Succession Solution Amendment

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

I repeat: Maybe the recall petition would be enough, but I'd have to see the details. And I can't imagine I'd vote for any process (either for removal or for nominating a successor) which is too complicated/has too many steps.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

I repeat: Maybe the recall petition would be enough, but I'd have to see the details. And I can't imagine I'd vote for any process (either for removal or for nominating a successor) which is too complicated/has too many steps.

Complicated, right.
I am glad to hear the recall petition could be a step forward and that the TNC proposal might be the basis for an enduring solution.

I wanted to add something via this edit: Thank you to the Seneschal and Miestra for engaging with the proposal. This is actually an exciting moment.

[xpb]

Thank you for your feedback.  I don't want to be unreasonable, but this represents a pretty careful months-long effort to bring together a number of stakeholders with very different views.  So please believe me when I say that I'm going to do my best, but I think only some of what you propose is possible. 

On one hand, I see what you mean, but on the other, it's kind of irritating. If you were having a months-long discussion with the goal of presenting a nearly-finished amendment, it probably should have included everyone important enough to have their own entrance music (i.e., the Seneschal).

With that aside, I think there are two conceptually distinct aspects of Monarchy reform that both need to be addressed:
1. How should a new King be selected?
2. How should the current King be able to be replaced before their death or voluntary abdication?

Unlike my fellow Free Democrats, I am not that concerned with #1. I personally like my Convocation idea but the other proposals seem mostly fine to me as well (although I am not sure a new King should be able to be elected with only a bare majority of the votes). I think it is fine if the current King gets a say over their successor, and I do not think the democratic-ness of the selection process should be the overriding consideration, as long as there is an element of democracy involved.

As should surprise no one, I am very concerned with #2. A King could be doing a very poor job without committing anything actually criminal, so I don't think the current mechanisms for removing the King pass muster. I understand the aversion to regular votes of confidence, though. What about this:

If the Secretary of State is presented with a petition signed by 1/3 of all the citizens of Talossa to remove the King, then the Secretary of State shall call a referendum on the question. The King is removed if at least 3/5 of the votes are in favor.

Now there is no fixed term of office. I will also point out, given the nature of Talossa, getting 1/3 of all Talossans on the petition would be an enormous task, so this isn't something that could be done willy-nilly.

Without regard to any other parts of this (and it would likely be well within a partisan effort to get a petition of one-third) I don't recall any other place in the law where there is a 60% supermajority vote, only 66⅔

[Sir Ian Plätschisch]

Is there any update on this? I would imagine it will not be proposed this Cosa, but I am interested to hear any developments.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

I don't have any immediate updates, since I had to mostly set aside Talossan stuff for the past few weeks (which is why I was pretty quiet).  I'm working on it -- I really want this to be a solved issue that we can set aside and stop fighting about.  But finding a solution that is palatable to everyone is crazy hard, since some monarchists feel like some recent proposals are just a stalking horse for the next step to ending the monarchy, and some republicans feel like they'd be signing up for the end of their movement if they agreed to anything.  I do think the gap can be bridged with a sufficiently thoughtful approach.  I appreciate the earnest and thoughtful engagement so many have already given the proposal.

We can and will find a point of agreement to settle this issue that is mutually (un)satisfactory to His Majesty, supporters of strong monarchy, and supporters of republicanism.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

I'd like to reintroduce this to the current Cosa.  I will be contacting stakeholders again soon, to see if there's a path forward right now.

One thing right off the bat that might be able to be done: @Ian Plätschisch , you were very open to this proposal initially, but suggested you'd like something more selective than an open election, and also an easier means to remove the monarch.  If the method of selection of a candidate were by means of the convocation thing you invented for your own monarch selection bill, compromising between the two, would you be in support of this?  I know it wouldn't be your ideal, but I'm not sure that everyone would sign off on a way to make it much easier to remove the monarch beyond the existing methods that permit removal with one vote in case of mis or non feasance.  I don't want the perfect to be the enemy of the good, here -- let's get a system in place that hits this great sweet spot with the strength of the monarchy but also the voice of the people.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

No, no, and no.

If the King is allowed to nominate his own replacement, we all know who he will nominate.

He will nominate the same person who he nominated as Regent when he "ragequit" last time.

And that is simply unacceptable, and would lead to mass renunciations.

There is absolutely no incentive for people who are not members of the TNC and are not part of its "personality cult" to support this amendment. As it stands, when the King abdicates or passes to his great reward, his replacement will be chosen by the regular procedure of Organic Law. And that's much better than letting him name a successor to lord it over us. So let it be.

Trying to "get around" Senator Plätschisch as an individual will have no reward. The Free Democrat majority in the Senäts will vote as a team on this issue. If you have an option which might be better for reformist or Republican opinion - the people who were elected on a platform that this current King must go - we crave to hear it, but we doubt it.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

No, no, and no.

If the King is allowed to nominate his own replacement, we all know who he will nominate.

He will nominate the same person who he nominated as Regent when he "ragequit" last time.

And that is simply unacceptable, and would lead to mass renunciations.

Fascinating.
Who would renounce in an actual "ragequit" rather than a theorized one?

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

No, no, and no.

If the King is allowed to nominate his own replacement, we all know who he will nominate.

He will nominate the same person who he nominated as Regent when he "ragequit" last time.

And that is simply unacceptable, and would lead to mass renunciations.

Fascinating.
Who would renounce in an actual "ragequit" rather than a theorized one?

Preserving this against the inevitable deletion, once the Seneschal realises he just said "WELL GET OUT THEN, THERE'S THE DOOR" to a large proportion of the nation.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

No, no, and no.

If the King is allowed to nominate his own replacement, we all know who he will nominate.

He will nominate the same person who he nominated as Regent when he "ragequit" last time.

And that is simply unacceptable, and would lead to mass renunciations.

Fascinating.
Who would renounce in an actual "ragequit" rather than a theorized one?

Preserving this against the inevitable deletion, once the Seneschal realises he just said "WELL GET OUT THEN, THERE'S THE DOOR" to a large proportion of the nation.

And it is also saved for the next time you make this threat, Miestra.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

First of all I should make clear that I have no reason to believe, at all, that the king has a successor in mind or that he would pick me. I'm not sure I would be a good choice, and I'm not sure I will be willing to accept a lifetime appointment. Everyone knows that I take that whole idea very seriously.

But if under this proposal, His Majesty selected myself or Dama Miestra or anyone else at all, they would only be confirmed as the successor once a democratically elected vote had agreed upon the choice. So there is absolutely zero chance that the king would somehow be able to force his choice on the country. In fact, one of the reasons why so many people like myself find this proposal so hard to swallow is that it would be pretty easy to force a general election instead of the outlined procedure.

I didn't know there was already an agreement on the matter, and that you could speak for every FDT senator. I thought I was able to ask Ian what he thought. Thank you for letting me know.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

You see the issue in the above two posts. The Baron says that he can't understand why anyone would think he's already lined up for Dear Successor. The Seneschal admits that that's the plan, and that anyone who doesn't like it can get lost.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

You see the issue in the above two posts. The Baron says that he can't understand why anyone would think he's already lined up for Dear Successor. The Seneschal admits that that's the plan, and that anyone who doesn't like it can get lost.

No, I noted your threat of "mass renunciations" and asked who was a part of this mass, Miestra. Which you appear hesitant to describe. You have made a representation and I am curious who these potential rage-quitters are.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

Brenéir, we had a PM conversation a while ago, do you remember? I tried to explain to you - in frank and unemotional language - exactly why there is such massive animus towards your Distain on our side of politics, and why trying to parachute that person into the Monarchy would be a disaster for the Kingdom. Now it appears that you simply didn't believe me, and want to try it out to see if we mean it.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

Brenéir, we had a PM conversation a while ago, do you remember? I tried to explain to you - in frank and unemotional language - exactly why there is such massive animus towards your Distain on our side of politics, and why trying to parachute that person into the Monarchy would be a disaster for the Kingdom. Now it appears that you simply didn't believe me, and want to try it out to see if we mean it.

I simply ask who these people are, Miestra. You said "mass renunciation."

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

You see the issue in the above two posts. The Baron says that he can't understand why anyone would think he's already lined up for Dear Successor. The Seneschal admits that that's the plan, and that anyone who doesn't like it can get lost.

That's not what he said.

I'm not going to engage with you like this. If no one else from the FDT is allowed to work towards a compromise while under your watchful gaze, that's unfortunate, but fine. I'll keep trying to make progress anyway.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

There's me, for a start. I will not live under "King Alex", or even under "Crown Prince Alex".

There's no organised movement - yet - because the situation has not become real yet. I am not discussing an already prepared plan, just what I sense is the general feeling on my side of politics. The precedent is the mass renunciation of the Talossan Liberal Party in 1999, after then-King Robert I said that he would simply never appoint one of them as Seneschal even if they won the election.

Maybe I'm wrong, lol, maybe it is just me.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

But if under this proposal, His Majesty selected myself or Dama Miestra or anyone else at all

Just on this issue: if KJ1 selected me, I'd turn it down because I'm a principled Republican.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

I'm flattered that you think I'd be so easily confirmed by a plebiscite, but - frankly - I doubt either you or I would be likely to be selected.

Anyway, if you ever relax your red lines here, or if FDT members decide to engage outside of your representation, I'd be eager to keep working towards a compromise. I'll keep trying to do what I can to find workable solutions.

[Sir Ian Plätschisch]

I'm not really interested in any reform to how the succession works unless it includes either fixed (renewable) terms or some other way of replacing the incumbent. Otherwise, to take an expression you use a lot, it's nothing but "rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic." There is no reason to believe King John would need to be replaced under current law for the next several years, so there is little reason to do anything about it right now.