discussion on Talossa's Organic Law and constitutional structure, in which each party will promote its own preferences.
• to set up a process for thorough reform of provincial assignments for new citizens.
• to encourage and participate in cross-party co-operation on other matters of broad consensus, such as replacing the Database.

Signed:
Civic Outreach For Fun & Enjoyable Events
Free Democrats of Talossa
Parti da Reformaziun

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

to start a wide-ranging and open-ended discussion on Talossa's Organic Law and constitutional structure, in which each party will promote its own preferences.

I applaud the parties on this accord but hope we will not see a re-run of the private Standing Committee blocking legislation from a Ziu vote. The leaders of two of the three member parties in this alliance need to promise this will not happen again. Hopefully open-ended means "open to the public" as well. Open Society would participate in that kind of effort and we believe that is what the Talossan people deserve.

[Glüc da Dhi S.H.]

On the assignment reform thing: again, why?

Every time we disturb catchment areas we are preventing any sort of unique provincial identity based on geography, which already takes years, if not decades, to build anyway.

Even worse if the idea is to make all provinces equally balanced in 'american'/'rest of the world', making provinces more similar than they already are.

Is this something the FreeDems truly believe is a good idea or just a concession to the pdr?

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

On the assignment reform thing: again, why?

Every time we disturb catchment areas we are preventing any sort of unique provincial identity based on geography, which already takes years, if not decades, to build anyway.

Even worse if the idea is to make all provinces equally balanced in 'american'/'rest of the world', making provinces more similar than they already are.

Is this something the FreeDems truly believe is a good idea or just a concession to the pdr?

Because of the gerrymandering inherent in Vuode being so underpopular, the question is *either* even it up so that Vuode becomes less of a ghost province, *or* take that out of the equation by ceasing to give each province even Senäts representation. And the latter is a bigger can of worms, but we can do it that way if there's broad support

[Dame Litz Cjantscheir, UrN]

I agree with S:reu da Dhi's caution regarding the redrawing of provincial assignment catchment areas. The unpredictable nature of immigration applications and the completion rate of these applications make it challenging to design a process that respects the unique provincial identities based on geography while maintaining a balanced immigration rate for each province. Inevitably, there will always be an underdog, regardless of how much we adjust the catchment areas.

However, I believe we should investigate the factual reasons behind Vuode's underpopulation and explore measures to promote immigration within the current catchment areas before considering redrawing the lines. Potential initiatives (and these are just suggestions) could include targeted advertising campaigns in these areas, a "fast track" citizenship process for applications from these regions, or specific measures to promote activity in "ghost provinces."

Moreover, I disagree with the notion that we must choose between catchment or Senäts representation reform. I think we can explore both options. I feel we need to move away from a US-modelled Ziu towards a structure more suited and representative of the Talossa of today.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

Does Avant plan to also support Open Society's effort on an apolitical Chancery/Civil Service?

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

I disagree with the notion that we must choose between catchment or Senäts representation reform. I think we can explore both options. I feel we need to move away from a US-modelled Ziu towards a structure more suited and representative of the Talossa of today.

That's an unexpected but welcome opening to the idea of constitutional reform. I certainly hope the IND Party will be part of the wide-ranging and open-ended OrgLaw discussion we hope to open.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

Does Avant plan to also support Open Society's effort on an apolitical Chancery/Civil Service?

[þerxh Sant-Enogat]

Does Avant plan to also support Open Society's effort on an apolitical Chancery/Civil Service?

Now that everybody and their aunt are Party Leaders, who will be allowed to take over from Sir Txec ?

[Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB]

Does Avant plan to also support Open Society's effort on an apolitical Chancery/Civil Service?

Now that everybody and their aunt are Party Leaders, who will be allowed to take over from Sir Txec ?

Am I going somewhere?

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

Does Avant plan to also support Open Society's effort on an apolitical Chancery/Civil Service?

Now that everybody and their aunt are Party Leaders, who will be allowed to take over from Sir Txec ?

Does Avant plan to also support Open Society's effort on an apolitical Chancery/Civil Service?

Does Avant plan to also support Open Society's effort on an apolitical Chancery/Civil Service?

Now that everybody and their aunt are Party Leaders, who will be allowed to take over from Sir Txec ?

Even with six parties and their leaders there are plenty of people who could step up to serve. Or resign as party leader to serve. I implore you all to address this issue. There are obvious solutions including one which would need no legislation (internal Chancery policy). I have said this before and will say again...not all future secretaries of state will be as honorable and well-intentioned as Txec. And future parties may be even more desperate than the FreeDems were to encourage Txec into the conflicted service.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

Does Avant plan to also support Open Society's effort on an apolitical Chancery/Civil Service?

Now that everybody and their aunt are Party Leaders, who will be allowed to take over from Sir Txec ?

Am I going somewhere?

I hear you are King John's preferred successor which delights me.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

The AVANT parties have taken 110 seats in the election and stand ready to form a government. I will be contacting the Seneschal directly in this manner to deal with questions of transition. A huge thank you to all our voters.

[mximo]

Azul,

"The Freedem, after spending a term sabotaging the former government, will now govern with their new friends. The thirst for power has led the anti-monarchist Freedem to now speak of royal succession. As for me, I have long respected the referendum's verdict on the monarchy. The Freedem also talk about working in harmony, but will they block our bills again before they can even be introduced to the Ziu? After mocking my position against the king, here is the new government asking for a new king. The Freedem are republicans only to maintain their vote election after election."

Mximo