The Speaker Accountability Act

BMWSurfer

BMWSurfer

Some random groundhog idk
-
TNP Nation
Veniyerris
Discord
BMWSurfer#1965
Hi all!


I have always struggled to know what the speakers staff does, and we seem to be focusing a lot on accountability recently. Therefore, I have come up with an addition to chapter 6 of the legal code.


Section 6.5: Speaker Accountability

1. The Speaker shall endeavour to be transparent and accountable to the Regional Assembly.

2. The Speaker shall produce a report every 2 weeks of all the doings and dealings of their office.
Click to expand...


This should provide the RA more info on what their speaker is doing on a regular basis. This may also help with engagement in the RA and recruitment to the speakers staff.
 
I cannot help but feel this legislation borrows heavily from a certain other piece of legislation currently under deliberation. That being said I think it is fair and just that all servants of the region report to the bodies and people that they serve so I support this legislation 100%.
 
Sil Dorsett:
Oh come on...


I think we all know what you're doing here, and it ain't funny.
Click to expand...


I mean, I actually don’t know what the speakers staff does on a regular basis. I can think of one occasion where speaker accountability would have been helpful in this term.


It may be seen as a statement, but it is based in fact.
 
I think that this doesn't need to be legislated. Surely this is a recommendation that the office itself could take up and act on.
 
BMWSurfer:
I mean, I actually don’t know what the speakers staff does on a regular basis. I can think of one occasion where speaker accountability would have been helpful in this term.


It may be seen as a statement, but it is based in fact.
Click to expand...
As a long time member of the Speaker's Staff, that is what I can say. Speaker Staffers are trained to become future speakers. We do have duties we have to do assigned by the Speaker. It used to be a group led by the Speaker to be trained to be future Speakers and do the RA Digest.
 
Dinoium:
As a long time member of the Speaker's Staff, that is what I can say. Speaker Staffers are trained to become future speakers. We do have duties we have to do assigned by the Speaker. It used to be a group led by the Speaker to be trained to be future Speakers and do the RA Digest.
Click to expand...
Furthermore, I've been trained in how speaker checks work and how to produce and publish the RA digest, should it ever be revived.

I don't feel the need to legislate every single tidbit of information out there. I know as well as you do that through this bill's press releases that we're going to be calling for the next Speaker's head by February.
 
I don't really think this legislation is necessary, though there isn't much harm in it either. While it does add some work to the Speaker's Office, it also adds some additional modicum of transparency.
 
I smell an unnecessary, immature, and borderline petty attack on Wonderess meant to blast his legislation when in reality it's well-intended and all it needs is some tweaks allowing more flexibility for it to work. I'm very disappointed.

As someone running for Delegate, you should know better. I'd consider this a PR blunder on your part.
 
Syrixia:
As someone running for Delegate, you should know better. I'd consider this a PR blunder on your part.
Click to expand...
I have always found these lines of argument confusing. It is quite easy for someone to run for the Delegacy.

I hardly see what running for the position of Delegate has to do with proposing legislation to better understand what the Speakers' Staff does.
 
Praetor:
I have always found these lines of argument confusing. It is quite easy for someone to run for the Delegacy. I hardly see what running for the position of Delegate has to do with proposing legislation to better understand what the Speakers' Staff does.
Click to expand...
I can't tell if you're being technical for the sake of it or just being snarky and snickering behind the screen. Either way, we both know what this legislation really is, so you can knock it off now.
 
Syrixia:
I can't tell if you're being technical for the sake of it or just being snarky and snickering behind the screen. Either way, we both know what this legislation really is, so you can knock it off now.
Click to expand...
I am being completely and utterly serious. I plan to remain involved in the RA despite your preference for me to not.

If this proposal is bad, why can it not be evaluated on the text and the implications?
 
Syrixia:
I smell an unnecessary, immature, and borderline petty attack on Wonderess meant to blast his legislation when in reality it's well-intended and all it needs is some tweaks allowing more flexibility for it to work. I'm very disappointed.


As someone running for Delegate, you should know better. I'd consider this a PR blunder on your part.
Click to expand...


The topic of transparency has been a focus recently, and so it seemed like an appropriate time to propose this. Wonderess himself had commented that he didn’t always know what the executive was doing, and I realized that this was an issue for me as well (just with the speaker instead of the executive). I have also acknowledged that this is similar to Wonderesses proposal, and it is similarly well-intended.


This would also be a strange way to attack Wonderess, as he supports this idea.
 
@Praetor:

XD

Alright, we're gonna be that way. Got it. It's not that the proposal is bad. It's good for the same reasons why Wondo's proposal is good. It's the circumstances and context behind this proposal that are the problems. I can't support it in that respect because if I do, we're setting a dangerous precedent.

Happy? :P
 
Syrixia:
@Praetor:

XD

Alright, we're gonna be that way. Got it. It's not that the proposal is bad. It's good for the same reasons why Wondo's proposal is good. It's the circumstances and context behind this proposal that are the problems. I can't support it in that respect because if I do, we're setting a dangerous precedent.

Happy? :P
Click to expand...
Actually, that was much better. :P

I personally disagree on this proposal. I believe the first clause is already covered under some legislation somewhere (idk) but the main part for me is the second clause. I think two weeks is too frequent were it to be implemented. Second, I would appreciate voluntary reporting to come from the Speaker and become part of our culture similar to how the Delegate's WA vote being determined by the region is.

However, I think if there is a recent push for accountability and transparency (the Delegate's Advisors bill, or a previously mentioned revised FoIA) it does not make sense to start excluding certain branches unless there is a reason for it.
 
I propose the following amendment to this bill.

Section 6.5: Speaker Accountability

1. The Speaker shall endeavour to be transparent and accountable to the Regional Assembly.

2 1. The Speaker shall produce a report every 2 weeks of all the doings and dealings of their office.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top