Discussion in 'Regional Assembly' started by Wonderess, Feb 23, 2019.
Spoiler: Marked Up Version
So I have decided to combine my intent of the Executive Accountability Act with a desire for a dedication to transparency, decency, and ethics in the TNP government with this addition. I honestly believe this government pursuit is worth its own ministry and is just as important as other areas of governance.
Dear god I would hope every elected delegate would be capable of being their own minister of ethics.
If this proposal were to pass (which I doubt it will - TNP's government tends to be very stand-up and transparent given Article 9 of the Bill of Rights and our general culture), it would make for a great job for the AG, who already provides legal advice to the Executive. The MoCO also already keeps the citizenry abreast of the latest happenings in the government.
Edit: Also, no. Just no. I'm not for this proposal at all.
Nobly intentioned, but define the nature of these ethics. Definitions are everything in legal documentation, @Wonderess. You should know that- you are a former Speaker.
tl;dr I cannot support this proposal.
I like the regular reports of government activity, but everything else has me a bit leery. Also echoing everyone else re: defining ethics
I do not feel that an EO for Ethics is necessary for TNP. Ethics itself is an ambiguous affair, there is also the possibility that the EO him/her/itself is corrupt, and unlike in real life, we can just remove the Delegate if he/she/it was found to be engaging in unethical behavior. It just seems too extra for me. No support.
Ethice is not a word. Opposed.
Ethice is latin for ethics or moral philosophy. Government ethics has the purpose of assuring that government remains interested in those it represents. The dedication of a ministry to this endeavor gives it a place of importance and consistent consideration by the government. A Delegate certainly has the capacity to be ethical as they should. However, their job is multifaceted and pulls them many ways in which may make it difficult to keep perspective. This is a natural part of facing many complex decisions on a daily basis. A Minister of Ethics (placeholder name) would have the job to be in deliberation of conflicts and questions that face the government and always speaking from an ethical perspective. A Minister of Defense speaks from the perspective of regional security and a Minister of Communications speaks from a perspective of expression of regional thought and activity through publication. A Minister of Ethics has the ethical stability and good of the executive machine as a central focus and this is n important focus that commonly is present but falls into the background without having an explicit representative in political discussion.
It is important to point out that ethics is not a religious endeavor in the political realm but remains vital for continuity and efficiency. Defense and diplomacy are practical activities that require accomplishment and action as their primary focus and rightly so. A government must get things done in different fields to remain efficient and to do its job. Ethics on the other hand is primarily deliberative and thought based. Though, action then comes forward from the pursuit of ethics because it is concerned with rightly ordered action. Perspective is vital to the success of any government. One may have a great army or good cultural outreach, but unless the whole is acting in the interest of the people and dead set on this goal then these individual parts grow separate and efficiency and good will naturally decay overtime. Governments get caught up in the task that the purpose and aim become lost. This is dangerous and capable of being avoided if government is willing and able to dedicate a place and institution to ethic.
My rendition of an ethical ministry for TNP does serve a practical function for the region. While being that institution that wishes to asses government action and function and create efficiency it also crafts official reports of non-sensitive government activity for the general public to see. It acts as the voice of transparency and continual service of the government to the people by providing updates to the RA on activity for review and discussion. It will also keep a record of deliberations by the government regarding certain conflicts as to fashion a lasting record of ethical decisions that in turn create a wholistic understanding of the TNP ethical heartbeat. This is a grand pursuit and an important one if we are dedicated to right governance and remaining dedicated to transparency. Corruption is not hard to fall into and it can be very close by the time one realizes it is upon the region. This ethical pursuit combats that and it is not job or drive that should be taken lightly or seen as unimportant. Standards and understanding are important and sometimes the necessity of accomplishing the task can make it hard to put time or effort into that pursuit, therefore it is right and beneficial to dedicate a ministry to this. It is a unique ministry that I think many would be interested to serve as it appeals to the thinker and the one searching for answers to these sorts of ordeals. Even if you are not interested in it yourself, consider its importance and place nonetheless. This is an endeavor I am very passionate about, and I would be vey excited to see this field of political thought to be an important and foundational aspect of our region. I think TNP deserves it and can be a leading example for other regions as well.
I am happy to take any questions you have. I ask that you approach this legislation with an open mind.
I don't understand the purpose of naming the bill in Latin. The Romans didn't invent ethics - in fact, the word is further derived from Greek.
If you *are* going to insist on keeping a Latin name, it should at the very least go all the way: lex ethices.
It seems to bother many so the title has been revamped.
Drat you've quoted my faulty Latin - I meant lex ethicorum
Take a wild guess.
I don’t find your “practical” reasons compelling, nor do I find any of what this officer does to be necessary. The RA already can hold the government accountable as we are seeing right now with the current recall motion.
I would rather see your Executive Accountability Act go to vote, as I feel it a more practical measure for the same goal.
Practicality is important I agree. However, there is more to governance than action and process. There is deliberation and understanding of the action that is also necessary and important. I strongly believe that this aspect of government needs more emphasis, which is why I propose a ministry that has that in mind. Also, there are both external and internal auditors. This is the internal sort that is closer and a part of the whole rather than being an outside entity like the RA doing the external audit so to speak. The audit language is simply allegorical.
In the past, we have tried to define other current ministries to be a mandatory ministry and it hasn't worked out. Why do you believe that ethics should be a mandatory ministry whilst something like Communications or WA Affairs not be one.
Communications and WA Affairs are both privy to what I will hereby define as "Ministries of Practicality." This is to say that they function to complete tasks that reflect the agency and active responsibilities of the Executive. Though the Ministry of Ethics would have practical responsibilities as I laid out above, its fundamental function would be to be deliberative and introspective as a ministry. Think of the Executive as a person for a moment. All of its current ministries are its types of "thoughts." Some deal with entities outside of it, and others deal with more internal but practical measures. Ethics would be like the introspective aspect of the person always reassessing self function and actions for the sake of bettering those functions and grounding them while tying them all together under the coherent responsibility and mission of the TNP government. I argue that though a different type of ministry it remains very important and so I believe that importance is so justified as to be encased in a ministry structure.
I will use Avengers: Infinity War for an example. What is it that Red Skull says of the Soul Stone? He says it "holds a special place among the infinity stone." This is because the purpose and aim of the soul stone is fundamentally different from the other stones yet still connected and just as vital.
Red Skull is a villain (and you know what else). Still opposed.
I wish to say this. If you are opposed then please deliberate with me and my ideas and understandings. My appeal and idea is different from most proposals because it is of a philosophical nature which some of you may not be used to dealing with. Philosophical reasoning is not any less valid than practical and action oriented reasoning I must say. That being said, I have not yet heard a challenge to my ideas but just a blanket "we don't need ethics in a ministry." I ask why not? Is it not important enough to you or is it that your idea of a ministry is limited to "practical" subjects alone? I see this as a means to fundamentally improve regional life by focusing on important aims.
Ethics is a valuable goal. None of us are disputing that on a philosophical level. It's just your proposal is so highly invalid from a practical standpoint that it's the major flaw we wish to overcome with this. I doubt any of us are saying that ethics, philosophically, is a goal we do not wish to attain.
You're in the RA. We pass laws. Practicality is the name of the game once we have a goal in mind, and that's the majority of debate when it comes to the RA. Rather than attempting to change the RA into a bunch of sophistic naval-gazers, perhaps you should instead realize that we are in the RA to discuss laws, and that practicality is the majority of law.
To decrease corruption, there must be some level of corruption. Unless you want negative corruption. What corruption currently exists?
What ethical issues are there in TNP’s government? Examples please.
Lastly, where in the Ministires is transparency lacking and which Ministries?
Sophist is quite the accusation, sir. Practicality is only so good as the aim remains stationary and constantly understood and brought forth through reminder. Once the aim is lost the government efficiency and coherence is lost even if ever so gradually. This call for ministerial ethics is meant to safeguard the aim of the government and keep everyone serving it oriented towards the service of the region through constant reevaluation of actions. This is most definitely an aid to practicality. It cannot all be about what is done, but also how and why it is done. These are necessary questions and a government needs to safeguard them and ask them frequently.
I have heard whispers of things that I am not willing to say openly as that will just start everyone up. Experientially, there is a trend towards getting caught up in work and goals which can cause the loss of perspective. A WA minister hypothetically may begin to care more about the number of passed proposals from the region instead of considering the good of the proposals for the region. The first is a self oriented goal while the second is region oriented. This is an example and has nothing to do with Tlomz. The ethical pursuit can pick up on this and as a presence keep perspective in place. Usually, government does not turn from not corrupt to corrupt overnight. It is likely a gradual process of rationalizing means for some end and then it worsens overtime. An ethical body can resist this sort of drift by the nature of its function and deliberation by keeping in touch with each ministry and seeing the individual aims of those ministries in light of the whole government's aim. It is a matter of coherence and then transparency as previously discussed.
I do not see a need for the proposed Ministry, and I agree with others above who have stated that the Regional Assembly is already firmly responsible for keeping the administration accountable.
Fantastic. We should take your word of certain “whispers” you have heard of corruption but you have no examples. I have not heard of any such whispers and have heard whispers to the contrary. This simply just sets your word against the words of others in the absence of definite examples.
I am asking for real examples here. Not hypotheticals. The region historically has not been passing resolutions recently as far as I am aware. And if they have they have not done a good job of showing their passage for political use (which would be why they focus on number over quality).
You did not answer my last question.
Alright, Fiji, I am willing to respectfully engage you on this. Why is the Ministry of Communications necessary?
It isn't. But the Ministry is also one of the more visible components of any administration. By producing TNS, we provide FA with governmental reports. In producing TNL, we advertise TNP to the world. With NBS, we enhance our regional culture, and bring attention to valuable subjects that deserve attention - hopefully we'll be doing a lot more of that in the coming weeks. The Ministry of Communications absolutely isn't necessary, but it supports much of what we strive to do here in TNP.
...what are you getting at?
Each ministry has a staff function which staffers know and then upper functions that the staff may not be aware of. If one is not serving on the staff of a ministry, then its whereabouts are not necessarily known to that person. By having actions documented in one place for the citizenry to see, everyone can know what is done in each region without it remaining a mystery. On paper one can see how a ministry performs from term to term and gauge if there was improvement or not. I believe transparency calls for the ability to have easy access to actions in the ministry and this is through documentation.
As for actual examples there are none that I will say. I would like to know the amount of influence older players have on the government and if their ideas are being integrated or not. The McMs and R3Ns of the region do hold sway. This does not mean that they are bad people, but their word may be preferential in opinions. An ethical arm could be a reminder that reasoning through and keeping perspective are important rather than worrying about favor and influence.
I am saying that Communications is good for the region and deserves to exist because of what it provides. People who have a passion for publications and writing get to use those gifts through your ministry. I believe there are some that would be passionate about ethics as well and wish to serve under that goal just people do in the goal of communications. It does not hurt to have someone spend a term asking questions and wishing to improve the function of the executive so that the government can better. I see it as a monumental opportunity to have a new kind of engagement in TNP unlike any NS region has seen and it can help the region to thrive even more.
In my opinion, Ministries should focus on producing tangible effects. I think you could very well don that hat yourself, gather like-minded people who are concerned about governmental ethics, and produce a write a report of your findings. It could even lead to a campaign for an office. But the endeavor does not seem to me to be one that requires a staff of individuals over many terms to accomplish, especially when I see the RA of already fulfilling that role.
I point you to my internal/external auditor point, but I understand and accept your point of view on this.
Okay, so we'll be sure to ask Sakkuriaw (the current newest TNP nation) their opinion on important policy decisions as well - their opinion is 100% exactly as valid for decisions requiring an experienced hand as those such as McM and r3n.
You also vastly overestimate how much influence they have - they may provide valuable input but they're not going around shaping policy. The elected government and other government officials very much have free reign over their areas - I have McM, Gladio, and QuietDad in my own Ministry, and frankly I've gone against their opinions as much as I've gone with them, if they even had opinions to give at all before I acted.
I'd also like to ask again what these "whispers" are. If they're so gravely serious as to require an entire Ministry dedicated to rooting them out and posting public information on government corruption, then lead by example. Let the public know about this corruption you seem to know so well of.
You are keeping this debate at a high level of abstraction. There is a lack of descent into particulars. Your entire argument suffers in the absence. It is fine to use buzzwords of encouraging ethical activity and increasing transparency should there be a more granular technical level to back it up. You have none.
So we have established the following:
1) There are no examples of corruption in government.
2) There are no specific Ministries in which you feel there is a lack of transparency nor are there areas in the aforementioned Ministries where you feel there should be more transparency.
Rather, you are concerned of the influence older players may have. While I suggest visiting the Delegate Question Time thread for such inquiries, I would also suggest perhaps they have influence due to having experience and good ideas?
Seems rather extreme to create a Ministry as a method to finding out the answer to such a question.
You assume that I want this because of some event or reason of circumstance, and that is not true.
I have made no such assumption. I am asking you to publicly state what corruptions plague our institutions after you wafted them in front of our faces like a treat for a dog. For a person so committed to "ethics" and the public's need to know, you're holding these cards very close to your chest.
I'm just going to leave this real life example here to simmer.
Do you intend to continue on from that and in any way argue why this is relevant to our political game, why our region requires this specific approach, and how this justifies your given approach?
Separate names with a comma.