Statement on "negative attacks"

[Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP]

How is your idea of mirroring application emails to the A-Xh (who would be a cabinet member and part of the governing coalition) any more transparent than doing the same but with someone appointed by HM Opposition

Yeah, that's a great point!  I'd suggest that my other suggested option of a justice would be the better choice.  I think the A-X is typically going to be fairly unlikely to abet a crime, but a justice would be much more unlikely.  Or even an email account the justices can all access.  It'd probably never be used, unless there's some reason to suspect that applications are being secretly discarded (like a later Government wants to check or the like).

Justices would be impartial I suppose, but when it comes to scrutinising the Government's actions I don't think you want impartiality, but rather thoroughness and rigorosity. Maybe this is a cultural barrier of sorts, but from my understanding, the whole point of the Opposition is to scrutinise the Government and discredit them for wrongdoing. As such, the most logical choice for who to give mirrored applications to would be the Opposition. Whatever other criteria we might want to place on the MinImm to disincentivise deleting or withholding applications, it should be up to the elected Opposition to make sure that no deleting or withholding actually takes place. I hope what I'm writing here makes sense.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Getting the judiciary involved "without case or controversy"? I don't think you get the concept of "separation of powers".

We ask the justices to do all kinds of things like this.  The senior justice advises His Majesty and they appoint people to oversee elections.

I mean... this kind of stuff is the point of separation of powers, lol.

Justices would be impartial I suppose, but when it comes to scrutinising the Government's actions I don't think you want impartiality, but rather thoroughness and rigorosity. Maybe this is a cultural barrier of sorts, but from my understanding, the whole point of the Opposition is to scrutinise the Government and discredit them for wrongdoing. As such, the most logical choice for who to give mirrored applications to would be the Opposition. Whatever other criteria we might want to place on the MinImm to disincentivise deleting or withholding applications, it should be up to the elected Opposition to make sure that no deleting or withholding actually takes place. I hope what I'm writing here makes sense.

No, you're right, and I definitely didn't envision the justices as having any hand in investigating or whatever.  I was just thinking about a person outside of our electeds to have a copy of the record in a way that would be outside of government control.  Even if the Government just quickly and quietly deleted an application, there would still be evidence of it.  His Majesty might also make sense as someone with access to the record.

Is there a version of this where the Opposition could request access to the record, or something similar?  I guess, and I'm not really opposed.  I'm just wary of creating a whole new big edifice to address what is hopefully a theoretical concern, and so I'd also be content with a preserved record available for another government to investigate in the future.

[Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP]

Is there a version of this where the Opposition could request access to the record, or something similar?  I guess, and I'm not really opposed.  I'm just wary of creating a whole new big edifice to address what is hopefully a theoretical concern, and so I'd also be content with a preserved record available for another government to investigate in the future.

If you simply were to give access to an account with mirrored applications on it to e.g. the Tanaischteu you wouldn't need any further edifices. Better yet, the Opposition wouldn't have to wait until they win an election to discover illegally suppressed applications, since they have full access to the emails as they come in in real time. Wouldn't that be preferable?

[King Txec]

Two points: first, it seems that if the opposition did as most other parliamentary systems do, which is to employ a shadow cabinet, then could not the Shadow Immigration Minister perform this function?

Second: Chief Judge Edwards doesn't advise me in any substantial way, is not on my Privy Council, so I don't exactly know what you are referring to Baron. Puisne Judge Plätschisch is a member of the Privy Council, however, but his advice is limited to the functions of any other Guaír (as are you).

-Txec R

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

If you simply were to give access to an account with mirrored applications on it to e.g. the Tanaischteu you wouldn't need any further edifices. Better yet, the Opposition wouldn't have to wait until they win an election to discover illegally suppressed applications, since they have full access to the emails as they come in in real time. Wouldn't that be preferable?

As an addition to legally requiring public disclosure, I guess that would make sense?  I'm not too fussed about it either way when we get to this juncture, because I do think that just making it actually against the law to do this in secret is 90% of the battle.  So sure, yeah, if that's what gets everyone on board, I'd be fine with adding that to the bill.  Do you have suggested language or would you prefer I write it?

Two points: first, it seems that if the opposition did as most other parliamentary systems do, which is to employ a shadow cabinet, then could not the Shadow Immigration Minister perform this function?

Sure, although we probably don't want to require that.  It could just be a person nominated by the Opposition, almost similar to what Mic'halgh has suggested (albeit without the new bureaucracy).

Second: Chief Judge Edwards doesn't advise me in any substantial way, is not on my Privy Council, so I don't exactly know what you are referring to Baron. Puisne Judge Plätschisch is a member of the Privy Council, however, but his advice is limited to the functions of any other Guaír (as are you).
-Txec R

It's not done as a matter of practice, but the senior justice is ex officio a member of the Sabor, according to the law, Your Majesty.  So is the Seneschal.

[Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP]

As an addition to legally requiring public disclosure, I guess that would make sense?  I'm not too fussed about it either way when we get to this juncture, because I do think that just making it actually against the law to do this in secret is 90% of the battle.

As Mic'haglh pointed out earlier, it's a bit pointless to criminalise something that is impossible to detect afterwards, so making it detectable in the first place is worth much more than 10% to me, especially if the purported purpose is furthering Government transparency. But admittedly, this is firmly in hair splitting territory.

So sure, yeah, if that's what gets everyone on board, I'd be fine with adding that to the bill.  Do you have suggested language or would you prefer I write it?

Nah, go ahead.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

As Mic'haglh pointed out earlier, it's a bit pointless to criminalise something that is impossible to detect afterwards, so making it detectable in the first place is worth much more than 10% to me, especially if the proported purpose is furthering Government transparency. But admittedly, this is firmly in hair splitting territory.

I actually think it's worth quite a bit to criminalize it.  I think that most people are hesitant to break the law, even if they think they might get away with it.

Okay, so then, I'll try to build a consensus around that: The Public Process Bill with an extra provision requiring that immigration applications be mirrored to an account accessible by the Opposition Leader.  The account will need a custodian, so I guess maybe either His Majesty or the Chancery?  I'll see what makes sense and what people are comfortable with.  It's basically just "save this password somewhere" so it's not a lot.

[King Txec]

You're right. I had quite forgotten that and should probably include Owen in PMs and such.

-Txec R