[CRL] Terpelaziuns Reform Bill

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

I support the proposed 1.2.5, but I sharply oppose the proposal to limit terps.

What do you think of the third suggested amendment - the deletion of H.1.2.3.2?

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Seems fine to me.  It doesn't seem like it will have any material effect

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

WHEREAS the Túischac'h of the Cosa has requested amendments to the law on Terpelaziuns to enable him to more effectively moderate official questions to the Government, responses, supplementary questions, and to maintain decorum therein:

BE IT ENACTED by the King, Cosa and Senäts of Talossa in Ziu assembled that:

1. El Lexhatx H.1.2.3.2, which currently reads:

1.2.3.2 Once the first (round of) supplementary question(s) have been answered, the floor shall be considered open to contributions from other Members of the Cosă and Senators. Any questions posed in this stage shall not be bound by any formal time constraints.

is hereby deleted in its entirety.

2. A new section to be added to El Lexhatx, numbered H.1.2.5, as follows:

1.2.5. The presiding officer of the questioner's House shall enforce decorum in both Terpelaziuns and answers to Terpelaziuns. The presiding Officer may require questioners to rephrase Terpelaziuns, or Ministers or their substitutes to rephrase answers to Terpelaziuns, to maintain decorum. In cases of continued violations, the presiding Officer may instruct the questioner or the Minister or their substitute to withdraw or apologise for a statement or comment, and remove any such statement or comment from the record in the absence of such withdrawal or apology; or disallow any further supplementary questions and responses to the Terpelaziun at issue.

Uréu q'estadra så: Miestră Schivă (MC-AVANT)

[Sir Lüc]

I don't wish to comment on the merits of the bill but I have to say this H.1.2.5 should go on some sort of handbook for how to write an addendum that is consistent in form, tone and style with the preexisting legislation.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

I support 1.2.5. My major concern is 1.2.1.4 which limits the number of terpelaziuns for everyone but the opposition leader. Is that section being revised or withdrawn?

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

Can we CRL this @Sir Lüc ?

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

@Baron Alexandreu Davinescu @Dr. Pôl dal Nordselvă @þerxh Sant-Enogat for your attention

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

I'll be traveling today, but will give these some scrutiny tonight. Thank you for your patience.

[þerxh Sant-Enogat]

Sorry for my late answer on this.
I think this bill lacks the usual formalism (whereas, be replaced by, ..)
Two bills instead of one would allow to vote separately on 1.2.5. addition and 1.2.1 modification.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

WHEREAS the Túischac'h of the Cosa has requested amendments to the law on Terpelaziuns to enable him to more effectively moderate official questions to the Government, responses, supplementary questions, and to maintain decorum therein:

BE IT ENACTED by the King, Cosa and Senäts of Talossa in Ziu assembled that:

1. El Lexhatx H.1.2.3.2, which currently reads:

1.2.3.2 Once the first (round of) supplementary question(s) have been answered, the floor shall be considered open to contributions from other Members of the Cosă and Senators. Any questions posed in this stage shall not be bound by any formal time constraints.

is hereby deleted in its entirety.

2. A new section to be added to El Lexhatx, numbered H.1.2.5, as follows:

1.2.5. The presiding officer of the questioner's House shall enforce decorum in both Terpelaziuns and answers to Terpelaziuns. The presiding Officer may require questioners to rephrase Terpelaziuns, or Ministers or their substitutes to rephrase answers to Terpelaziuns, to maintain decorum. In cases of continued violations, the presiding Officer may instruct the questioner or the Minister or their substitute to withdraw or apologise for a statement or comment, and remove any such statement or comment from the record in the absence of such withdrawal or apology; or disallow any further supplementary questions and responses to the Terpelaziun at issue.

This bill looks fine in form and function, with one exception: it needs the sponsorship at the bottom.  Assuming that's fixed, I vote to approve.

[þerxh Sant-Enogat]

No objections any more, thanks