Proposed Constutional Ammendment

Mabe, merging the PM and Speaker of the RA would be better then the PM and the Delegate, I do agree with you however we need to streamline a bit.
 
Posul:
Every system has its plus points, however I feel that the one proposed has more benefits and gains to be made then merely keeping the current one.

We have a chance to make the Prime Minister a much more powerful role and to make the whole system a little more centralised and efficent. At the moment I think we a little more wayward then perhaps we should be.
Click to expand...
We don't have to keep the current system, but I do bellieve there needs to be *some* separation of powers. Go ahead, make the PM more powerful, but don't do it by making them the *main* authority in all of TNP. The Delegate is constrained but powerful enough, the PM is the one that needs more power. But not over the region as a whole, over the government and the ability to make decisions and take action quickly.
 
I agree the PM needs more power, I'm just not sure how you will get any amendment through that achieves this!! The PM needs scope to act in each portfolio rather than merely be the ring master in the circus!! How can we actually legislate that?! Secondly, how can we even get this through as the vocal few tend to veto anything vaguely resembling an increase in power for any official in the region!!
 
I must concur, I don't see the point of merely having a seperate UN Delegate for the sake of it.

Giving the PM the Delegacy will do that.
 
Poltsamaa:
I agree the PM needs more power, I'm just not sure how you will get any amendment through that achieves this!! The PM needs scope to act in each portfolio rather than merely be the ring master in the circus!! How can we actually legislate that?! Secondly, how can we even get this through as the vocal few tend to veto anything vaguely resembling an increase in power for any official in the region!!
Click to expand...
I tend to agree with you on this one. The PM does need to have more duties in terms of executive actions.

The other issue that GM brought up as to making the PM also Delegate has a lot of practical merit. There is, IMHO, a couple of problems with doing that. The first is that it centralizes power to a degree that it could make it easier for a delegate to rogue, but that is not the major concern. The second reason (the major concern) is that it could lead to a single individual becoming overloaded with duties. It also makes for a potential problem if the PM gets way-laid from the game, thus taking out not only PM position but also the Delegate position. Division of powers, function, duty and authority is a good thing to maintain.

Currently, the system in place essentially functions like a constitutional monarchy in the sense that the Delegate functions like a constitutional monarch insofar as the Delegate only exerts power at the request of the government but also reserves the ability to act in a dire emergency in which the government is too slow to act. Fortunately, this function hasn't needed to be tested and probably never will be tested.

To me it would seem to be more logical to allow the delegate a little more authority in the regional security department - perhaps a small staff of people whose duty is to gather statistical information on the region with the object of maintaining regional security and stability.

So far we have had no problems with succession of the Delegate mainly because of the current status quo. If it works, don't fix it. Fortunately, we have had delegates in this government that have exercized the ultimate power, that power being the ability to transfer power in an orderly fashion. So far we have elected delegates who we know will transfer power at the end of their terms and who honor the constitution as is their duty.

R
 
To me it would seem to be more logical to allow the delegate a little more authority in the regional security department - perhaps a small staff of people whose duty is to gather statistical information on the region with the object of maintaining regional security and stability.
Click to expand...

I completly agree with this statement, belive the delegate needs a bit more power then it currently has, but I do not agree merging the Delegate with the PM is the right way to do it. Mabe when the election happenes the Delegate gets the delegacy and a seat on the Security Council. That way if the delegate feels threatened it will have a bit more say, then just asking the SC.

I think the best way to do that is to let the delegate assume the powers and role of the Chair of the SC, that way it will only vote in a tie.

-pick
 
perhaps making the delegate a figurehead and the PM, the head of government? I don't think it's really that wise to give the delegate much power as well, considering it's quite easy to win the delegate elections these days.
 
I apologise for not already knowing this and I guess I could find it if I looked hard enough but maybe we should vote on the original (or modified) proposal. Do we actually have a definite porcedure for moving things from discussion to vote?

Otherwise it seems this may go the way of other things talked about but which never actually get more definitive action.
 
Cathyy:
I apologise for not already knowing this and I guess I could find it if I looked hard enough but maybe we should vote on the original (or modified) proposal. Do we actually have a definite porcedure for moving things from discussion to vote?

Otherwise it seems this may go the way of other things talked about but which never actually get more definitive action.
Click to expand...
It's up to the Speaker.
 
FEC, I against the Delegate being seperate because I do not wish to see someone who isn't in the political process gain so much infulence over it through the power of the delegate.

In a choice I would prefer the PM over a seperate Delegate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top