The Legislative Proofreading Act

[Sir Lüc]

WHEREAS, the Scribery is directed by Lexh.H.2.1.5.1 and Lexh.C.1.3 to assist in the legislative process by providing advice to Members of the Cosă and Senators on the form of their bills; and

WHEREAS, in recent years that role has also been delegated to a Committee of the Ziu,  known as the CRL, by the provisions of Lexh.H.2.1; and

WHEREAS, this has proven cumbersome for three reasons:
1. The CRL's status as a standing committee, unless meaningless, implies bills should be referred to- and discharged from it; this is supported by the language of Lexh.H.2.1.4, and adds unnecessary complexity to our legislative process, stifling debate and necessitating active shepherding of a bill's voyage through the Hopper and Ziu;
2. The CRL's fixed composition, Lexh.H.2.1.5.3.1. notwithstanding (a provision used just once), makes it unnecessarily reliant upon the legislative ability and activity levels of three specific officeholders;
3. The CRL's requirement to only accept for referral bills that have laid before the Hopper for at least ten calendar days puts an implicit burden of judgement upon members to decide whether or not a substantially amended bill is still the same bill, which is outside the scope of the CRL's duties.

WHEREAS, as this last bullet point caused minor controversy last year, as no official definition of what a "bill" is exists, it may be helpful to officially declare what a bill is, and for less important reasons, to remark that Senses of the Ziu and similar nonbinding resolutions are not bills;

WHEREAS, concerning the first two bullet points, legislative proofreading is still highly desirable, and should be done in a more flexible and scalable way;

WHEREAS, additionally, the unregulated practice of posting "placeholders" in the Hopper is positive insofar as it encourages debate, but should be better (if minimally) regulated;

WHEREAS, additionally, it may be helpful to officially set out what happens to bills that are rejected, or are presently in the Hopper upon Dissolution, or need to be voted on again in the same form because of vetoes or other legislative requirements;

THEREFORE BE IT ENACTED by the Crown, Cosă and Senate in Ziu assembled, as follows.

1. El Lexhatx C.1.3.2, which currently reads:

1.3.2. The Scribe of Abbavilla shall maintain el Lexhatx in accordance with the directions in Title Z. The Scribe shall thus advise all proposers of bills to the Clark on proper formatting of their bills to conform with Title Z.

is amended to read:

1.3.2. The Scribe of Abbavilla shall maintain el Lexhatx in accordance with the directions in Title Z. To this end, the Scribery shall oversee a team of Clerks of Parliament (Clarqeux del Ziu), collectively forming the Office of the Clerks of Parliament (Óifisch dels Clarqeux del Ziu, OCZ), which shall advise the Ziu on proper form of legislation, as to conform with existing legislation, informal regulations, or other established customs; and to evaluate bills and resolutions from the technical point of view of the quality of the legislation, the correctness of the language, the internal consistency of the document and consistency with existing legislation.

    1.3.2.1. Clerks of Parliament serve indefinite terms on a voluntary basis, but the Scribe of Abbavilla, or a deputy, shall formally appoint Clerks and relieve Clerks for inactivity. Any Talossan with the right to vote in national elections shall be eligible to serve as Clerk.
    1.3.2.2. The Scribe of Abbavilla, or a deputy, shall review the composition of the OCZ as soon as practical after each General Election has ended, by calling for new volunteers and dismissing inactive Clerks.
        1.3.2.2.1. Additionally, during review, the following officeholders may each recommend to the Scribe to appoint a Clerk or, in the absence of a recommendation, shall serve themselves as Clerks by default as long as they hold their respective positions: the Attorney-General of the incoming Government, the Túischac'h, and the Mençei.
        1.3.2.2.2. Additionally, during review, the leader of the largest party in government and the Leader of the Opposition shall be explicitly asked if they wish to recommend a Clerk.
    1.3.2.3. The Scribe of Abbavilla may name any Clerk to serve as Principal Clerk. The Principal Clerk shall co-supervise the OCZ and may issue recommendations and guidelines that, though legally non-binding, shall generally be understood to guide the work of the OCZ. In the absence of such an appointment, the Scribe shall serve as Principal Clerk by default.
    1.3.2.4. The Scribe of Abbavilla and/or the Principal Clerk may co-ordinate the work of the OCZ, such as by informally assigning one or more Clerks to review one particular proposal.
    1.3.2.5. Clerks of Parliament shall be understood to be civil servants in the Scribery, but Clerks of Parliament shall not serve as Deputy Scribes, nor act in the stead of the Scribe in any other way, unless they have been separately appointed to that position.

2. El Lexhatx H.2.1 and all subsections thereof, which currently read:

2.1. No bill may be published in a Clark unless it has passed the Hopper, as provided in this section.

    2.1.1. All citizens of Talossa are entitled to participate fully in discussions and debates in the Hopper, within the bounds of law and of the decisions of the administering and presiding authorities of the Hopper. Any citizen may submit a draft of legislation to the Hopper, though these shall not be considered to be "legislative proposals" until sponsored by one or more individuals authorised to submit legislative proposals under Organic Law VII.5.

    2.1.2. A bill has passed the Hopper if it has spent at least 10 days in the Hopper, and is exclusively limited to the following:
        2.1.2.1. Non-binding proclamations that have no effect other than express the wish of the Cosa, Senate, or Ziu as a whole, in which case the bill must contain the words "Sense of the Cosa", "Sense of the Senate" or "Sense of the Ziu" in its title.
        2.1.2.2. Proclamations that establish the position of the Ziu on a foreign policy issue.
        2.1.2.3. Establishment of a committee that has no powers other than advisory powers and whose recommendations must still be approved by the Ziu in order to be binding and making appointments to such a committee.
        2.1.2.4. Appointments to functions that are already defined in law and for which the Ziu is explicitly allowed to make appointments according to law.
        2.1.2.5. Any decision which the law explicitly allows the Ziu to make without the bill containing such a decision having to go through committee.
        2.1.2.6. Removing a regent or consenting to the re-appointment of a regent in accordance with Org.II.5, or confirming the nomination of an Heir Presumptive in accordance with Org.II.7.[719]
        2.1.2.7. Revoking a Prüm Diktat.
        2.1.2.8. Notices of reprimand in accordance with Org.VIII.5.
        2.1.2.9. The granting or restoration of citizenship
        2.1.2.10. A bill that was passed by the previous Cosa but, due to Organic Law provisions, must be passed once again to take effect.[720]
        2.1.2.11. A bill that was passed by a previous Cosa but did not take effect due to drafting errors, which are explicitly corrected in the revised bill.[721]

    2.1.3. A bill has passed the Hopper if it has spent at least 10 days in the Hopper and at least half of the Senators and 2/3 of Cosă seats express their support in the Hopper for clarking the bill.

    2.1.4. After a legislative proposal has spent at least 10 days in the Hopper, its proposer may request that it "move to committee". No bill may be Clarked without being "moved to committee", except as provided by Lexh.H.2.1.2. or Lexh.H.2.1.3.

    2.1.5. For each Cosă term is created a Comità da Redacziun Legislatïu (in english Legislative Advisory Committee), hereinafter "the CRL", which shall review or revise all legislative items from the Hopper once they have moved to committee; and may recommend acceptance or rejection , or suggest amendments in their best judgment.
        2.1.5.1. The main, but not exclusive, purpose of the CRL, with the assistance of the Scribery, shall be to evaluate bills from the technical point of view of the quality of the legislation, the correctness of the language, the internal consistency of the document and consistency with existing legislation.
        2.1.5.2. The CRL shall conduct all its deliberations openly in the Hopper.
        2.1.5.3. The CRL shall consist of the incumbent Mençéi, Túischac'h, and Avocat-Xheneral.
            2.1.5.3.1. The Mençéi, Túischac'h, and Avocat-Xheneral may at any time appoint and dismiss one Senator or one Membreu dal Cosă, to serve as a member of the CRL in their place.[722]
        2.1.5.4. The CRL may create further committees to which their functions may be delegated, as concerns any bill or category of bills. Such a committee must have at least 3 members, including at least 1 Membreu dal Cosă and 1 Senator.

    2.1.6. After the CRL has given its recommendation, or if it gives no recommendation within 30 days of the bill having passed to committee, the bill has passed the Hopper and the sponsor of the bill may ask for it to be Clarked, with or without amendments.
        2.1.6.1. The same bill can not be submitted to the Clark more than once in the same Cosa, unless the original bill was vetoed, the original bill had been retired or voted down by its main sponsor during the voting period, or the bill has been substantially amended, as judged by the Secretary of State.
        2.1.6.2. Bills must be submitted to the Secretary of State more than 24 hours before the publication of the Clark. Bills received less than 24 hours before publication of the Clark shall be published in the next Clark or postponed for one Clark, at the Secretary of State's discretion.

    2.1.7. The Secretary of State is empowered to refuse to put a certain bill on a Clark if said bill:
        2.1.7.1. appears to him to be obviously on its face inorganic, or to have such grave errors as would make it ineffective and/or require further legislation or a Prüm Diktat to make it effective;
        2.1.7.2. does not specify exactly the Law(s) or Article(s) which it seeks to amend, change, or repeal, if the bill seeks to amend, change, or repeal any Article of the Organic Law or any Law;
        2.1.7.3. is not clearly typed or word-processed; and/or
        2.1.7.4. is so substantially different from its form as a legislative proposal when "passed to committee" that it constitutes a significantly different proposal;
        2.1.7.5. has not passed the Hopper or is deemed by the sponsor to have passed the Hopper in accordance with Lexh.H.2.1.2. but is in the judgement of the Secretary of State not exclusively limited to the items listed in Lexh.H.2.1.2.
        2.1.7.6. Any such decision shall be subject to judicial review.

    2.1.8. All bills submitted for the Clark shall be in one of the national languages.

    2.1.9. The Secretary of State shall remove legislative proposals from the Hopper at the request of the author.
        2.1.9.1. If a legislative proposal has remained in the Hopper for more than 59 days, it shall be considered to have been removed, though any person entitled to do so may subsequently re-publish it.

    2.1.10. Notwithstanding the rules about a bill's eligibility to be Clarked, if no bill was submitted to the Clark at the moment of publication, the Secretary of State shall be allowed to add to the Clark a simple bill asking for Quorum where Cosa Members and Senators can vote to confirm their presence for the Clark.

    2.1.11. The Secretary of State is under no obligation to create a permanent record of legislative proposals in "The Hopper."

are amended to read:

2.1. A bill is a legislative proposal seeking to make a new law or to amend or repeal an existing law. A resolution is a written proposal which is explicitly non-binding, or does not seek to make a new law nor to amend or repeal an existing law.


    2.1.1. No bill or resolution may be published in a Clark unless it has been presented to the Hopper.
        2.1.1.1. The Hopper shall both be construed to mean a collection of proposals being actively scrutinised, and the place where such scrutiny takes place, under the provisions of Title J of El Lexhatx and Organic Law VII.4.
        2.1.1.2. All citizens of Talossa are entitled to participate fully in discussions and debates in the Hopper, within the bounds of law and of the decisions of the administering and presiding authorities of the Hopper.
        2.1.1.3. Presentation to the Hopper shall entail the posting of a properly formatted bill or resolution, consisting of a title, an optional preamble, an enacting clause, a body of provisions, and a list of eligible sponsors.
         2.1.1.4. Any citizen may submit a proposal to the Hopper, though these shall not be considered to be "bills" or "resolutions" until sponsored by one or more individuals authorised to submit proposals under Organic Law VII.5, and shall not be considered to be "presented" until sponsored by at least a person eligible to present a bill or resolution, and structured in a form compliant with H.2.1.1.3.
        2.1.1.5. Should the author of a proposal lose their ability to submit proposals under Organic Law VII.5 at any point between presentation and submission to the Clark, they can be substituted as main sponsor by another individual still able to do so; this change of sponsor will not count as a break when determining lengths of time concerning the proposal.
        2.1.1.6. Any citizen may submit placeholders to the Hopper that do not contain actual formatted legislation but are expected to be fleshed out into a bill or resolution at a later date; however, for the purpose of determining when a bill or resolution has been presented to the Hopper, this shall be taken to mean the day an actual formatted draft, consisting of a title and enacting clause at least, was posted.

    2.1.2. The Office of the Clerks of Parliament (OCZ) may advise proponents of bills or resolutions about style and form.
        2.1.2.1. At any point between presentation and the proposal being published in a Clark, a Clerk of Parliament may suggest amendments to the proposal, provided the amendments fall under the scope of the review provided for in C.1.3.2.; the author of the proposal may accept or reject these.
        2.1.2.2. Equally, at any point between presentation and the proposal being published in a Clark, a Clerk of Parliament may issue a "positive check" on the proposal, signifying that in their opinion it would be ready for Clarking for what concerns style and form.
        2.1.2.3. Should the proposal be submitted for Clarking by its author with any pending OCZ amendments, the Secretary of State may automatically apply them if such amendments have laid unanswered for more than a day, and if the original proposal is flawed such that it would be refused for Clarking pursuant to H.2.1.4.3, if left unamended.

    2.1.3. No bill or resolution may be published in a Clark unless it is eligible for Clarking.
        2.1.3.1. A bill or resolution is eligible for Clarking if it has spent at least a week in the Hopper, and is exclusively limited to the following:
             2.1.3.1.1. Non-binding resolutions that have no effect other than express the wish of the Cosa, Senate, or Ziu as a whole, in which case the bill must contain the words "Sense of the Cosa", "Sense of the Senate" or "Sense of the Ziu" in its title.
             2.1.3.1.2. Resolutions that establish the position of the Ziu on a foreign policy issue.
             2.1.3.1.3. Bills or resolutions establishing a committee that has no powers other than advisory powers, and whose recommendations must still be approved by the Ziu in order to be binding, and resolutions making appointments to such a committee.
             2.1.3.1.4. Resolutions appointing people to functions that are already defined in law and for which the Ziu is explicitly allowed to make appointments according to law.
             2.1.3.1.5. Bills or resolutions making any decision which the law explicitly allows the Ziu to make without the bill or resolution containing such a decision having to go through committee.
             2.1.3.1.6. Resolutions removing a regent or consenting to the re-appointment of a regent in accordance with Org.II.5, or confirming the nomination of an Heir Presumptive in accordance with Org.II.7.
             2.1.3.1.7. Resolutions revoking a Prüm Diktat.
             2.1.3.1.8. Resolutions constituting notices of reprimand in accordance with Org.VIII.5.
             2.1.3.1.9. Resolutions granting or restoring citizenship.
             2.1.3.1.10. Bills or resolutions that have previously been vetoed, if presented in the same form to override a veto.
             2.1.3.1.11. Bills or resolutions that were passed in a previous term but, due to legislative provisions, must be passed once again to take effect.
             2.1.3.1.11. Bills or resolutions that were passed but did not take effect due to drafting errors, which are explicitly corrected in the revised text.
        2.1.3.2. A bill or resolution is eligible for Clarking if it has spent at least a week in the Hopper, and at least half of the Senators and members representing at least half of the Cosa request the bill or resolution be discharged from the Hopper. This shall not apply to bills seeking to amend the Organic Law. Resolutions that are to be voted on by one House only shall only require half of the members of that House to request discharge.
        2.1.3.3. In all other cases, a bill or resolution is eligible for Clarking if any of the following applies:
            2.1.3.3.1. it has spent at least two weeks in the Hopper and has received one or more amendments by at least one Clerk of Parliament, which have been accepted and applied by the author;
            2.1.3.3.2. it has spent at least two weeks in the Hopper and has received two or more "positive checks" by at least two Clerk of Parliament;
            2.1.3.3.3. it has spent at least a month in the Hopper and has received one or more positive checks by at least one Clerk of Parliament.

    2.1.4. A bill or resolution can be submitted to the Clark once it is eligible for Clarking.
        2.1.4.1. The Secretary of State shall allow for bills and resolutions to be submitted for Clarking ("Call for Bills") at least five days in advance of the upcoming Clark, but bills and resolutions received less than 24 hours before publication of the Clark shall be published in the next Clark or postponed for one Clark, at the Secretary of State's discretion.
        2.1.4.2. The same bill can not be submitted to the Clark more than once in the same Cosa, unless the original bill was vetoed, the original bill had been declared retired or voted down by its main sponsor during the voting period, or the bill has been substantially amended, as judged by the Secretary of State.
        2.1.4.3. The Secretary of State is empowered to refuse to put a certain bill or resolution on a Clark:
             2.1.4.3.1. if the bill or resolution is not eligible for Clarking according to H.2.1.3 and subsections thereof, or to H.2.1.4.2;
             2.1.4.3.2. if the bill appears to him to be obviously on its face inorganic, or to have such grave errors as to make it ineffective and/or require further legislation or a Prüm Diktat to make it effective;
             2.1.4.3.3. if the bill does not specify exactly the Law(s) or Article(s) which it seeks to amend, change, or repeal, if the bill seeks to amend, change, or repeal any Article of the Organic Law or any Law;
             2.4.4.3.4. if the bill or resolution is not clearly typed or word-processed;
             2.4.4.3.5. for bills and resolutions subject to H.2.1.3.3, if the bill or resolution is so substantially different from when it last received OCZ review that it constitutes a significantly different proposal.
        2.1.4.4. Should there be any unapplied OCZ amendments that would fix the issues covered by H.2.1.4.3, the Secretary of State is empowered to apply them prior to Clarking as detailed in H.2.1.2.2.
              2.1.4.4.1. The Secretary of State is also empowered to autonomously fix any instances in which a bill or resolution is mistitled, such as if a nonbinding resolution is titled an "Act" or a bill seeking amending the Organic Law is not titled an "Amendment".
        2.1.4.5. If no bill or resolution was submitted to the Clark at the moment of publication, the Secretary of State shall be allowed to add to the Clark a simple nonbinding resolution on any topic. In this case, H.2.1.1 shall be considered waived.
        2.1.4.6. A bill or resolution must be submitted for the Clark by its main sponsor, including if the main sponsor is not its author (such as under the provisions of H.2.1.1.4), unless the main sponsor gives advance notice that another member eligible to submit proposals will offer it on their behalf.

    2.1.5. All bills and resolutions submitted for the Clark shall be in English or Talossan.

    2.1.6. Proposals posted to the Hopper shall expire and may be archived by the Secretary of State, without prejudice to them being re-published at a later date, under any of the following conditions:
        2.1.6.1. If the author declares the proposal is withdrawn or merged with another;
        2.1.6.2. If the proposal lies in the Hopper for more than three months, without counting any intervening days in which the Cosa is dissolved;
        2.1.6.3. If the proposal became eligible for Clarking but was not then submitted to the Clark in the two subsequent "Calls for Bills";
        2.1.6.4. If the proposal is in the form of a placeholder, if has laid in the Hopper for more than three months without being fleshed out into a bill or resolution.

Uréu q'estadra så,

Sir Lüc da Schir (Secretary of State)

[Sir Lüc]

So this bill has been in my Google Docs drafts for more than a year now, as might be evident by the events I referenced; it's been pretty challenging to find an elegant way to solve the issues I have outlined in the preamble, but I think I'm finally mostly happy to publish it to the Hopper.

This bill seeks to:

• Replace the CRL with a new Scribery-led OCZ, for more flexibility in who does the review and when the review can happen;
• Define what is a bill and what is a resolution, and regulates placeholder bills, and defines when they become a proper proposal;
• Slightly elongates minimum Hopper time to 14 days for most bills, but shortens it to 7 days for bills that don't need review;
• Allows/better regulates changes of main sponsor;
• Allows someone other than the main sponsor to Clark a bill, if authorised;
• Better regulates expiry of bills from the Hopper;
• Better regulates when the Call for Bills happens.

(I still want to do a side by side comparison of CRL vs OCZ review, but I don't have enough time to type it up right now.)