Confirmation of Pallaith as Election Commissioner

Caius

Caius

The Minister
-
-
-
Pronouns
He/Him
TNP Nation
United States of Dictators
Discord
cayus.code
The Delegate:
Noting that the term of @Pallaith expires on 19 July 2024, I appoint Ghost to another term as EC.
Click to expand...
@Pallaith has been appointed Election Commissioner by Delegate Simone. I hereby open the floor for debate and discussion on this matter. I would also welcome a statement in support of the nominee from the Delegate.

Should this reach a vote, I intend to put the following motion to the Regional Assembly:
Motion:
The Regional Assembly, acting on the nomination of the Delegate, appoints Pallaith to the Election Commission.
Click to expand...
 
I think Ghost needs no introduction and his work on the EC (in addition to all the other roles he has and had) have been excellent.
 
Franky, I do not have any questions for Ghost. They are overly qualified for this position, I am sure they have done amazing things during their tenure so far.
 
I have absolutely no issue with Ghost being reconfirmed as an Election Commissioner. I move for a vote.
 
Guys, it's been six hours. Pallaith's term doesn't even expire for almost a month. This nomination is already a little premature, there's no need to rush it to a vote.
 
Last edited:
Comfed:
Guys, it's been six hours. Pallaith's term doesn't even expire for almost a month. This nomination is already a little premature, there's no need to rush it to a vote.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I could see the vote starting somewhere around the 11th or 12th. It's too early right now.

I third Lord Nwahs's motion.
 
Since three citizens have objected to the vote, I am cancelling it.
 
As the discussion has been pretty one sided, I request the Speaker open an immediate and shortened vote. That way it will complete in time for the expiration of Pallaith’s term.

I’m not sure if this is the way to do it as I’m not particularly familiar with RA procedures, but I thank the Speaker either way.
 
Halsoni:
As the discussion has been pretty one sided, I request the Speaker open an immediate and shortened vote. That way it will complete in time for the expiration of Pallaith’s term.

I’m not sure if this is the way to do it as I’m not particularly familiar with RA procedures, but I thank the Speaker either way.
Click to expand...
1/3 of quorum is required for me to start an immediate vote. Right now that would be 6 citizens.

Ignore this.
 
Last edited:
If I may - Is there any reason the Speaker has declined to shorten the voting period so as to maintain Pallaith's continuous tenor and thus the CEC seat? I understand the Speaker's office has no obligation to help in this case, however I am at a loss for why one wouldn't help in this scenario.

This motivation to shorten the vote is by no means the problem of the Speaker, however we are all on the same team here. Ensuring the EC has continuous and stable leadership, not lost to some timing error in confirmation votes, seems like a worthy cause to expedite this process, especially for a candidate who is as qualified as they come in Pallaith.
 
TlomzKrano:
If I may - Is there any reason the Speaker has declined to shorten the voting period so as to maintain Pallaith's continuous tenor and thus the CEC seat? I understand the Speaker's office has no obligation to help in this case, however I am at a loss for why one wouldn't help in this scenario.

This motivation to shorten the vote is by no means the problem of the Speaker, however we are all on the same team here. Ensuring the EC has continuous and stable leadership, not lost to some timing error in confirmation votes, seems like a worthy cause to expedite this process, especially for a candidate who is as qualified as they come in Pallaith.
Click to expand...
I didn't deem it necessary to shorten the voting period since this is a reconfirmation vote, and Pallaith would still be in the commission (or, in this case, return) regardless of whether I shortened the voting period or not. I don't see his continuous tenure on the Election Commission being interrupted as a reason to shorten the voting period. We are two months away from the next election, and I don't think stability is jeopardised here just because his continuous tenure will end. He'd still be in the EC when the next election comes.
 
Cloud:
I didn't deem it necessary to shorten the voting period since this is a reconfirmation vote, and Pallaith would still be in the commission (or, in this case, return) regardless of whether I shortened the voting period or not. I don't see his continuous tenure on the Election Commission being interrupted as a reason to shorten the voting period. We are two months away from the next election, and I don't think stability is jeopardised here just because his continuous tenure will end. He'd still be in the EC when the next election comes.
Click to expand...
No, but it was the whole reason the vote was delayed and people wanted to time the vote the way they did - so that the confirmation would occur prior to the expiration of the term and so that the term wouldn’t shift. I even cooperated with that goal, which is why I’m speaking on this now. There’s plenty of history of trying to handle these appointments so that people don’t unnecessarily drop off the roster, and considering how routine and perfunctory a process it is, much emphasis has always been placed on the timing of the vote.

The RA rules allow a vote to be 3 days minimum. A 3 day vote would achieve the goal that everyone involved in this vote had going in. There would be no interruption in the length of time served on the EC, and doing so would still be consistent with RA rules. None of this was ever about me getting on the EC or because it’s urgent, it was about deliberately timing it. The Speaker is not wrong to point out there’s no fire and no harm done to my ability to serve, and he’s within his rights to set a 5 day vote. But I feel he is being unnecessarily rigid and disregarding the preferences of the citizens who participated in this matter, and it costs him nothing to accommodate them. If it’s no big deal of a vote, and the shorter length doesn’t even require making an exception to RA rules, I’m not seeing the problem here.
 
St George:
Perhaps they should've been paying attention?
Click to expand...
No doubt about that. People make mistakes and things come up. But it was still caught with enough time for the Speaker to schedule an ordinary vote within the time frame needed to achieve the goal. The Speaker doesn’t have to do anything extraordinary to keep this going as originally planned, and it’s entirely in his power to make it possible, so why not do it?
 
Apparently the reason not to do it is that it is not possible to do. I apologize for leading us down a fruitless path. It is a shame this happened, but I appreciate the Speaker’s willingness to hear me out. I hope that in the future more care can be given to the RA members involved in the confirmation when the decision to schedule a vote is made by the Speaker’s office, given it is not possible to change once the vote begins, and that others will choose to be more magnanimous when engaging with their fellow citizens rather than using parliamentary procedure as a means to shame them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top