mr_sniffles
TNPer
Proposed Constitutional Amendment by Gracius Maximus:
If this passes, perhaps a little forum clean up would be in order
If this passes, perhaps a little forum clean up would be in order
FD - Cabinet Clean Up
- Thread starter mr_sniffles
- Start date
R
Romanoffia (Guest)
Guest
Good condensation and arrangement of functions.
One deleted item from the MoC section may need to be delegated though:
Since the open sections of the cabinet meeting room are visible, 'minutes' of cabinet meetings are a moot point, but we need a provision for keeping the visible sections of the cabinet meetings visible.
On the whole of things, it does simplify things a bit and reduce redundant functions.
One deleted item from the MoC section may need to be delegated though:
Since the open sections of the cabinet meeting room are visible, 'minutes' of cabinet meetings are a moot point, but we need a provision for keeping the visible sections of the cabinet meetings visible.
On the whole of things, it does simplify things a bit and reduce redundant functions.
Fedele
TNPer
I definitely think we need to cut down on the ministried but I don't quite agree with Pier's proposed ministries. It seems to me that the MoIIA is already doing I and IA. Why should we split a ministry that is handling the job well enough?
When we look at the ministries, the only ones that are really doing any work are the MoIIA, MoEA and MoJ. I suggest we just cut it down to those three and basically eliminate the other Ministries.
When we look at the ministries, the only ones that are really doing any work are the MoIIA, MoEA and MoJ. I suggest we just cut it down to those three and basically eliminate the other Ministries.
Monte Ozarka
TNPer
dont pick it up
TNPer
Isnt the army under the MoD?, I dont think the MoJ or MoD, are being tampered with.
Monte Ozarka
TNPer
I was responding specifically to what Fed said. He just accidentally left out the MoD.
mr_sniffles
TNPer
Something tells me Fedele hasn't really read the document...
But anyways, the Minister of Internal Affairs is a new ministry that takes over where the MoCE, MoAE, and MoC left off. Just because they don't seem to do much, doesn't mean they don't do a lot. It's a supersized ministry full of stuff the MoIIA never really did, so the argument of if it ain't broken why fix it kind of doesn't apply here.
Anyways, for those wanting to make principle changes to the document... THAT'S WHAT PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION IS FOR YOU &(^^&%&*%^*&^*&^&*^&*@#$%^&* ARGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHH!!!
Anyone see any problem with the language? Because I'm going to rush this to a vote tomorrow.
Fedele
TNPer
I just restated a post I made in the preliminary discussion that you said was all language. I literally copied and pasted it and changed a few words.
Brilliant.
Perhaps I need to go through this again.
What does MoAE do?
What does MoCE do?
What does MoC do?
Why could the MoIIA not take up these jobs, if they are anything at all, and add them to accepting RA members?
Regardless, this objection is relatively minor. I would still vote in favor of the document in its present form though I would prefer one more similar to that which I described (MoJ, MoE, MoI, MoD).
mr_sniffles
TNPer
Only five cabinet ministers? I think we need one more year dictator-free before most of us accepts this.
mr_sniffles
TNPer
Well, unless your post was an attempt to sarcastically illustrate that the majority of flat-out "No, I will never support this"-type opposition to this is going to be from people that have yet to get over things that happened over a year ago, you cheapened the discussion by not adding anything worthwhile or of value to it.
Gracius Maximus
Tyrant (Ret.)
That too.
I know most everyone has already voted on this. But before I cast my vote I read this thread and the PD thread - again. It is kind of dismaying that many of those who disagree with this proposal for one reason or another, did not articulate their concerns or suggest alternatives. If the RA is to function as a body, we all need to put our 
in, make compromises and revise proposals as needed. That is the only way we can develop legislation everyone can be satisfied with.
I hope this passes. If it does, and there are "unforseen problems" or we simply aren't happy with the arrangement, then, for goodness sakes, we can just repeal it. I think it's worth trying.
in, make compromises and revise proposals as needed. That is the only way we can develop legislation everyone can be satisfied with.I hope this passes. If it does, and there are "unforseen problems" or we simply aren't happy with the arrangement, then, for goodness sakes, we can just repeal it. I think it's worth trying.
mr_sniffles
TNPer
I know most everyone has already voted on this. But before I cast my vote I read this thread and the PD thread - again. It is kind of dismaying that many of those who disagree with this proposal for one reason or another, did not articulate their concerns or suggest alternatives. If the RA is to function as a body, we all need to put our
I hope this passes. If it does, and there are "unforseen problems" or we simply aren't happy with the arrangement, then, for goodness sakes, we can just repeal it. I think it's worth trying.
Grosseschnauzer
TNPer
My own preference would be to examine a more limited change, such as a merger of Culture and Education, and Arts and Entertainment.
I do not believe that the Minister of Communications should be eliminated. In addition to the lack of thought about the implementation of the proposed amendment currently at vote (when would this be implemented; what about the terms of office of currently elected Ministers, and when would the combined departmental ministry be chosen and by what method, as well as the amendments needed to the Legal Code concerning these Ministries that would be affected). With these flaws, I could not support this proposed amendment.
And inclusiion of provisions in a proposal at vote about effectiveness and implementation is not unknown in this region....several constitutional amendments and proposed laws have included such provisions in the past. In my view, it is better to allow this proposed to go down to defeat so the scope is reduced, the flaws cleaned up, and a broader consensus created.
I do not believe that the Minister of Communications should be eliminated. In addition to the lack of thought about the implementation of the proposed amendment currently at vote (when would this be implemented; what about the terms of office of currently elected Ministers, and when would the combined departmental ministry be chosen and by what method, as well as the amendments needed to the Legal Code concerning these Ministries that would be affected). With these flaws, I could not support this proposed amendment.
And inclusiion of provisions in a proposal at vote about effectiveness and implementation is not unknown in this region....several constitutional amendments and proposed laws have included such provisions in the past. In my view, it is better to allow this proposed to go down to defeat so the scope is reduced, the flaws cleaned up, and a broader consensus created.
Haor Chall
The Power of the Dark Side
- TNP Nation
- Haor Chall
As I mentioned in the preliminary discussion, I personally agree with the majority of this change, except for the removal of the Ministry of Communications, and especially the merger of that role with the MoEA.
As for Grosseschnauzer's other points (from what I understand of them), mostly the highlight the generally confusing and overcomplicated nature of our system. When/if this, or a similar ammendment passes, legal code changes will also need to be done, logically I would presume that this would come into effect from the next election.
As for Grosseschnauzer's other points (from what I understand of them), mostly the highlight the generally confusing and overcomplicated nature of our system. When/if this, or a similar ammendment passes, legal code changes will also need to be done, logically I would presume that this would come into effect from the next election.
mr_sniffles
TNPer
Well of MoC hasn't seen much action if you ask me, the original purpose was to relay Cabinet Decisions to the public (please correct me if I'm wrong) but it seems they've only taken a newswire routine which seems to flatline in the middle of every term.
So I think the new Minister of Internal Affairs quite complements this bill by adding the jobs of the MoC, MoCE, and MoEA into one more focused superministry.
I also wanted more input but the supporters were more andale, andale! than here's a potential problem...
So I think the new Minister of Internal Affairs quite complements this bill by adding the jobs of the MoC, MoCE, and MoEA into one more focused superministry.
I also wanted more input but the supporters were more andale, andale! than here's a potential problem...
If the MIA turns out to be a big job for one person, then the Minister needs to "hire" some help. Build a team. Manage them. Give them cookies and 
. Or depending on one's management style, 
and 
. Or depending on one's management style, and
mr_sniffles
TNPer
In hindsight, the proposed changes should take effect the next election season as Cabinet members can only take power through elections (and since the ministry isn't there, it cannot be vacant. Kind of like if a tree fell in the woods and no one was there to hear it or see it...) and elections can only be next Nov, Feb, Aug.
This should close that issue.
This should close that issue.
The Southern Acre
TNPer
Indeed. So this ammendment has been defeated?
mr_sniffles
TNPer
Nope it had over 50% agreeing (without counting abstains) but did not meet the 60% threshold to pass. I'm giving it another week to see if further consensus can be reached, otherwise I'll declare it a dead bill which can only reawakened two more times after a month.
Fergi the Great
TNPer
That is a leading principle of effective leadership: delegation.If the MIA turns out to be a big job for one person, then the Minister needs to "hire" some help. Build a team. Manage them. Give them cookies and
Leaders who try to do everything themselves are poor leaders.
**throws sidelong glance at Noctaurus**
The Southern Acre
TNPer
Agreed. If you dont know how to delegate you dont know how to lead.
Fergi the Great
TNPer
Yes, delegate and enlist aid. In every well-run leadership organization that I've belonged to, the leaders found people on whom they could rely and delegated to them, then asked them to return and report. The stewardship-accountability triangle not only works to spread out the workload but also helps train up successors for future needs.
I think that any measure that trims the bureaucracy is a good idea, even if not necessarily the best way to do it.
If we hold out for "the best" whatever amorphous terms that means to every sundry person, we may never DO anything.
I think that any measure that trims the bureaucracy is a good idea, even if not necessarily the best way to do it.
If we hold out for "the best" whatever amorphous terms that means to every sundry person, we may never DO anything.
The Southern Acre
TNPer
Agreed. If you dont delegate and do all the work yourself you are not really leading anyone to do the work other than youself. Therefore you are not really a leader.
Fergi the Great
TNPer
Ironically, that kind of person imagines himself often to be an important leader, or at least someone deserving of a statue 
Grosseschnauzer
TNPer
This proposal is a Constitutional Amendment, and as such. it requires a two-thirds majority of the RA voting with a quorum, participating, does it not?
And I don't recall off-hand that any other proposed constitutional amendment that failed to pass utilizing the second-round proposal.
The Southern Acre
TNPer
Thank you for clarifying.
mr_sniffles
TNPer
Well I think it's a grey area, if consensus can't be built then I'll let it die but I feel like we're close to something really important here.
The Southern Acre
TNPer
Possibly, but I dont think that many people are in favor of cutting the size of the cabinet this drastically.
mr_sniffles
TNPer
I'm giving this two more days before I call it a dead bill.
The Southern Acre
TNPer
Sounds good.
mr_sniffles
TNPer
This topic is close, this proposal dead.