The "Reform" Plan

[Mic’haglh Autófil, SMC EiP]

Name the last rejected referendum.

Based on a little light digging, it would appear to be the referendum on an unknown amendment during the October 2005 general election. The Digest is pretty unclear on exactly what this bill was, as is the relevant ProBoards thread.

Frankly speaking, if support for the monarchy were so low that it could not even survive a referendum, then it probably shouldn't continue to exist anyway. "The people might vote in a way I don't like" is not reason to gatekeep referenda with a unilateral veto.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Name the last rejected referendum.

Based on a little light digging, it would appear to be the referendum on an unknown amendment during the October 2005 general election. The Digest is pretty unclear on exactly what this bill was, as is the relevant ProBoards thread.

Indeed.  Virtually every referendum succeeds.  It is unwise to design a system where referenda are the only backstop against a hasty and foolish change.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

Name the last rejected referendum.

The referendum on the Fiova-Florencia provincial merger, September 2019.

I agree that referenda shouldn't be the only backstop, which is why, in the discussion on the Succession, I insisted that the King's choice of Heir should be approved by the Ziu as well as by referendum. The value of referenda as an "additional" safeguard is for situations where the elected officials are totally disconnected from their base on a particular issue.

[Sir Lüc]

I would be interested in hearing more from other MZs who have yet to express much of an opinion. @Dame Litz Cjantscheir, UrN and @Sir Lüc come to mind, though the latter will likely be a bit more taciturn given his potential to become SoS in the near future.

Right, sorry if I don't address fresher points that may have come up but all my Talossan time has gone towards the referendum lately. My opinion is a bit scattered here and there (and I have the bad habit of leaving posts half-written and never finishing them, so things stay in my mind even though I assume people know) but to summarise:

- I am generally in favour of yearly Cosa terms, though lots of details need to be fleshed out; I don't think the proposed 8-month cycle works because then you don't alleviate at all the fact that each government is on a mega rush to get things done in time.

- I am absolutely in favour of having provinces play no part at all as constituencies for national elections (or if they must, only with proper weighting)

- I am not married to retaining the Senate, but I vaguely prefer it to switching to an unicameral Ziu. But again, if it was retained, I really prefer it to switch to a nationwide constituency with 4 seats up at each election, as I discussed elsewhere.

- (At another point in time I would have liked to see the Senate and the Cosa vote at different times, so the two houses's action as a check on each other is amplified, but this might be complicated.)

- I am not in favour of royal power-swapping.

- I am tentatively in favour of non-scheduled VoCs, and of constructive Votes of No Confidence.

- I am undecided on provisions for midterm party-swapping, but support free registration of political parties (and plan to add such capabilities to the new DB regardless)

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

I would be interested in hearing more from other MZs who have yet to express much of an opinion. @Dame Litz Cjantscheir, UrN and @Sir Lüc come to mind, though the latter will likely be a bit more taciturn given his potential to become SoS in the near future.

- I am generally in favour of yearly Cosa terms, though lots of details need to be fleshed out; I don't think the proposed 8-month cycle works because then you don't alleviate at all the fact that each government is on a mega rush to get things done in time.

I am really feeling the momentum. Like Walken with cowbell I can hear annual elections getting nearer now...

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

-(Mandatory Live Cosa Session) We really need to make better use of technology to connect. In combination with longer parliamentary terms we should have one live session (during the middle of the term perhaps) where we actually have direct terpelaziuns and ministerial reports. Let's be honest it is fun and notable when we actually get to see one another even if we nurture dislike of the words we see from each other.

This may be outside of the overall reform scope but I wanted to re-surface this as it didn't get much attention but I think it is a good idea. Especially as a part of more face-to-face interaction.

Even if it is not something placed into law shouldn't we make an informal effort to have at least one live Cosa session each term? Maybe right in the middle to allow time for government preparation and have terpelaziuns submitted a few days in advance to allow for the same.

I think it would be a boon for social connections and public interest.

[Ian Plätschisch]

Haven't been commenting too much, but quickly:

- Don't like getting rid of the King's veto
- Still hesitant about unicameralism, but could be open to some sort of change depending on the specifics.
- Don't love annual elections, that's probably too long in between.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

@Mic'haglh Autófil, SMC EiP This was a question that got lost in the mix from the complimentary terpelaziun I posted. Do you foresee a bill coming from this discussion for consideration this term?

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

Can I just reiterate my hobby horse - there *has* to be explicit provisions to choose a Seneschal between elections, if the incumbent quits/vanishes and the Distain isn't available

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

Can I just reiterate my hobby horse - there *has* to be explicit provisions to choose a Seneschal between elections, if the incumbent quits/vanishes and the Distain isn't available

This is indeed needed.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

@Mic'haglh Autófil, SMC EiP This was a question that got lost in the mix from the complimentary terpelaziun I posted. Do you foresee a bill coming from this discussion for consideration this term?

@Mic'haglh Autófil, SMC EiP ?

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

@Mic'haglh Autófil, SMC EiP This was a question that got lost in the mix from the complimentary terpelaziun I posted. Do you foresee a bill coming from this discussion for consideration this term?

Nearly two weeks since this question was posted and we are past the halfway point of the term. This is still a live question.

[Mic’haglh Autófil, SMC EiP]

- I am absolutely in favour of having provinces play no part at all as constituencies for national elections (or if they must, only with proper weighting)

I wanted to touch on this point specifically -- do I understand you correctly that you prefer either of my proposed options to an MMP electoral system?

This may be outside of the overall reform scope but I wanted to re-surface this as it didn't get much attention but I think it is a good idea. Especially as a part of more face-to-face interaction.

Even if it is not something placed into law shouldn't we make an informal effort to have at least one live Cosa session each term? Maybe right in the middle to allow time for government preparation and have terpelaziuns submitted a few days in advance to allow for the same.

I think it would be a boon for social connections and public interest.

This was something I considered outside the scope of these reforms -- since it's not necessarily a proposed change to law so much as custom -- but for what it may be worth, I would also like to see us utilize Living Cosas more regularly.

Can I just reiterate my hobby horse - there *has* to be explicit provisions to choose a Seneschal between elections, if the incumbent quits/vanishes and the Distain isn't available

I mean, given that the "power-swapping" arrangement appears to be more unpopular than popular, it would be expected that the Cosa retains the sole power in nominating a Seneschal. In that case, I imagine the current petition method is acceptable to use mid-term, no?

@Mic'haglh Autófil, SMC EiP This was a question that got lost in the mix from the complimentary terpelaziun I posted. Do you foresee a bill coming from this discussion for consideration this term?

That would be preferred, once we can arrive at a broader consensus. As it stands, the sixth Clark is tentatively scheduled for January, though if the Seneschal declares a month of recess for December that pushes it out to February. I'd like to think we can arrive at something by then. (I may actually go back through the thread and tabulate people's responses to individual items in the proposal, that way we know which parts are more likely to achieve broader support.)

Finally, I do want to apologize for the delayed response -- the past few weeks most of my energy has been devoted to a higher-than-usual workload at work and the process of beginning legal proceedings for marital dissolution. La vidă martscha.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

Awww man, I hope you don't think I was liking "marital dissolution", look after yourself

[Mic’haglh Autófil, SMC EiP]

Awww man, I hope you don't think I was liking "marital dissolution", look after yourself

Nah, I knew what you meant, lol. The hard part is in the past, now it's just paperwork.