The Make The Ziu Actually Read This Stuff Bill

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

WHEREAS the quality of legislation in Talossa is admittedly low, with many errors and infelicities of language;

AND WHEREAS there is an even worse problem, whereby provisions enter into our Organic and statute law "by accident"', in that the Cosa and Senäts majority vote for the principle of a bill, trust its author, and don't actually read it properly, or assume that someone else will read it properly and point out any problems;

AND WHEREAS every legislator simply promising to be more conscientious is not a feasible response to this;

AND WHEREAS the following provision would probably work better than the previously mooted role of "legislative janitor";

BE IT ENACTED yadda yadda yadda as follows:

1. El Lexhtax H.6 shall be amended as follows:

6. No bill may be published in a Clark unless it has spent at least ten days in the Hopper as a legislative proposal and the Legislative Standing Committee of the Ziu has considered and reported upon it, except according to H.6.1.

2. A new section to be inserted after the current H.6 as follows, with all subsequent sections renumbered accordingly:

7.1 The Legislative Standing Committee of the Ziu (el Comità da Redacziun Legislatïu, the CRL) shall accept all bills from the Hopper as described in H.6 above, upon request of their sponsor or sponsors; examine them clause-by-clause, then adopt by majority vote a report which may include a recommendation to accept/reject, and/or suggested amendments.

7.2 The CRL shall conduct all its deliberations openly in the Hopper.

7.3 A bill upon which the CRL has not given a report within 30 calendar days shall be considered to have been approved for the purposes of H.6.

7.4 Unless the Mençéi and Túischac'h agree otherwise, the Mençéi shall chair the CRL and the CRL shall consist of all MCs and Senators.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

It might be objected that 30 days is too short. But there's a fine line between "making sure this stuff gets read properly" and "slowing the legislative process down to incapacity". Not wedded to that figure.

[Açafat del Val]

I oppose this bill in principle and in practice. It's an unnecessary extra burden to legislation, and I personally take offense that someone would need to "approve" my legislation before it can be hoppered.

The current scheme is sufficient.

If you really want a revisor of sorts, then do that instead. I could get behind it. Or add these duties to the Scribe.

Either way, we don't need a "committee" to "approve" bills.

[Ian Plätschisch]

I oppose this bill in principle and in practice. It's an unnecessary extra burden to legislation, and I personally take offense that someone would need to "approve" my legislation before it can be hoppered.

The current scheme is sufficient.

If you really want a revisor of sorts, then do that instead. I could get behind it. Or add these duties to the Scribe.

Either way, we don't need a "committee" to "approve" bills.

I agree; also, there is no guarantee that just because all MZs are suddenly on this new committee they will actually do the accompanying work.

[Açafat del Val]

Paging the incumbent and past Scribes: would it be unduly burdensome, in your own opinion, if on top of updating the Wiki you also became a sort of "editor" or "revisor" of hoppered bills?

If so, would it be unduly burdensome to vest these tasks instead in the Chancery, i.e. the Secretary of State?

[Dr. Txec Róibeard dal Nordselvă, Esq., O.SPM, SMM]

Paging the incumbent and past Scribes: would it be unduly burdensome, in your own opinion, if on top of updating the Wiki you also became a sort of "editor" or "revisor" of hoppered bills?

If so, would it be unduly burdensome to vest these tasks instead in the Chancery, i.e. the Secretary of State?

Well seeing as the current Scribe of Abbavilla and the Secretary of State is the same person, I'll speak for both. I don't think adding more work to the job is a necessarily good idea. Why not let the Tuischach or the Mencei help out?

[Açafat del Val]

I would like now to plug shamelessly a bill that I wrote during the last term:

https://wittenberg.talossa.com/index.php?topic=231.0

I could get behind reintroducing this bill and adding a statutory duty to the presiding officers so that they form an ADVISORY committee. Far better than a committee of arbitrarily appointed people who get to pass or fail someone's idea. Gatekeeping is not cool.

[Açafat del Val]

I would like to invite the leaders of the Senate and Cosa (@GV and @TER, respectively) to weigh in on this bill.

Would you both be willing to constitute a sort of advisory committee to help members of your respective chambers write bills? "Legislative janitor", "law editor", whatever you want to call the task.

[Açafat del Val]

I would like to offer the following amendment...

1. El Lexhtax H.6 shall be amended as follows:

6. No bill may be published in a Clark unless it has spent at least ten days in the Hopper as a legislative proposal and the Legislative Standing Committee of the Ziu has considered and reported upon it, except according to H.6.1.

1. A new section shall be inserted after H.6 of El Lexhatx, as follows, and the subsequent sections renumbered accordingly:

7.1 The Legislative Advisory Committee of Talossa A Legislative Advisory Committee of Talossa (in Talossan, el Comità da Redacziun Legislatïu; and hereinafter, "the CRL") shall accept review or revise all bills all legislative items from the Hopper as described in H.6 above upon the request of their sponsor or sponsors; and, when so requested, they shall recommend acceptance or rejection, or shall make amendments in their best judgement examine them clause-by-clause, then adopt by majority vote a report which may include a recommendation to accept/reject, and/or suggested amendments.

7.2 The CRL shall conduct all its deliberations openly in the Hopper.

7.3 The CRL shall consist of the incumbent Mençéi, Túischac'h, and Avocat-Xheneral.

7.3 A bill upon which the CRL has not given a report within 30 calendar days shall be considered to have been approved for the purposes of H.6.

7.4 Unless the Mençéi and Túischac'h agree otherwise, the Mençéi shall chair the CRL and the CRL shall consist of all MCs and Senators.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

I have no principled objections to this: biggest issue is "at the request of the sponsor". I don't see that most people who introduce bills will be humble enough to submit their legislation to this committee if they don't have to. I for one personally believe that all my bills are perfect and are in no need of amendment, lol.

[Açafat del Val]

I have no principled objections to this: biggest issue is "at the request of the sponsor". I don't see that most people who introduce bills will be humble enough to submit their legislation to this committee if they don't have to. I for one personally believe that all my bills are perfect and are in no need of amendment, lol.

Then the originating idea of this advisory group may be moot

For the SoS's sake, if this were clarked, here is the new bill after the sponsor above accepted the amendment...

WHEREAS the quality of legislation in Talossa is admittedly low, with many errors and infelicities of language;

AND WHEREAS there is an even worse problem, whereby provisions enter into our Organic and statute law "by accident"', in that the Cosa and Senäts majority vote for the principle of a bill, trust its author, and don't actually read it properly, or assume that someone else will read it properly and point out any problems;

AND WHEREAS every legislator simply promising to be more conscientious is not a feasible response to this;

AND WHEREAS the following provision would probably work better than the previously mooted role of "legislative janitor";

BE IT ENACTED yadda yadda yadda:

A new section shall be inserted after H.6 of El Lexhatx, as follows, and the subsequent sections renumbered accordingly:

7.1 A Legislative Advisory Committee of Talossa (in Talossan, el Comità da Redacziun Legislatïu; and hereinafter, "the CRL") shall review or revise all legislative items from the Hopper as described in H.6 above upon the request of their sponsor or sponsors; and, when so requested, they shall recommend acceptance or rejection, or shall make amendments in their best judgement.

7.2 The CRL shall conduct all its deliberations openly in the Hopper.

7.3 The CRL shall consist of the incumbent Mençéi, Túischac'h, and Avocat-Xheneral.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

Here's my amendment of your amendment. I think the CRL should examine all bills, to the extent capable, and have their say on their own initiative when they see fit to.

WHEREAS the quality of legislation in Talossa is admittedly low, with many errors and infelicities of language;

AND WHEREAS there is an even worse problem, whereby provisions enter into our Organic and statute law "by accident"', in that the Cosa and Senäts majority vote for the principle of a bill, trust its author, and don't actually read it properly, or assume that someone else will read it properly and point out any problems;

AND WHEREAS every legislator simply promising to be more conscientious is not a feasible response to this;

AND WHEREAS the following provision would probably work better than the previously mooted role of "legislative janitor";

BE IT ENACTED yadda yadda yadda:

A new section shall be inserted after H.6 of El Lexhatx, as follows, and the subsequent sections renumbered accordingly:

7.1 A Legislative Advisory Committee of Talossa (in Talossan, el Comità da Redacziun Legislatïu; and hereinafter, "the CRL") shall review or revise all legislative items from the Hopper as described in H.6 above upon the request of their sponsor or sponsors; and, when so requested, they shall may recommend acceptance or rejection, or shall make suggest amendments in their best judgement.

7.2 The CRL shall conduct all its deliberations openly in the Hopper.

7.3 The CRL shall consist of the incumbent Mençéi, Túischac'h, and Avocat-Xheneral.

[Antaglha Xhenerös Somelieir]

Here's my amendment of your amendment. I think the CRL should examine all bills, to the extent capable, and have their say on their own initiative when they see fit to.

WHEREAS the quality of legislation in Talossa is admittedly low, with many errors and infelicities of language;

AND WHEREAS there is an even worse problem, whereby provisions enter into our Organic and statute law "by accident"', in that the Cosa and Senäts majority vote for the principle of a bill, trust its author, and don't actually read it properly, or assume that someone else will read it properly and point out any problems;

AND WHEREAS every legislator simply promising to be more conscientious is not a feasible response to this;

AND WHEREAS the following provision would probably work better than the previously mooted role of "legislative janitor";

BE IT ENACTED yadda yadda yadda:

A new section shall be inserted after H.6 of El Lexhatx, as follows, and the subsequent sections renumbered accordingly:

7.1 A Legislative Advisory Committee of Talossa (in Talossan, el Comità da Redacziun Legislatïu; and hereinafter, "the CRL") shall review or revise all legislative items from the Hopper as described in H.6 above upon the request of their sponsor or sponsors; and, when so requested, they shall may recommend acceptance or rejection, or shall make suggest amendments in their best judgement.

7.2 The CRL shall conduct all its deliberations openly in the Hopper.

7.3 The CRL shall consist of the incumbent Mençéi, Túischac'h, and Avocat-Xheneral.

I personally think requiring all bills that are put into hopper would be impractical in the long run, whilst activity is low, then yeah, itll be fine but one day that might now be sufficent. I think a better option might be that once a bill has been in the hopper for a long enough period to be reviewed by others, then the bill is submitted to the committee to be clarked before the next clark starts, for review, then at a time near to the clark starting, the committee submitts these bills to SoS to be clarked (so long as support for it still exists, but that can be determined by the SoS). Also i think that their needs to be strict peramiters set in law, on what can or cant be changed, based on what is need to change, but doesnt fundimentally change the bills intent, otherwise the committee could potentially be missued as a political tool rather than a legislative clean up tool.
Anyways these are just my preliminary thoughts on this.

[Txosuè Éiric Rôibeardescù]

I would like to offer the following amendment...

1. El Lexhtax H.6 shall be amended as follows:

6. No bill may be published in a Clark unless it has spent at least ten days in the Hopper as a legislative proposal and the Legislative Standing Committee of the Ziu has considered and reported upon it, except according to H.6.1.

1. A new section shall be inserted after H.6 of El Lexhatx, as follows, and the subsequent sections renumbered accordingly:

7.1 The Legislative Advisory Committee of Talossa A Legislative Advisory Committee of Talossa (in Talossan, el Comità da Redacziun Legislatïu; and hereinafter, "the CRL") shall accept review or revise all bills all legislative items from the Hopper as described in H.6 above upon the request of their sponsor or sponsors; and, when so requested, they shall recommend acceptance or rejection, or shall make amendments in their best judgement examine them clause-by-clause, then adopt by majority vote a report which may include a recommendation to accept/reject, and/or suggested amendments.

7.2 The CRL shall conduct all its deliberations openly in the Hopper.

7.3 The CRL shall consist of the incumbent Mençéi, Túischac'h, and Avocat-Xheneral.

7.3 A bill upon which the CRL has not given a report within 30 calendar days shall be considered to have been approved for the purposes of H.6.

7.4 Unless the Mençéi and Túischac'h agree otherwise, the Mençéi shall chair the CRL and the CRL shall consist of all MCs and Senators.

I thank the honorable member for his invitation to weigh in on this piece of legislation.

The amendment proposed is agreeable to me and the added responsibility to the position is not, to mind, an issue. This is a added requirement for each bill to be read and checked before going to a vote. I do however question if this "power" be wielded by the few? For example, an international government by the name of the United kingdom and northern island, the chamber requires a majority to agree for a bill to be put to a vote. It would be the speakers job on when and if this "vote to vote" will be called, however it is common practice for them to agree with the majority.