The Free Democrats Want YOU!

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

It seems that a major issue in this election will be the proper relationship between Government and Opposition.

The Free Democrat position is that:

• The job of the Government is to govern - to enact its programme. The job of the Opposition is to oppose - to critique the Government's programme and its enactment thereof, and to offer alternatives.
• It is not the responsibility of the Opposition to help the Government with its programme or the enactment of it - unless the Opposition becomes part of the Government and gets to help determine that programme.
• The Opposition might find it good to allow individual members to work for the Government in the Civil Service or in administrative, non-Cabinet roles, if this will be good for the Kingdom and support Opposition priorities

The new TNC Green and Red Party Progressive Alliance programme asserts, in so many words, that it was at least in part the fault of the Free Democrat opposition that the outgoing TNC government - whose record they are defending - didn't do much of anything at all. Let's set the record straight.

• There would have been no TNC government at all without the deal to temporarily give the TNC one seat. I don't think there has been any other time in history when a Talossan party literally gave a seat to a political opponent. Give us credit.
• Under Seneschal Excelsio, the Free Democrats seriously debated providing a Cabinet Minister (and we were aware that people inside the TNC were arguing very hard against it). The major argument against it was the principled one I mentioned above - if we became part of the Government we could no longer properly act as an Opposition, and there would therefore be no effective Opposition, which would be bad for democracy. And how would we vote on the Vote of Confidence? Could we vote against a Government we were part of? Eventually Seneschal Excelsio withdrew his offer, which we didn't object to because we were in two minds on the whole thing anyway.
• Seneschal Sant-Enogat later renewed the offer to bring us into Cabinet. All the issues mentioned above still applied, in addition to the collapse of trust between the two parties caused by the campaign of political destruction waged against Seneschal Excelsio. So the decision to turn it down was easier. By a staggering coincidence, that collapse of trust (and the way the TNC rewarded the political wrecking-ball responsible by making him Distain and a member of the Standing Committee) is the main reason the Standing Committee didn't do very much.

So a Free Democrat-led government will operate in what we consider a "traditional" way:

• The Cabinet will be drawn from those Parties (and independent or non-political Minister) who agree to a common programme and to collective responsibility for that programme, and if they have Cosa seats, to vote YES on the VoC.
• Qualified and enthusiastic Members of Opposition parties will be welcome to take on non-political roles, even Deputy Ministerships, to enact Government policies but not get to help decide those policies.
• We promise never to try to blame the Opposition for not helping the Government enact its programme. We would expect the Opposition to help only if it's something that they politically agree on, and we would ask politely for such help.
• Terpelaziuns are an important part of keeping the Government honest. We pledge to answer all Terpelaziuns honestly, and all polite Terpelaziuns politely. We won't claim that our own failures are the Oppositions because they asked too few Terps, or too many.
• Free Democrat MCs will be required to uphold Party policy and collective decisions, including on Votes of Confidence. This is how we keep accountability with the voters. A party which just lets its MCs do "whatever" can't be held responsible for anything.
• No rage-monsters or wrecking balls in Cabinet. Trust is necessary.

The Government is not entitled to the help of the Opposition. The Free Democrats helped the outgoing TNC government, perhaps too much, but we're still blamed for their failings. If the Progressive Alliance want to stand on that record, they have to take responsibility for it. In fact, the PA seems to have a different view than us altogether on what "taking political responsibility" entails.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

No rage-monsters or wrecking balls in Cabinet. Trust is necessary.

That darned "wrecking ball" helped you get monarchy reform across the finish line too. And participated in that secret committee you created to block a Chancery Reform bill and then, inconveniently, forced you to block it. So pesky that trust thing...it's there when the goal is just shiny enough?

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

Seneschal Sant-Enogat later renewed the offer to bring us into Cabinet. All the issues mentioned above still applied, in addition to the collapse of trust between the two parties caused by the campaign of political destruction waged against Seneschal Excelsio. So the decision to turn it down was easier. By a staggering coincidence, that collapse of trust (and the way the TNC rewarded the political wrecking-ball responsible by making him Distain and a member of the Standing Committee) is the main reason the Standing Committee didn't do very much.

You are claiming that I forced you not to propose any Organic Law reforms in the Standing Organic Law Reform Committee you demanded be created?

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

On the question of trust, I think my words to the last Free Democrat convention still apply.

But on more important matters: Priority 2 for a FreeDems-led government will be getting our websites back under public control.

Right now, Wittenberg, talossa.com and all those other good things are on a server privately controlled by the Minister of Technology. This was a sensible short-term solution given the need to get off collapsing DoRoyal in a hurry. But it seems to have become semi-permanent - especially given that the party the outgoing Minister belonged to no longer exists, which means there will be no accountability relationship once the new Government takes over.

Under a Free Democrat-led government, our websites will be run by a non-political Permanent Secretary and housed on a commercial webhost paid out of the National Treasury. The Database shows what happens when we rely on "private enterprise" for our national infrastructure. Which reminds me, the new Database will *also* be on the same servers.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

I'm sure that there's a consensus here.  We haven't made the move because (a) it's hard to beat free kindness from a citizen, but we do still need to find someplace cheap and (b) we need someplace stable so we don't have a repeat.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

The more areas of cross-party consensus the better

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

The more areas of cross-party consensus the better

I hope we can reach cross-party consensus on the matter of an apolitical Chancery/Civil Service too, Miestra. An enlargement of it is in both the Open Society and FreeDem political programs after all.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

It increasingly seems that the two major parties in this election - i.e. the two which will feasibly lead the next government - are the Free Democrats and the Progressive Alliance. Especially since recent events suggest that, despite their positioning as a centrist party, the PA are regrouping at least part of the people who have made monarchism the centre-point of their Talossan identity.

I've talked with the PA leader/incumbent Seneschal about having a public video chat, like I did with the TNC leader last election. This is not going to happen, which is a pity. There are a lot of things where the two parties agree (technology issues, like the Database and the National Websites, in particular). So I think we owe it to the voters to clarify any serious differences, otherwise what are they supposed to vote based on?

The most obvious difference is that the Free Democrats are in an alliance that includes an unshamed Republican party, and are ourselves interested in a wider discussion on constitutional issues. A perhaps more subtle difference is that - despite the fact that the outgoing TNC government exploded - the PA leader is the outgoing Seneschal and therefore responsible for the record of that government, from the time he took over after his predecessor was wrecking-balled out. It really doesn't do to insinuate that the reason his was an inactive Government was that we somehow failed as an opposition.

But apart from that, exactly why are the FreeDems and the PA different parties? Does it just boil down to one social clique have beef with another one? It would be shameful if so. This is why we need some kind of debate to balance this out. And honestly I think live-action chat is more conducive to actually clarifying/settling issues than duelling manifestos.

Anyway, our Election Program is now out.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

The more areas of cross-party consensus the better

I hope we can reach cross-party consensus on the matter of an apolitical Chancery/Civil Service too, Miestra. An enlargement of it is in both the Open Society and FreeDem political programs after all.

This could be a distinction between the FreeDems and the Progressive Alliance. @þerxh Sant-Enogat I do think we see eye to eye on this?

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

You cannot view this attachment.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

There is indeed a fundamental difference in principle between the parties. We agree that there is a real need to make sure that the Secretary of State, the Chancery and the whole Royal Civil Service act without any hint of partisan bias. We do not agree that limiting the civil rights to free association of the Secretary of State are necessary or justifiable in that regard; nor that, when the Secretary of State briefly served as Free Democrats Party President during a crisis, he behaved improperly or even criminally.

This is you from February 2024. If the bolded part is still your stance then it is a reasonable potential distinction between the FreeDems and the Progressive Alliance. Certainly between Open Society and the FreeDems.

I also wanted to check as to why "you needing a break" (Txec's words) is considered a crisis on a scale to cause an appearance of partisanship for one of the nation's most powerful civil servants?

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

A Lot of people are coming to me and saying that they might not vote Free Democrats because they think we have the election all sewn up and they don't want us to have a bulldozer supermajority.

It's precisely that kind of complacency which sunk the Government in the last election and might well sink us.

If you like the FreeDem candidates and programme best, vote FreeDems. Don't engage in weird game theory which might lead to people you don't want forming the next government. If you're really worried, vote for one of our alliance partners.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

Tapping the sign...

I've talked with the PA leader/incumbent Seneschal about having a public video chat, like I did with the TNC leader last election. This is not going to happen, which is a pity. There are a lot of things where the two parties agree (technology issues, like the Database and the National Websites, in particular). So I think we owe it to the voters to clarify any serious differences, otherwise what are they supposed to vote based on?

The most obvious difference is that the Free Democrats are in an alliance that includes an unshamed Republican party, and are ourselves interested in a wider discussion on constitutional issues. A perhaps more subtle difference is that - despite the fact that the outgoing TNC government exploded - the PA leader is the outgoing Seneschal and therefore responsible for the record of that government, from the time he took over after his predecessor was wrecking-balled out. It really doesn't do to insinuate that the reason his was an inactive Government was that we somehow failed as an opposition.

But apart from that, exactly why are the FreeDems and the PA different parties? Does it just boil down to one social clique have beef with another one?