Tomb for Vice Delegate - January 2017

That's my vote, what's yours?​

​

Hi everyone, I am seeking your vote and support for the January 2017 Vice Delegate (VD) election. As January came around, I actually had no intention of seeking the VD position. However, with sitting Vice Delegate Lord Ravenclaw declining to seek another term and with only one other person declaring candidacy to run for this office, I decided to personally take a shot at the position. As you may know, I’ve served previously as Delegate of The North Pacific. Aside from my tenure as Delegate, I’ve served as Minister of Home Affairs (for a cumulative period of 15 months), Court Justice, Deputy Speaker, and many other positions within our great region. Outside of TNP, I’ve served as Prime Minister, Minister of Foreign Affairs, and Minister of Culture (along with two terms as MP) in United Kingdom. In Balder, I am serving a second term as Speaker of their legislature, and I’m also their Minister of Foreign Affairs. To view my full NS resume, feel free to checkout my forum signature. I outline all of this to assure you that in the event that anything happens to the Delegate or in the event that the Delegate resigns, I will be ready to assume office as acting Delegate until a new one is elected. Aside from performing security checks, which I will get to in a bit, I think the Vice Delegate’s most important responsibility is being prepared to be Delegate within a moment’s notice. With years of service in TNP’s executive branch under my belt, I am currently the candidate with the best qualifications/experience to deal with an emergency in which the Delegate’s position is vacated.

My agenda as Vice Delegate this term will be centered around several goals. First of all, I will be working hard with the Security Council to attempt and raise the endorsement levels of SC members. With the Delegate having an endorsement count of almost 1,300 endorsements, I’d like to have higher Security Councilors be at 900-1,000 endorsements at least while also have lower Security Councilors be at 800-900 endorsements at least. This will take some work, yes, but I believe it is essential for our region. With the Delegate’s endorsement count constantly going up, our Security Councilors must also match this upward trend in their endorsement counts. In addition to that, this goal will require Security Councilors to be more active and interactive with TNP populace (at least on the RMB) as they work with me to try and reach their desired endorsement levels.

My second goal will be centered around security checks. As you know, the Vice Delegate performs security checks on all citizenship applicants. As someone who has served 15 months as Minister of Home Affairs (integration), I can easily tell you that the faster we admit citizens, the greater our chances of retaining them are. Of course, this is a political simulation game. Some citizens are going to sign-up for citizenship, and ultimately, they may never come back. But I believe it is the Vice Delegate’s job to work with the Speaker and the Administration Team to get applicants admitted in a timely manner. For my part, I will perform checks at least twice daily – at 8 AM EST and 8 PM EST. I should be able to perform checks in between those times, but if I have a busy exams week in RL, you can count on the checks happening during those two times.

My third goal is to continue the World Assembly Development Program (WADP). I think this is an excellent program, and it is actually part of the reason that TNP has the high amount of endorsements that we do. While other regions restrict the amount of endorsements you may have, TNP encourages and awards endorsing other nations in the region. This keeps our community safe and it makes the game a lot more enjoyable for nations as they get to endotart. So basically, I’ll make sure that the WADP awards are out on time, that nations are telegrammed when that happens, and that generally, this program remains active.

My fourth goal is rather personal. Over the coming four months, I want to engage more with the RMB/game-side community of TNP. The truth is that most WA nations do not have accounts on the forums (otherwise we’d have 1300 citizens), and so it is vital to engage with them. I plan to do that by upping my participation on the RMB, by continuing my involvement in the Ministry of Home Affairs, and by joining the RMB Guardians. I hope that with greater involvement in the game-side aspects of the game, I can get more nations (both WA and non-WA) involved in TNP whether it is by endorsing the Delegate and Vice Delegate, participating in the WADP, or joining the forums and participating in our community.

For now, that is all. I welcome all and any questions, and I hope that I can earn you vote and support for Vice Delegate.

[me] puts on his Security Councillor hat.

Cool, I get to ask you questions now.

In response to your first goal: How are you going to work to increase endorsements? Which SC members are doing well under Raven's administration and will continue to do well in your term, and which SC members are not meeting your goals for the term?

Your second goal: How are you going to check if someone's a risk or not?

Your third goal: At this point, I don't think there's anyone in TNP who thinks the WADP is a bad idea and wouldn't continue it under their Vice Delegacy. Why bring it up?

Your fourth goal: Fair.

General question: The Vice Delegacy is one of the most stressful political seats in the entirety of The North Pacific. Can we trust that you won't crack under pressure?

Bootsie:

[class=cabinet]Bootsie[/class] puts on his Security Councillor hat.

Cool, I get to ask you questions now.

In response to your first goal: How are you going to work to increase endorsements? Which SC members are doing well under Raven's administration and will continue to do well in your term, and which SC members are not meeting your goals for the term?

Your second goal: How are you going to check if someone's a risk or not?

Your third goal: At this point, I don't think there's anyone in TNP who thinks the WADP is a bad idea and would continue it under their Vice Delegacy. Why bring it up?

Your fourth goal: Fair.

General question: The Vice Delegacy is one of the most stressful political seats in the entirety of The North Pacific. Can we trust that you won't crack under pressure?

Click to expand...

Hi Boots, thanks for your questions!

1.) We're going to work to increase endorsement counts just like we've always done -- through the WADP, the WFE updates, and good old telegramming. Perhaps posting a message or two every now and then on the RMB would help as well. As far as the performance of SC members, I think they've all been performing admirably. My goal for increasing endorsement counts is not here to suggest that they're not performing well, rather, it is my vision of what the SC should be doing. To answer your questions, I think what I am proposing here is a group effort that involves all SC members. They'll all have to raise their endorsement counts and maintain them. This will require greater activity on all of their part.

2.) Determining whether a nation is a risk or not involves checking their history. Does the said person have a history of couping? Do they pose a threat to the TNP community in any way? I will personally have a thread opened in the SC private sub-forum where I'll be able to converse with the rest of the SC on citizenship applicants. I don't know every player in NS -- no one does -- and so I definitely plan to get the rest of the SC involved in my security check determinations.

3.) Because it is important. People don't talk about regional recruitment, yet, all past Delegate candidates have it included in their campaigns. Some programs are essential Bootsie, and it is important to outline your vision for them if you're a candidate for the office running them.

4.) Thank you.

5.) Very good question. I've served as Minister of Home Affairs for 15 months now. As MoHA, you are in charge of creating recruitment lists, constantly updating the mentoring program, keeping up an active Executive staff (mentors and recruiters) and basically, taking up whatever challenge you must in order to increase recruitment and retention. It's a very work-heavy job. I think I've handled it well, despite the pressure, and I think I can bring this same work ethic and commitment to the Vice Delegacy if elected.

Do you think it appropriate for the Vice Delegate to have a role in the Delegate's government (such as being a Minister)? If so, to what extent do you think involvement is appropriate and do you not think there are benefits to being relatively detached from the Delegate and their government? If not, why do you not think it appropriate?

If elected, you would remain eligible to serve as Deputy Attorney General (both the Vice Delegate and the Deputy Attorney General being in the executive category and only one being a Constitutionally Mandated Elected Office), would you continue to so serve? If so, do you have any concerns as to whether holding both offices might reduce your ability to work effectively in either or both? If not, why would you not do so?

Tomb, will you actually see out the term if elected? Your words say yes, but your record says differently. I don't recall the last time you held an office for the duration of its term, and your record in TNP is littered with resignations due to "real life and time constraints" - most recently, Minister of Home Affairs the term just gone.

You ran on a grandiose campaign for Attorney General (another elected position) in my second term but abandoned the office (literally: you moved your nation to British Isles and lost citizenship in the process), leaving many things unfinished, as well.

You can refer us to your resume in NS as much as you like, but truly, if you do not have the staying power to hold the office you're seeking, why are you doing it? The office of the Vice Delegate has the potential to be the most stressful office in this region, full stop. Yes, even more so than that of the Delegate. Bootsie held the office for eight months and at times, I didn't know who had the more stressful job, and it was normally me the one seeking his advice.

The Vice Delegate isn't a deputy to the Delegate... because the Vice Delegate is there to remove the Delegate should it come to it. And you need to be prepared for that, because your friendship with the Delegate may be the very reason you can't fulfil the requirements of your office and as Vice Delegate, it becomes a very real problem.

The Vice Delegate needs to be a good manager, and even more so, a good communicator. They do not have a choice about the staff they have.

Why? You can't sack the Security Council, and you have to listen to them. The Delegate can sack their ministers as well as completely ignore them.

As Vice Delegate you need to listen, and listen hard to the Security Council when they speak - you can ignore them, but you ignore them at your peril, truthfully. The Vice Delegate must be prepared to make difficult decisions and accept the consequences- social and otherwise, of those decisions. It isn't just approving security checks, posting the WADP or putting SC applications to vote. You have a real commitment to the security of The North Pacific, and grandiose campaigns and platforms are not the way to winning it.

Good luck.

Zyvetskistaahn:

Do you think it appropriate for the Vice Delegate to have a role in the Delegate's government (such as being a Minister)? If so, to what extent do you think involvement is appropriate and do you not think there are benefits to being relatively detached from the Delegate and their government? If not, why do you not think it appropriate?

If elected, you would remain eligible to serve as Deputy Attorney General (both the Vice Delegate and the Deputy Attorney General being in the executive category and only one being a Constitutionally Mandated Elected Office), would you continue to so serve? If so, do you have any concerns as to whether holding both offices might reduce your ability to work effectively in either or both? If not, why would you not do so?

Click to expand...

1.) Everything within a healthy balance is good. What I am trying to say Zyvet is that the Vice Delegate should not be running the Executive Branch, but at the same time, they should maintain an active participation in the Executive Council of the Delegate. Personally, I think there's nothing wrong with assuming a cabinet portfolio while serving as VD as long as one can handle both the responsibilities of VD and their ministry. Nowadays, though, I think it is becoming harder and harder to run a Ministry, and so I personally will not be applying for a formal portfolio within the Delegate's cabinet. With that in mind, I'll keep up my participation in the Ministries where I am a member of the Executive Staff, and I of course plan to take part in official cabinet meetings.

2.) This is something that I am still thinking about, Zyvet. Assuming I get elected, if I decide to stay as Deputy AG (and the AG approves) I will stay onboard in an advisory role -- basically providing legal advice, but I will not be personally handling any cases, etc. As I said in my response above, I will be concentrating my time on the VD position.

@Lord Ravenclaw, thank you for your questions/comments. I will answer them in the order you laid them out.

1.) I don't plan on resigning as VD if that's what you're asking. While we can definitely focus on me departing as Minister of Home Affairs during the very last month of Plembobria's term, I think it'd be a good idea to outline the successes I had in that office as well. When I was handed the Home Affairs Ministry in September, I was given a barren executive staff, a broken recruitment system, and no retention strategy whatsoever. On day one, I got right to work reversing this downward trend. The first priority was rebuilding an active Executive Staff, and within the first week of me assuming the position, we had an fully functioning, active Executive Staff -- one that is still present to this day. Then, the Ministry of Home Affairs set about to improve the recruitment program. We did that by improving, and in some cases rewriting, our sample telegrams -- making them much more effective and responsive. When we started recruiting with these TGs and completing recruitment tasks quickly, we saw a surge in citizenship, NPA, and Executive Staff applications. There were times (and Gladio could verify this) where we had as much as 5 players sign up for the NPA (on the first day) after a recruitment round. At that point, it was clear that our recruitment program is up and running. The next point of business was seeing how we could make it easier for new members, so Kasch and I brought our Ministries together and we updated all of the FAQs. Yet, I still felt that more needed to be done. So the Mentoring Program was restarted and reformed, and while the region still needs to work on its retention efforts, this Program has made a huge difference. Mentors don't only focus on people who join the forums and become citizens. The main focus is actually on those who join the forums but never come back. We send those players telegrams in-game, and many have come back and decided to give the forum another try thanks to the effort. I by no means take credit for all of this work. It was a group effort, and as I said to the HA Executive Staff in my last statement as HA Minister, I was blessed to have a team like them by my side. However, I'd like to believe that I was instrumental to some degree in bringing the Ministry back from the dead and planning much of the programs that are in place right now.

2.) I don't see my relationship with the Delegate being a problem -- no matter who is elected Delegate. While I'd love to be a close advisor to the Delegate, I fully understand the duties described and required by law of the VD. Should the delegate be recalled, resign, or go rogue, I plan to work with the SC and RA to do all I can (as Acting Delegate) to protect (or restore) the region.

3.) I don't anticipate my relationship with the SC to be a problem. As I said, I'll be consulting with them on citizenship applications and other matters of regional security. If you're referring to my endorsement goals, I'd be happy to reconsider them upon being elected if the majority of the SC finds them unreachable for some reason or another. As I said, there's no way of knowing everybody or knowing everything. The SC will be my eyes and ears for the next four months, and I plan to fully work and cooperate with them.

Thank you for the questions, Raven (and the advice).

Tomb, I don't really see an answer to Raven's first question in that paragraph, only a vague "I don't plan on resigning" and a redirect to your successes as Minister of Home Affairs. I don't know about Raven, but I'm personally hesitant to vote for a Vice Delegate that may resign his office partway through the term. I doubt you had plans to resign from your previous offices, either, and yet your record, as Raven pointed out, shows otherwise.

My apologies for the direct question, but why should the voters trust that you would keep this office for the full term when you've had issues keeping your position in the past?

Darcania:

Tomb, I don't really see an answer to Raven's first question in that paragraph, only a vague "I don't plan on resigning" and a redirect to your successes as Minister of Home Affairs. I don't know about Raven, but I'm personally hesitant to vote for a Vice Delegate that may resign his office partway through the term. I doubt you had plans to resign from your previous offices, either, and yet your record, as Raven pointed out, shows otherwise.

My apologies for the direct question, but why should the voters trust that you would keep this office for the full term when you've had issues keeping your position in the past?

Click to expand...

Thank you for the question, you don't have to apologize. I've resigned three times here -- at the beginning of my second term as Delegate (due to... well, issues at the time), during my recent term as AG (burned out), and most recently as MoHA. With my MoHA resignation -- that came because of RL exams, and I knew that my resignation was not going to impact the Ministry at the time. I had brought the Ministry to a point where it could sail forward without necessarily having me at the helm. I had a deputy prepped up and ready to assume the position, and the transition was as smooth as possible. I've served about a dozen positions here alone, and I'm not proud of ever having to leave a term unfinished, but if you really take into account my TNP career, I don't think Raven's statement is accurate. I will serve a whole term as VD, and possibly seek reelection come May.

i think the point is that nobody ever plans to resign. so all we have to go on is track record. And your track record in seeing through what you commit to is pretty poor.

flemingovia:

i think the point is that nobody ever plans to resign. so all we have to go on is track record.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the comment.

Tomb:

during my recent term as AG (burned out)

Click to expand...

Hope you don't mind me pointing this part out, but this also worries me. As Raven and Bootsie have separately said before, the Vice Delegate job is one of, if not the, most stressful job in TNP. My apologies again, but I remain unconvinced.

Darcania:

Tomb:

during my recent term as AG (burned out)

Click to expand...

Hope you don't mind me pointing this part out, but this also worries me. As Raven and Bootsie have separately said before, the Vice Delegate job is one of, if not the, most stressful job in TNP. My apologies again, but I remain unconvinced.

Click to expand...

As I said above, I plan to serve a full term as VD and possibly seek reelection in May, Darcania. Thanks for your question.

In the past (before March 2015), the Security Council would conduct discussion of prospective members of the Council in a forum that was publicly visible, they have since stopped doing so. What is your view of the notion of public discussions of applications to the Security Council or of the disclosure of such discussions once they have concluded, what benefits and drawbacks are there? More generally, ought the Security Council be subject to the freedom of information provisions in the Codified Law?

Do you consider the Security Council at present to be too few in number, or too many, or to be about sufficient? If it is too many or is sufficient, would you suggest the Council and the Assembly be more discerning in those that are admitted? If so, would you suggest any informal standards or requirements which new applicants ought generally to meet (such as past service as Delegate or Vice Delegate or a certain length of participation in TNP)? Would you suggest changing the formal requirements for the Councillors in any way? If it is too few, would you suggest that the Council and Assembly should be less discerning and ought the formal requirements for members be lowered; would you encourage members to seek to join the Council?

(You may recognise these questions, I asked them to Vice Delegate candidates at the previous election also)

Tomb, since you have all these other govt jobs in other regions, how can you commit your very best as the Vice Delegate here?

Caddy:

Tomb, since you have all these other govt jobs in other regions, how can you commit your very best as the Vice Delegate here?

Click to expand...

Hi Caddy, and thank you for the question. To put it on the record, I am currently a Justice in Lazarus, MP and MoFA in Balder, and Deputy AG in TNP. As you know, the position of Justice is one that's not demanding, especially since Lazarus's judiciary is modeled on a non-adversarial court system. In Balder, I have already rebuilt the Diplomatic Corps, and basically at this point, we're just addressing events as they come up. In regards to my current job as Deputy AG, as I said, I am willing to remain in this capacity if the incoming AG wants me to for legal advice, however, I will not be personally handling any cases. So with that in mind, I don't anticipate that any of my positions elsewhere will affect my performance as VD.

Zyvet:

In the past (before March 2015), the Security Council would conduct discussion of prospective members of the Council in a forum that was publicly visible, they have since stopped doing so. What is your view of the notion of public discussions of applications to the Security Council or of the disclosure of such discussions once they have concluded, what benefits and drawbacks are there? More generally, ought the Security Council be subject to the freedom of information provisions in the Codified Law?

Click to expand...

In regards to your first question, as Vice Delegate, I will continue to have the SC discussions of prospective members in private. I understand the argument for increased transparency; however, it is important to understand that the Security Council is our region's most essential and important security apparatus. Deciding who is and who is not admitted is not an easy task, and it's important to give SC members the privacy they need to make these decisions. To further clarify, let's say that a popular member of the region is applying to the SC; however, Security Councilor X believes them to be unqualified (or possibly dangerous) for the SC. If we were to have the discussions in public, then Security Councilor X at this point faces a dilemma no matter what he does. If he were to bring up his concerns, he'd be risking his standing and future in the region, but if he stays silent, he'd be possibly risking the whole region. As a result, I think having these discussions in private helps us circumvent all these problems, and it allows our Security Councilors to safely bring up their concerns/views on prospective members.

To answer your second question, at first glance, one is inclined to say yes. However, it's not that simple. Once again, the SC is the most important and essential security apparatus in-game in TNP. I'm not entirely comfortable with disclosing certain discussions that could be used against Security Councilors directly or indirectly. If you (or anyone in the RA) would be interested in writing up a proposal that would be tailored specifically for the SC, I would happily consider it. I just think the discussion for such a proposal needs to significantly take into view the opinions of Security Councilors as this could (and will) have a huge impact on them.

Zyvet:

Do you consider the Security Council at present to be too few in number, or too many, or to be about sufficient? If it is too many or is sufficient, would you suggest the Council and the Assembly be more discerning in those that are admitted? If so, would you suggest any informal standards or requirements which new applicants ought generally to meet (such as past service as Delegate or Vice Delegate or a certain length of participation in TNP)? Would you suggest changing the formal requirements for the Councillors in any way? If it is too few, would you suggest that the Council and Assembly should be less discerning and ought the formal requirements for members be lowered; would you encourage members to seek to join the Council?

Click to expand...

To answer the first part of your question, with 9 Security Councilors, I think we are at just the right amount. I personally would not support any informal requirement for new applicants. While I understand the view that former Delegates and Vice Delegates are trusted individuals, I don't think the holders of those two positions (which are very hard to get into) are the only ones in the region who care about TNP's security and as a result, I would not want to discriminate against the others and force them to handle positions that they may have no interest in order to be Security Councilors. With that in mind, I am currently supporting the Security Council Reform Bill (as currently proposed by Kondratev and previously by Ash). I think our current requirement of 300 endorsements makes absolutely no sense in the current context of our region and its endorsement levels. With over 1,300 WA nations in the region, and with the Delegate having almost 1,300 endorsements, I believe it is safe to say that the requirements (endos and SPDR) ought to be raised.

Thank you for the questions, Zyvet.

Edit: Fixed some grammatical errors.

Good you have my vote

Lord Emmanuel:

Good you have my vote

Click to expand...

Thank you, Emmanuel.

You have my vote!

Romanoffia:

You have my vote!

Click to expand...

Thank you, Roman

Since the VD is a heartbeat away from the delegacy.....

1. What is your analysis of the situation in TNP this past week which led to the resignation and departure from the region of the Attorney General and the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and the apparent decision to dismiss Syrixia from the cabinet should Plemboria be elected for a second term?
2. What is your opinion of the use of the Delgate's veto to overturn a 41-10 majority vote from the Regional Assembly (please note, this is not a question about the legality of the veto, it is a question about the ethics of it.)
3. If you had been delegate over the past week, what would you have done differently?

flemingovia:

Since the VD is a heartbeat away from the delegacy.....

1. What is your analysis of the situation in TNP this past week which led to the resignation and departure from the region of the Attorney General and the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and the apparent decision to dismiss Syrixia from the cabinet should Plemboria be elected for a second term?
2. What is your opinion of the use of the Delgate's veto to overturn a 41-10 majority vote from the Regional Assembly (please note, this is not a question about the legality of the veto, it is a question about the ethics of it.)
3. If you had been delegate over the past week, what would you have done differently?

Click to expand...

1. First of all, let me say that I'm honestly perplexed by Praetor's departure, and I am hoping that in the coming days, we'll get more information from him. With regards to Ash, I don't approve of how he handled the evidence, but I think his departure from office as AG is very unfortunate. He was an extremely motivated, smart Attorney General, and his loss is a loss for the region. Now to address the whole conflict between Syrixia and Plembobria, I honestly think this whole mess could've been avoided. People are entitled to vote and voice their views however they wish. That's the bottom line in TNP. Sure, legally, Plembobria could remove Syrixia as part of his cabinet, and sure, a Delegate's cabinet is there to support them on issues, but in the end, freedom of speech in TNP is allowed and protected, and it should never be discouraged even when said member has different beliefs than you do.

2. If you look at the "Magicality Grand Plaza" channel in our Discord server, you'll notice that I was the first one to point out that the bill the Delegate had just vetoed had passed with a margin that's already greater than 2/3 of the votes cast. Like you, I'm not questioning the legality of the veto, and I'm not necessarily questioning any ethics per say, but what I am concerned about is the lack of communication between the Delegate and the RA on this particular bill. If you look at the discussion thread of that bill, the Delegate had not made a single post in there. Even if he thought that those opposing the bill had built a strong case against it, it'd been nice of him to inform the RA of his personal opposition to the proposal. Instead, there was nothing.

3. I don't really see a point in us mulling over the past tense. It doesn't matter what I would've done. I would be happy to provide some input as to what I think would happen next if I were Delegate, though. First of all and most importantly, I would issue a written statement to the RA explaining the events of last week. The truth is a lot of people are still confused about all of this. Not everyone has had access to Discord, and so Lord Ravenclaw's statements obviously did not reach the whole citizenry. Once again, it is essential, no -- imperative, that the Delegate maintains a direct line of communications with the RA.

Thank you. I heartily agree concerning the need for communication.

Thank you for your answers. I have some follow up questions in relation to the first group.

Zyvet:

In the past (before March 2015), the Security Council would conduct discussion of prospective members of the Council in a forum that was publicly visible, they have since stopped doing so. What is your view of the notion of public discussions of applications to the Security Council or of the disclosure of such discussions once they have concluded, what benefits and drawbacks are there? More generally, ought the Security Council be subject to the freedom of information provisions in the Codified Law?

Click to expand...

In regards to your first question, as Vice Delegate, I will continue to have the SC discussions of prospective members in private. I understand the argument for increased transparency; however, it is important to understand that the Security Council is our region's most essential and important security apparatus. Deciding who is and who is not admitted is not an easy task, and it's important to give SC members the privacy they need to make these decisions. To further clarify, let's say that a popular member of the region is applying to the SC; however, Security Councilor X believes them to be unqualified (or possibly dangerous) for the SC. If we were to have the discussions in public, then Security Councilor X at this point faces a dilemma no matter what he does. If he were to bring up his concerns, he'd be risking his standing and future in the region, but if he stays silent, he'd be possibly risking the whole region. As a result, I think having these discussions in private helps us circumvent all these problems, and it allows our Security Councilors to safely bring up their concerns/views on prospective members.

To answer your second question, at first glance, one is inclined to say yes. However, it's not that simple. Once again, the SC is the most important and essential security apparatus in-game in TNP. I'm not entirely comfortable with disclosing certain discussions that could be used against Security Councilors directly or indirectly. If you (or anyone in the RA) would be interested in writing up a proposal that would be tailored specifically for the SC, I would happily consider it. I just think the discussion for such a proposal needs to significantly take into view the opinions of Security Councilors as this could (and will) have a huge impact on them.

Click to expand...

Approval for membership of the Security Council is not solely a matter for the Council, it is a matter for the Assembly also; if concerns of Councillors are not made known to the Assembly, does it not make it more difficult for the Assembly to make the right decision in relation to an applicant?

At the moment, the Security Council is the only government organ which keeps secret from the Assembly, for an indefinite period, almost all of its activity. The Delegate and the rest of their government is required by law to disclose most matters after a year; the Court has, in exercise of its rule making power, made similar provision for declassification after a year; the Speaker's Office and the AG's Office undertake much of their activity visibly; and the Assembly cannot keep secrets from itself. Would you take steps to allow some amount of disclosure, through exercise of the Security Council's rule making power, if legislation were not forthcoming (I should note, I appreciate that the Vice Delegate is but one voice among the several on the Council (and, indeed, it would be a voice without a vote, in your case) and that, therefore, it may well be your endeavour to take steps would be unsuccessful)?

Zyvet:

Approval for membership of the Security Council is not solely a matter for the Council, it is a matter for the Assembly also; if concerns of Councillors are not made known to the Assembly, does it not make it more difficult for the Assembly to make the right decision in relation to an applicant?

Click to expand...

First of all, thank you for the follow-up questions, Zyvet. As you know, the Regional Assembly votes on applicants who have been approved by the Security Council. The Security Council does not take its job lightly and it holds applicants to a very high standard when evaluating them (as we've seen with the number of recent applicants who have been rejected). As Vice-Delegate, I promise nothing less than that. No issue or concern (no matter how small it may seem) will go unaddressed, because I strongly value the input of each Security Councillor, and I understand that even a small mistake or oversight could have a huge impact on our region.

Zyvet:

At the moment, the Security Council is the only government organ which keeps secret from the Assembly, for an indefinite period, almost all of its activity. The Delegate and the rest of their government is required by law to disclose most matters after a year; the Court has, in exercise of its rule making power, made similar provision for declassification after a year; the Speaker's Office and the AG's Office undertake much of their activity visibly; and the Assembly cannot keep secrets from itself. Would you take steps to allow some amount of disclosure, through exercise of the Security Council's rule making power, if legislation were not forthcoming (I should note, I appreciate that the Vice Delegate is but one voice among the several on the Council (and, indeed, it would be a voice without a vote, in your case) and that, therefore, it may well be your endeavour to take steps would be unsuccessful)?

Click to expand...

I'm all for transparency when possible. As I responded to your previous question regarding the application of the freedom of information provisions in the Codified Law to the SC, the Security Council is different than all the other government branches you described, as its our region's in-game security apparatus. Their discussions and decisions are extremely delicate, and they need a certain amount of privacy to candidly make the best decisions for the region. So to answer your question, I (personally) would definitely consider increasing disclosure, but it is something that I'll have to discuss with the rest of the SC.

You know what you are talking about. You have my vote.

Mystery Player:

You know what you are talking about. You have my vote.

Click to expand...

Thank you, Mystery Player

I just want to say I think you did a fantastic job in Home Affairs. In the election before your appointment, people were talking about disbanding the department because it was so inactive. You brought back the mentor program, which I think is an essential part of every successful region's domestic life. You instituted a simple system for recruitment spam that made it very easy for people to contribute. As a result of all this, member retention improved. I find the attacks on your activity somewhat ironic given the state of the department before you arrived.

I nominated you because I'd like to see more of what you have to offer this region. Your dedication is obvious. Good luck.

Thank you for the kind words, Kondratev, I really appreciate it. And best of luck to you in the Speaker's race.

Tomb:

Now to address the whole conflict between Syrixia and Plembobria, I honestly think this whole mess could've been avoided. People are entitled to vote and voice their views however they wish. That's the bottom line in TNP. Sure, legally, Plembobria could remove Syrixia as part of his cabinet, and sure, a Delegate's cabinet is there to support them on issues, but in the end, freedom of speech in TNP is allowed and protected, and it should never be discouraged even when said member has different beliefs than you do.

Click to expand...

This is a radical turnaround in your views compared to your term as Delegate, when you attempted to misuse the power of your office to restrict Flemingovia's free speech -- basically, to silence his dissent -- in exchange for permitting his involvement in the NPA. He wasn't even a Minister, he was just a citizen looking to be more involved in the regional military. And that is in fact the difference. While what you did was wrong because you were trying to silence an ordinary citizen who just wanted basic involvement in a regional activity that should be relatively open to anyone interested, serving as a Minister isn't a right, it's a privilege, and Ministers serve at the pleasure of the Delegate. It is reasonable to expect them to support the government's program, or if they cannot support it, to resign or be dismissed. It happens all the time in real life governments.

In any event, does this turnaround indicate that you now acknowledge your actions as Delegate were wrong, and that you should not have attempted to misuse the power of your office to silence a citizen? Even if I disagree with you in regard to the current situation, I would certainly be glad to hear that you acknowledge you were wrong in what you did.

Cormac:

In any event, does this turnaround indicate that you now acknowledge your actions as Delegate were wrong, and that you should not have attempted to misuse the power of your office to silence a citizen? Even if I disagree with you in regard to the current situation, I would certainly be glad to hear that you acknowledge you were wrong in what you did.

Click to expand...

Hi Cormac! Glad to see you here! Make sure to apply for citizenship so you can fully participate in TNP after this.

To answer your question, I am not proud of that episode/chapter of my TNP career. It is something that I deeply regret, of course, and I have apologized in private to Flemingovia, and I have expressed my regret publicly multiple times now. As I said, this is a closed chapter, and while I do regret going through it, it has improved me as a player and taught me a lot. I understand the importance of free speech, and it is something that I will uphold and promote everyday in which I am a Vice Delegate if elected.

Thank you for answering, I'm glad you've had a change of heart since then.

In regard to citizenship, I'm comfortable as a resident, but I appreciate the encouragement and perhaps I will apply for citizenship sometime in the future.