|
A clip from "Roundtable with Shaurya Vuong," a popular morning news SCN broadcast, June 1, 3062 SHAURYA VUONG: Joining us now on the train from Sard to Sapphire is Minister Danube. Say, haven't we met before? [VUONG, DANUBE, and AMINA COOK, via telepresence, laugh] VUONG: But in all seriousness, two days ago, you spoke at a rally for Sisay Cardoso in Opal, last week you were on the program with Kyra Petrov of Peridot. Now, you're on your way to campaign with Dr. Cook. What's got a government minister so involved in local campaigns? DANUBE: Well, Shaurya, you know what they say, all politics is local. Local government has been a major focus of parliament for the last couple months, and it's just so encouraging to see the flowers of democracy finally blooming in our streets. But my message, which I share with Dr. Cook, is that the Forward Development Group is the best choice for a prosperous and stable city. COOK: Thank you, Minister. Speaking to the people of Sapphire, I offer solutions for you. Not the same plan as everywhere else in the country, but specifically for our community. We're not a rural farming community or a bustling manufacturing center, we're a university town with a burgeoning biotech sector. Mister Hammon of SRLF, on the eve of the election, still refuses to pledge to respect the private property of Sapphire's citizens. Even with the Property Appropriation Committee in place- DANUBE: And let me tell you, the SRLF aren't happy about that. COOK: They're undoubtedly trying to find ways around it. Mister Hammon would try to implement the same agenda his party is pushing everywhere else, a confiscation of all private property, to be redistributed by his own executive office. To me, this stinks of tyranny. The Old Regime at least tried to hide the fact that it was stealing from us, but have we been left so inundated in the authoritarian mindset by the three decades of dictatorship that we'll elect a man who's pledging to do just that? I don't think so. Now, I decided to get involved in politics after seeing the success of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, spearheaded by Minister Danube here. DANUBE: Which passed, I should add, without a single SRLF vote in favor of it. COOK: Right! My father's murder at the hands of the Old Regime left me deeply cynical about government, but what my own experience seeking justice for my father's murder taught me about government is that there is a way for government to better the lives of its citizens, and the cornerstone of this is respect. For life, for property, for the individual. A mayor who doesn't do that is no better than Vallstein. VUONG: *sips coffee*
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 05:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 01:14 |
|
|
It's very exciting when candidates get to state what their opponents have done. I look forward to the precedent.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 05:34
|
|
|
A viral clip from Opal's most popular evening talk show, "Life's The Game, June 1, 3062 Present: EVAN DURAND, Host; ESTEBAN SEGAL, Popular Cultural Commentator; TANU BAI, Popular Singer; DENVER AXO, Government Official and former Fashion executive DURAND: So, Denver...oh, sorry. Should I say...Mr. Committee Member? [CROWD 'ooohs'] DURAND: Are you really planning on taking everybody's stuff and giving it to a bunch of dirt farmers? [CROWD boos, SEGAL and BAI laugh] SEGAL: Get him! AXO: Uh, what? DURAND: Just kidding, Denver. Really though, what drove you to join the government? It's so boring. All those meetings! AXO: Well, Evan, growing up I was expected to just sort of be groomed for the position of head of Axo's. But as a resident of Panorama, I came to identify with the people who worked in the factories, much more than the rich crowd I was told to socialize with. And when I joined the CLF, I took the lessons of justice and equality to heart- DURAND: Justice? Equality? CLF? Talk about a bunch of guys and gals with sticks up their asses! [CROWD laughs] DURAND: Pretty different than what you were talking about on our last date, Denver! I remember you talking more about ancient poetry, and running away to the Hesperides! BAI: Haha! [CROWD screams in ecstasy as AXO visibly blushes] AXO: I - what... SEGAL: Go easy on the poor guy! He's given us these trim new uniforms everybody's wearing. AXO: No - I mean, it wasn't my personal design, actually- DURAND: Alright, alright. Just one last question for you before we go to break, Denver. AXO: Hm. DURAND: WHAT! ARE! THOSE! [CROWD bellows and hoots as lights flash and sirens wail while the camera zooms in on AXO's cufflinks. A bucket of green slime is lowered from the ceiling and the contents are upended onto AXO] Axo: This was a mistake. DURAND: That's all for tonight, folks! Check in tomorrow night when we have on Fifteen Fingers Tojiko, the famous, and she says former, mob assassin! And now a [DURAND checks notes in mock surprise] KNK party leader?!? Stick around for a special sneak peek of next week's Cromdon's World! [The feed cuts to CROMDON's WORLD, a popular sitcom. CROMDON, a young man, supervises a CLF squad as they line a group of Regime special police up against a wall.] CROMDON: Time to face justice, you dogs! [The squad fires] SHELLNO: Wait, Cromdon, those weren't police goons! They're a bunch of community theater actors! [CROMDON shrugs in his trademark manner] CROMDON: Woops! That's a doozer!
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 05:39
|
|
|
Amendment on Parliamentary Composition -The number of seats in parliament filled by Guardian Council appointments will be reduced from 15 to 5 - The number of seats in parliament filled by elected seats ( proportional representation) will be increased by 10 The undemocratic nature of the constitution of this Parliament is intolerable. The people must govern themselves, and there are currently 20 seats in Parliament not chosen by the people of Sirta. That is one fourth of the entire Parliament! If the people themselves wish a law to be passed, what legitimate authority can deny them? The Rehabilitation Act, V2 -The government will agree to establish free rehabilitation centers. People may voluntarily enter into these programs, or they may be sentenced to rehabilitation in place of more traditional punishment for consumption and possession of illegal addictive substances. These rehabilitation centers will initiate a program for their clients with the goal of stopping their current addictive substance use, and preventing their clients from using substances in the future. The program in question will be decided upon by a panel of licensed doctors who will decide on a national program, based primarily on efficacy of reducing drug relapse and improving overall health. People who voluntarily enter the program may withdraw at any time without legal consequence, though those sentenced to a rehabilitation center by a judge cannot withdraw from a program until their completion of the program. - One of each of these centers will be established in the cities of Sard, Opal, Peridot, Topaz, Amber, and Sapphire - The amount of funding given to these centers will be decided upon by the Minister of Health
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 07:15
|
|
|
Expected Local Government Income and Expenses for June 3062: All amounts listed are in millions of New Sirtan Credits. Items that are one-time only (arent recurring on a monthly basis) are marked with square brackets. Sard: Income Breakdown: * Property Tax 18 13 * Business Tax 23 at least 17 * Income Tax 25 at least 20 * Estate Tax 3.5 at least 5 * Asset Transfer Tax 2.4 1.1 Overall Income: 71.9 Expenses: * Advisory Committee 3 * Sard Executive Council 2.5 * Office of the Sard Attorney 0.5 * Professional Advisory Council 2.7 Overall Expenses: 8.7 Remaining: 63.2 Panorama: Income Breakdown: * Profits from Voluntarily Appropriated Business 3.6 0.1 * [Donation from Denver Axo 0.1 - 0] Overall Income: 3.7 Expenses: * Advisory Committee - 0.5 Overall Expenses: 0.5 Remaining: 3.2
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 11:21
|
|
|
Property Appropriation Committee Decision on the Panorama Regional Governments Request: The full 81,989 properties on the list shall be divided into the following categories and attached compensation amounts equal to the listed percentage of their market value as of the 29th of May, 9:30. Here, Vital properties are properties that include some sort of agricultural capacity, non-luxury production capacity, or public utility like energy, transportation, or medical facilities. * Company Shares: ## Attached Compensation Values: 100% if owned by external actors, 50% if owned by Panorama residents. ## Number of Properties: 15,605 ## Total Compensation Amount: 8.49 million NSC ## Notable Properties: Panorama Construction Co. (425,000 NSC for all shares), Waterfall Energy U. Co. (650,000 NSC for all shares) * Vital Real-Estate: ## Attached Compensation Values: 40% if owned by external actors, 20% if owned by Panorama residents. ## Number of Properties: 345 ## Total Compensation Amount: 4.7 million NSC ## Notable Properties: Wind Farms (820,000 NSC), Hydroelectric Dam (1.3 million NSC), Agricultural Fields (325,000 NSC) * Vital Other Assets: ## Attached Compensation Values: 40% if owned by external actors, 20% if owned by Panorama residents. ## Number of Properties: 745 ## Total Compensation Amount: 890,000 NSC ## Notable Properties: Private Clinic Equipment (130,000 NSC), Basic Medicines (85,000 NSC), Canned Food (95,000 NSC) * Not-Vital Real-Estate: ## Attached Compensation Values: 90% if owned by external actors, 70% if owned by Panorama residents. ## Number of Properties: 5,986 ## Total Compensation Amount: 35.72 million NSC ## Notable Properties: Residential Properties (24.46 million NSC), Stores and Pharmacies (2.1 million). * Not-Vital Other Assets: ## Attached Compensation Values: 100% ## Number of Properties: 41,637 ## Total Compensation Amount: 5.8 million NSC ## Notable Properties: Vehicles (342,000 NSC) If you want to know the compensation value for any other type of property in Panorama not mentioned here explicitly, feel free to ask. Property Appropriation Committee First Meeting Transcript: The date is the 28th of May. Those present are Fatima Shwe, Hospes, Denver Axo, Diya Choi and Benjamin Ramachandra. Hospes: Before getting to the matter at hand, or matters at hand really, I believe it would be prudent to elect a Chair, to manage all proceedings and break ties. I nominate myself, due to my long years of experience. Benjamin: I disagree to having a former tycoon be the Chair of a committee dealing with the appropriation of private property. It seems entirely out of line with both professional integrity and the spirit of the revolution. Axo: Respectfully, I think a more utilitarian perspective would be appropriate and remind us that our ultimate goal is to allocate resources so that no one is favored at the expense of a productive and just society. I nominate Committee Member Shwe, due to her acknowledged expertise in the subject and neutral perspective as an analyst. Benjamin: I agree with Mr. Axo, I think her perspective would be invaluable for reaching appropriate decisions. Do you agree, Ms. Shwe? Fatima: Hm. I suppose so. Benjamin: Let us vote then. Axo: Support Benjamin: Support Fatima: Support Diya: Abstain Hopes: Oppose Benjamin: The vote passes 3-1. Fatima Shwe is selected as Committee Chair. You should take it from here, Ms. Shwe. Fatima: Right. Well, as far as I can understand, the Panorama Regional Government's request is to appropriate all property within Panorama, including property held by non-residents and external companies, correct? Axo: I'll answer for the PRG, as I helped draft the proposal. Yes, all property within the town and its valley is to be turned over to the local government, which will hold all property and assets in a fund, and the local government will assume the role of sole owner and shareholder for all businesses thus affected. The local government being run through the new direct democracy model, I should clarify. As the government now consists directly of every resident, in effect the property is held communally. Fatima: The property affected by the request can be divided into three broad categories: Real-Estate, Company Shares and Other Assets. Determining the current market value of each property isn't complicated or very time consuming. Therefore, I think this Committee should provide broad directives on how to determine compensation and who should be compensated, in the case of each category, and the rest can be done without our input. Does this sound agreeable? Benjamin: That sounds reasonable to me. Hospes: As long as we don't leave too much room for interpretation and... "creative accounting"... on the PRG's part. Axo: I would like to make a special exemption for properties valued in the 90th percentile of value and above. Since these are the largest and most important industries in the region, we owe the people of Panorama special attention for these cases. Additionally, while I agree with the broad groupings, we should also keep in mind that some businesses benefited from or were founded through the corruption of the previous regime. What should we do with that sort of property? I think that it would be just to rule that in cases where corruption of that sort can be proven, all compensation is immediately waived. Hospes: Matters of regime-adjacent corruption seem more suited to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission than to our purview. We should have the same rules for everybody, and if the PRG has conclusive proof of corruption, they can file a claim with the TRC, which can make the relevant parties pay restitution. I don't believe we should trouble ourselves with matters of this nature, our work is complicated enough as is without taking on the responsibilities of others. Hospes: Additionally, your claim that the owners of the most valued properties should receive no or reduced compensation is absurd! On the contrary, basic common sense would dictate that the more value a property has the bigger the compensation its' owners should receive. Axo: You misunderstood me. I meant that instead of merely applying a uniform ruling, the largest industries deserve a more thorough scrutinizing. No form letters or automatic judgments for the biggest employers. Hospes: I have no patience for cheap word games. I don't see what else a "more thorough scrutinizing" can achieve other than reducing the compensation the rightful owners are entitled to. At best, the compensation would remain the same, in which case it would be a waste of everyones time. Axo: The entire point of this committee was to provide honest and discerning judgment for cases of compensation. If the chief concern was expediency, then we would have tasked an algorithm with determining value and set a floor and ceiling and been done with it. Hospes: In any case, Mr. Axo clearly has a blatant conflict of interest when it comes to this request. I can't see how it would be remotely fair to provide anything but firm general directives, unless he recuses himself. Axo: If anyone doubts my commitment to honesty, justice, and professionalism, they may review the portion of the proposal where I and my family waive all compensation claims to our property and holdings - which would otherwise be one of the high-value properties thus scrutinized! I think that if I were out to enrich myself in some way, I've gone about it in a rather puzzling manner. Hospes: I don't mean a conflict of interest in the sense of blatant corruption! I mean that, as someone personally invested in the affairs of the Panorama Regional Government, he can't possibly be an impartial arbiter of how much that same government will be required to pay to the rightful property owners! Some of whom, I remind you, aren't even residents of Panorama! Axo: Mr. Hospes, have I offended you in some way? Every person has their sympathies and dreams. However, we were chosen for this committee because the Minister of the Interior believed us able to set aside our own partisan leanings to rule fairly and justly. Do you think the Minister was in error in his judgment? Hospes: That isn't relevant to the matter at hand. The point is, we are currently discussing the compensation owed by YOUR GOVERNMET to property owners not represented in this committee. Does your position truly seem impartial to you, when it comes to THIS PARTICULAR REQUEST? Axo: Mr. Hospes, please lower your voice. You are welcome to criticize my recommendations during these proceedings if you somehow sense that I am flouting my duty to impartiality. For my part, I am certain that I may advise this committee without letting sentiment compromise my judgment. Further, I must remind Mr. Hospes that a rural settlement, plagued by starvation, cut off from the rest of the world through the neglect of the very government and business interests it now hopes to replace -- do you really imagine they would peacefully accept a ruling delivered by a committee equally distant, equally neglectful, equally without representation? I hope you realize that they are certainly willing to administer a much rougher justice if they feel they are being sacrificed in the name of some mystical contract law. Remember that you are ruling to keep the peace as well as lining the pockets of your friends in the business community. Hospes: What gall! I see you took no time at all to resort to slander and threats of mob violence should the decision of this committee not be in your favor! I hope you realize that this only reinforces my point as to your lack of impartiality? Axo: I do not threaten anyone with anything. I am telling you as plainly as I can that I cannot, nor can anyone in this life, tell the parents of a starving child that because they cannot afford a proper compensatory fee, they cannot grow food to feed their children on land sitting unused, because it belongs to some tycoon. I am reminding you that the situation of the rural settlements is extremely dire. You cannot let your commitment to valuing everything at 100% and demanding payment stand in the way of saving lives and ensuring public order. Hospes: Says the owner of a successful fahion empire. Axo: Well, if everyone else valued their respective successful empires at 0% and gave them to the public, I'm sure this crisis would pass very quickly. Chair, I apologize for taking up so much time. Let's return to business. Fatima: ...Right. The concerns of Mr. Hospes are noted. This committee shall take them into account during the considerations. At any rate, in light of Mr. Axo's request, I believe we should further divide property into Vital and Non-Vital and have different directives for each. How should we make this division? By market value alone, as Mr. Axo mentioned? Hospes: That seems unreasonable. If we are planning on making such a division after all, it would make more sense to go by number of employees in the case of companies and in other cases whether the property includes farmland or is an energy source or some other piece of vital infrastructure, surely? Dividing them by market value seems more like a scheme to lessen the debts of the PRG, if you ask me. Axo: Starvation and lack of medicine and other basic amenities are chronic concerns. I agree with Mr. Hospes that the Vital category should include properties that include some sort of agricultural capacity, non-luxury production -- clothing and such --, or public utility like energy, transportation, and medical facilities. Fatima: Then we'll use these factors to define the Vital category. Benjamin: Additionally, we should divide all properties into those owned by Panorama residents and local companies and those owned by other individuals or external companies. Panorama residents will benefit from the value these properties bring to the communal fund and local companies no longer exist, while the same can't be said about external owners. Perhaps, in this way, we can reduce the compensation owed to Panorama residents, while not harming the right of external individuals and companies. How does that sound? Axo: That sounds agreeable. My only concern would be a very highly valued property or major employer continuing to be owned by an outside interest. But otherwise, that seems like a fair compromise. Hospes: Esteemed Mr. Axo, surely you are aware that the proposal you pushed through the Panorama People's Assembly clearly states that all private property is abolished? If your government pays fair compensation to all external owners, I don't see how a situation such as you describe can occur. Unless... you don't plan on paying the fair compensation? Axo: If I remember correctly, the Property Appropriation Process Act ensures that the PRG can only assume control of what it can pay for, after the Committee sets the price. I assume that the People's Assembly laws must first observe the laws passed by Parliament. So, I mean that I would like to avoid prohibitively valuing any major, vital employer in the region just because it's owned by an outside interest. If the PRG can't pay the valuing, I suppose it would remain in private hands until they feel equipped to approach the committee with more funds. Hospes: So, you mean to say that you don't plan to fully pay fair compensation if you consider it to be "too high"? Axo: I'm sure the PRG will honor the valuing of the Committee. If they can't pay, they won't take it. So, it's up to us to determine what fair compensation is. Hospes: I don't see why the property rights of entirely unrelated companies and individuals should be disregarded or minimized for the sake of Panorama's prosperity. I propose that any properties owned by external actors should carry a compensation equal to their full market value. Axo: I'm fine with that, on two conditions. First, the property must not be determined to be categorized as Vital. Second, it must not be in the 90th percentile of value or a top ten employer. Those are too important to just issue a blanket determination. Hospes: I thought we had agreed to dismiss market value as a dividing criterion? We can make exceptions for properties in the Vital category, but otherwise I don't see how market value enters into the equation, unless Mr. Axo merely wants to reduce the financial burden on his government. That isn't the sort of consideration that should concern this committee. Axo: It's exactly the sort of thing we should take into consideration. Let me share an example that comes to mind. I know that on the eastern rim of the valley, there's about a thousand acres of land bought about ten years ago by a Topaz mining conglomerate. Surveyors confirm that it's rich in mineral and gas deposits. But the conglomerate, for whatever reason, never even bothered to invest in the land or begin extraction operations. Now, the land is still valued highly, it's just that the owners in Topaz don't want to do anything with it. It's not Vital, is it? And it's not employing anyone, excepting a night watchman. But it represents part of the natural wealth of Panorama, and I know several local operators who would be happy to begin to process those minerals and ship them to the rest of Sirta. So how should we value it? Should we value it so that it provides some use to society? Or should we value it so that it sits there, idly? That's why we should include market value as well as Vital categorization and employer status. Hospes: The mining conglomerate paid for that land. It deserves to be fully compensated for the loss of this, as you say, incredibly valuable property. As I said just now, I don't see why the property rights of entirely unrelated companies and individuals should be disregarded or minimized for the sake of Panorama's prosperity. Your government doesn't have some inherent superiority over any other organization or individual within Sirta. Axo: I don't want to disregard their rights. Outside of the Vital category or the two exceptions I mentioned, I can't imagine recommending any property be valued at zero percent or something close to it. But it's our duty to society and Sirta to balance compensation with other concerns. They'll get paid, won't they? The question is how much, and whether them getting paid a little more than usual should outweigh questions of public utility. And, actually, the local government of Panorama absolutely does have a moral and ethical claim to its own resources before some outside investor does, if they can use it and the investor can't. Hospes: That is precisely what I meant when I said "minimizing" their property rights. Axo: I'm sure that anything less than a 100% valuing constitutes an unacceptable minimizing of their property rights in your eyes. What does the rest of the Committee think? Hospes: I don't see why you consider these resources to be "Panorama's own", before the PRG fulfills all of its' obligations under national law to appropriate them. Geographical proximity doesn't give you any inherent rights. Axo: Sure they do. We have anti-pollution laws, don't we? The same principle of the common good applies here. Hospes: What a baffling comparison. Negative effects and resource exploitation rights aren't at all equivalent. Axo: Denying society fair use of a useful product out of pure pique isn't a negative effect? Hospes: The mining conglomerate is also a part of society. In any event, this is a tangent. The law already allows your government to appropriate the land, so long as you pay proper compensation. Nothing more and nothing less. Axo: Then the shame is doubled, as they not only deny others but themselves to boot. Hospes: We aren't here to discuss some mining conglomerates "shame". Axo: Alright. My modifications to Hospes's proposal regarding foreign-owned property stand, if the others find them a fair compromise. Fatima: ...Understood. So, shall we begin in earnest then? Having divided the properties between these categories, we should determine what compensation is owed for properties in each category as a percentage of its' market value, and how it should be divided among the owners if there is more than one. I suggest starting with the simplest category first - Company Shares. Since local companies no longer exist in Panorama, at least not in a form where shares would have any meaning, the PRG would not be harmed in any way if these shares "remained in the hands" of outside interests should it find itself unable to pay full compensation. Therefore, it seems reasonable to suggest that Company Shares owned by external actors should carry compensations equal to their full market values. It also seems reasonable to suggest that Company Share owned by residents of Panorama should carry compensations equal to half their market values, as Panorama residents would benefit from the communal fund. Any objections? Hospes: 50% is far too low, even for Panorama residents. Think of the potential harm to the national economy setting this precedent would cause. What happens if a similar proposal passes in Sard? Why would anyone buy company shares ever again? Axo: The 100/50 split seems fair to me, Chairwoman. Hospes: You aren't going to bother responding to my concerns? Are you unable to find even a thin pretense for a justification? Axo: Do you have an objection that's specific to Panorama? That is, the case we're considering at the moment? Hospes: Yes. Doing this now sets a precedent, as far as the public is concerned. Why would investors risk buying shares in any company knowing that , at any moment, their city or settlement may implement a similar scheme and leave them with only half of their return on investment? If not an outright loss? Axo: The 100/50 split the Chair proposed, as far as I know, applies to Panorama. Unless you're planning on resigning from this Committee, are you not prepared to argue for a higher percentage if it comes to Sard passing a similar law? I'm not sure why precedent would be binding if the same people are hearing the second case and acknowledge that circumstances may change the ratio we find fair. Hospes: The public and any prospective investors within it have no way to be sure of that. Axo: You know this meeting is being recorded and the transcripts are issued to the public, right? Hospes: If I can be overruled now, I can be overruled at any future time. This will be easily apparent from the transcript. Axo: Finally, some good news. Hospes: So you have no justification? Axo: I'm not sure I understand your objection, actually. If Sard passed a similar measure, then Sard's residents would recoup any theoretical investment losses in Sard itself through access to the new common fund. And foreign investment is guaranteed at 100%. So who exactly is losing out? Hospes: The communal fund is communal. As long as this threat hangs in the air, it is easy for prospective investors to decide to keep their money and, when a similar scheme is implemented, share in the benefits of the communal fund alongside everyone else, without risking their own money. Except, everyone would think that, so no one would invest, the economy will return to it's downward spiral, and any resulting communal funds will be very meager. You find no issue with this? Axo: No, I agree with you. The capital cycle of boom and bust is horrifically irrational and prone to panic. If we did away with all privately-held money and managed our needs through central planning none of this would be necessary. Say, Hospes, I think you're on to something. Have you ever thought about joining the SRLF? Hospes: How very clever. Given that we live in the present reality, and not in the SRLF's imagined utopia, and most other cities and settlements haven't switched to this model, setting compensation at only half of the market value is guaranteed to depress investment and harm our national economy. What is your justification for this, in the reality in which we currently live in? Axo: First, that's a bit of a leap considering this split is acknowledged as applying only to Panorama and that all future splits will be valued on their own merits. Second, the Finance Ministry is aware of the concept of deflation. They have methods of encouraging investment. What exactly is preventing investors from transferring their money to another city under the control of a representative democracy? Hospes: Nothing. Which is going to significantly harm the economies of every Peoples Assembly not named Panorama! But I guess you're fine with this. Axo: The Peoples Assemblies of every place not named Panorama are the rural settlements, which, good luck further depressing their economies, and Sard. So let's determine to judge Sard's split at a different ratio when it comes to that. Let's move on. Hospes: You are willing to guarantee that Sard's split will be at least 75% to local share owners, should a similar request from there arrive before this committee? Not to mention that nothing stops a future City Council under SRLF control from making a similar law, so the effect is not just limited to Sard. Axo: No, Mr. Hospes. Considering we know nothing of the circumstances of Sard at the moment, it would be premature to guarantee any split before our staffs can compile sufficient reference materials. Hospes: I see. I am certain prospective investors in Sard will be actively encouraged to invest upon seeing this transcript. I hope the other members of this committee can see what I am getting at, and won't allow this foolish mistake to get through. Axo: Sard can take care of itself. Can we proceed? Fatima: ...I understand your concerns, Mr. Hospes. I propose we take item by item votes from here on out. First, let's vote on setting the compensation for Company Shares owned by external actors at 100%. Fatima: Support. Hospes: Support Diya: Support Axo: Support Benjamin: Support Fatima: The motion passes in a unanimous 5-0 vote. Now, let's vote on setting the compensation for Company Shares owned by local residents at 50%. Benjamin: Support Axo: Support Hospes: Oppose Diya: Abstain Fatima: Abstain Fatima: The motion passes in a 2-1 vote. Now, let's hear Mr. Axo's proposed compensation for Vital Real-Estate and Other Assets owned by external actors. Axo: Proposal to set a 25% valuing ceiling for Real Estate and Other Assets (owned by external actors) deemed Vital, which is to be defined as 'including properties that include some sort of agricultural capacity, non-luxury production capacity, or public utility like energy, transportation, or medical facilities. Hospes: TWENTY FIVE PERCENT??? I had in mind something like 45-55% for external actors and 30% for local residents. Mr. Axo seems determined to keep as much money for his government as possible! Axo: That seems like a reasonable percentage for non-vital property, Mr. Hospes. Vital is called Vital for a reason. Food, clothing, medicine, power. The bare necessities for survival. Hospes: The Ministry of Interior is in charge of providing social care. Not this committee. Axo: They'll be happy to learn their burden will be lessened. Hospes: I am sure. However, it isn't our responsibility. Axo: I'll do 40 for external if you do 20 for local. Hospes: I don't see how that follows from anything we discussed just now. Axo: What does the Committee think of a 40/20 external/local split for Vital? Hopes: How rude. Fatima: ...I think we best put both proposals to a vote. First, let us vote on setting the compensation for Real-Estate and Other Assets deemed to be Vital and owned by external actors at 40% and the same types of properties owned by local residents at 20%. Axo: Support. Hospes: Oppose Benjamin: Support Diya: Oppose Fatima: Support Fatima: The motion is approved in a 3-2 vote. There's no need to hold a vote for the second proposal now. Now, what would Mr. Axo suggest for Not-Vital Real-Estate? Hospes: Excuse me, but these questions deferring to Mr. Axo create a certain expectation for the discourse that could be perceived as prejudiced. Axo: Proposal to set a 90% valuing ceiling for Real Estate and Other Assets (owned by external actors) deemed Not-Vital, which is to be defined as 'including properties that do not include some sort of agricultural capacity, non-luxury production capacity, or public utility like energy, transportation, or medical facilities.' Hospes: What is the purpose of arbitrarily lowering the compensation amount for external actors? What possible justification can there even be? Axo: Proposal amended to 95% as a gesture of good faith. Hospes: I ask the same question again. Let me put the compensation at 120% and then lower it to 105% as a gesture of good faith! This has about as much meaning as what you just said. Axo: Ridiculous. Out of the question. 99.9998%. Hospes: Making a laughingstock of this committee won't do you any favors, Mr. Axo. In the absence of any real argument to the contrary, I propose setting the compensation rate at 100% for these types of properties owned by external actors. Axo: I can provide an argument if the Chair would like. I simply wanted to avoid another drawn-out argument with Mr. Hospes and assumed we had moved on to the bargaining phase. I will resume proving him wrong if I am mistaken and we are still debating theory. [Silence reigns for a few moments] Benjamin: If I may, a drawn out argument is unnecessary. I think it would be best if Mr. Axo presented his reasoning behind this particular compensation value, Mr. Hospes got a chance to respond, and we immediately moved on to the vote from there. Axo: The argument is simple. The people of Panorama built this real-estate. They, despite what a contract may say, inhabit it every day. They, despite what a contract may say, work at these places every day. They have devoted their livelihoods and the years of their lives to these places, providing their labor in exchange for wages, the difference being pocketed by the owners as profit. By definition, a business owned by an external actor and not a resident is a case of absentee landlordism. The people of Panorama, having devoted their lives to the upkeep and operation of these facilities, are the rightful owners through the principle of use -- whoever uses it, or can use it, owns it. However, in the spirit of fair compensation and out of respect for those like Mr. Hospes who are concerned for their own future, the untold hours of labor given over to a stranger's profit can best be recouped by the people of Panorama receiving a 10% discount on these properties. Hence the 90% figure. Hospes: Do you listen to yourself? "Having devoted their lives to the upkeep an operation of these facilities"? I would think that no one in Panorama is so generous as to maintain a stranger's property without due compensation in the form of wages, unless it was for their own convenience in their everyday lives. Is it irrational to ask the PRG to provide the owners with their due compensation, before it takes these buildings for its' own use? Fatima: Let us vote on Mr. Axo's proposal of setting the compensation rate of Non-Vital Real-Estate at 90% of market value. Hospes: Oppose Benjamin: Support Axo: Support Diya: Oppose Fatima: Abstain Fatima: As the vote is tied, the proposal can't be approved. Axo: Does the chair decline her privilege to decide a tie? Fatima: ...Well, I voted to Abstain...so it really wouldn't be... I mean... Axo: It's your decision. We'll all honor it, of course. Fatima: ...I use my right to break the tie in favor of support. The motion passes with a 2-2 vote. Now, let us move on to Not-Vital Real Estate owned by local residents. What would you propose, Mr. Hospes? Hospes: Hrmph. I suppose 70% would be reasonable. Fatima: Mr. Axo? Axo: That's very generous, and fair. Shall we vote? Fatima: I don't see the need, unless someone objects? This committee sets the compensation value for all Not-Vital Real-Estate properties owned by local residents at 70%. Now, let us discuss Not-Vital Other Assets. Since this could potentially be more complex, I ask Mr. Axo to bring up any factors and considerations he finds relevant, as the person most familiar with the matter at hand. Hospes: [unintelligible] conflict of interest [unintelligible] Axo: Because of the broad and non-vital nature of this category, representing rare items of worth or other non-liquid assets that are neither real estate nor company shares, I cannot see any great public interest in valuing them at less than 100%. Hospes: Surprisingly sensible words for once. Fatima: You mean this for both properties owned by external actors and properties owned by local residents? Axo: Yes, 100% for both. Fatima: Any objections? [Silence reigns once more.] Fatima: This committee sets the compensation value for all properties categorized as Not-Vital Other Assets at 100% of market value. With this, we have gone over all types of properties. Are there any objections to simply feeding these constraints into a dedicated algorithm alongside the list of properties? Axo: Chairwoman, could we discuss the exemptions for an additional two sub-categories I mentioned earlier? The 90th percentile or higher valuing and the top ten employers that deserve a bespoke evaluation? I'd be happy tabling the exact valuing for a session next month, but I'd like to establish the categories if there is agreement. Fatima: ... I will be honest, Mr. Axo. I don't see the need. Could you provide an example of why they deserve special consideration? Your previous example with the resource-rich land would work the same way whether it was valued in the 90th percentile, the 80th percentile or the 70th percentile. Hospes: It's so his government will have to pay less. There is no other explanation. Axo: Then I'll defer to the Chair's judgment. No objection to giving the constraints to the algorithm. Axo: Oh, one last thing that occurred to me. What do we plan on doing with repeat applications for the same property? That is, if a People's Assembly cannot afford some piece of property, but it can next year? Do they simply resubmit a request and we provide a new valuation? If that's the case, we might consider a cap on appreciated value to prevent predatory speculation. Benjamin: According to my understanding of the PAP Act, any request is evaluated once, and the local government in question can take as much time as it wants to pay the determined compensation. As soon as it pays the compensation for a particular property, it may appropriate it. There is no opportunity for repeated requests for the same property, unless the local government decides to privatize it again. Axo: Ah, then that should suffice. Thank you. Fatima: Very well. The constraints and the full list of properties will be fed into a dedicated algorithm later today. Full compensation amounts for each property will be published tomorrow. They will be binding, in accordance with this committee's decision. Any other comments? Axo: Thank you to the honorable Chair and my colleagues for their patience, judgment, and time. Hospes: Yes...our time. Fatima: I hereby end this meeting of the Property Appropriation Committee. Thank you all for your cooperation. AFancyQuestionMark fucked around with this message at 08:22 on Aug 5, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 13:30
|
|
|
Comrade Bookchin Sard People's Assembly Right then, I will be brief and ask for the following to be debated upon: Sard Appropriation of Blighted Properties Act * The Professional Advisory Council is to review all property within Sard to generate a list determining all that are considered to be blighted or not. * This list will be submitted to the Property Appropriation Committee so that the blighted properties can be taken over by the city proper. We can determine what rehabilitation is needed and what new usage shall occur when a list is actually generated.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 14:43
|
|
|
June 3062 Municipal Elections Results: In this election, I introduce a new element NPC Popular Sentiments, which stand for the votes of segments of the population not strongly committed to a particular party and are determined by the local populations needs combined with the messages they extract from the parties campaigns. The amount of NPCPS votes in future elections will be inversely proportional to the amount of player votes - the more players the less NPCPS votes and vice versa. Total Votes: 9 (6 players, 1 GM, 2 NPCPS) Opal: City Council: 5 votes (3 players, 1 GM, 1 NPCPS), 18 seats The percentages from 18 return fractional results, so I was forced to floor each partys seat allocation and select two parties to be granted an extra seat via RNG. * SRLF 2 votes (1 player, 1 NPCPS) 40% - 7 seats * Dawn 1 vote (GM) - 20% - 3 seats * The Community 1 vote (player) 20% - 3 + 1 seats * FDG 1 vote (player) 20% - 3 + 1 seats Mayoral: 5 votes (3 players, 1 GM, 1 NPCPS) * GM Ballot: 1. [Dawn] Cynthia Grimmet 2. [FDG] Sisay Cardoso 3. [Independent] Claudia Barnes 4. [SRLF] Michael Saint-Just 5. [The Community] Revlo Ansin 6. [Unity Coalition] Harold Matteson 7. [FSP] Agnes Cash * NPCPS Ballot: 1. [SRLF] Michael Saint-Just 2. [FDG] Sisay Cardoso 3. [Dawn] Cynthia Grimmet 4. [Independent] Claudia Barnes 5. [The Community] Revlo Ansin 6. [Unity Coalition] Harold Matteson 7. [FSP] Agnes Cash * First Round: ## Michael Saint-Just 2 votes 40% ## Cynthia Grimmet 1 vote 20% ## Sisay Cardoso 1 vote 20% ## Revlo Ansin 1 vote 20% All other candidates were removed, but they dont have any votes to distribute, so I picked one of the three tied candidates to remove at random Revlo Ansin and looked at their voters next pick on the list that wasnt already removed. * Second Round: ## Michael Saint-Just 2 votes 40% ## Cynthia Grimmet 2 votes 40% ## Sisay Cardoso 1 vote 20% * Third Round: ## Michael Saint-Just 2 votes 40% ## Cynthia Grimmet 3 votes 60% Topaz: City Council: 4 votes (3 players, 1 NPCPS), 14 seats * SRLF 2 votes (players) 50% - 7 seats * FDG 2 votes (1 player, 1 NPC) 50% - 7 seats Mayoral: * NPCPS Ballot: 1. [FDG] Omar Guo 2. [SRLF] Conrad 3. [Dawn] Isabella Correia 4. [Unity Coalition] Waneta Lambert 5. [The Community] Inner Fire 6. [FSP] Mark Broughton 7. [Independent] Mia Robertson * First Round: ## Conrad 2 votes 50% ## Omar Guo 2 votes 50% All other candidates are removed, but have no votes to distribute. RNG chose Omar Guo to remove, which means * Second Round: ## Conrad 4 votes 100% Sapphire: City Council: 1,013,527 votes, 12 seats * Restoration 33% - 4 seats * FDG 25% - 3 seats * SRLF 16% - 2 seats * Dawn 14% - 2 seats * Unity Coalition 8% - 1 seat * FSP 2.5% - 0 seats * The Community 1.5% - 0 seats Mayoral: 1,013,543 votes * First Round: ## Professor Melanie Bak 33% ## Amina Cook 25% ## Albert Hammon 16% ## Alaine Couet 14% ## Walter Noe 8% ## Joseph Stevens 2.5% ## Marco Silvas 1.5% * Second Round: ## Professor Melanie Bak 33% ## Amina Cook 25% ## Albert Hammon 16% ## Alaine Couet 15.5% ## Walter Noe 8% ## Joseph Stevens 2.5% * Third Round: ## Professor Melanie Bak 33.5% ## Amina Cook 27% ## Albert Hammon 16% ## Alaine Couet 15.5% ## Walter Noe 8% * Fourth Round: ## Professor Melanie Bak 35.5% ## Amina Cook 29% ## Albert Hammon 18% ## Alaine Couet 17.5% * Fifth Round: ## Professor Melanie Bak 44% ## Amina Cook 30% ## Albert Hammon 26% * Seventh Round: ## Professor Melanie Bak 65.5% ## Amina Cook 34.5% Amber: City Council: 686,953 votes, 10 seats * Industrial Resurgence Party 30% - 3 seats * FDG 25% - 3 seats * SRLF 20% - 2 seats * Dawn 14% - 2 seats * Unity Coalition 5% - 0 seats * Social Liberation List 3.5% - 0 seats * FSP - 1.5% - 0 seats * The Community 1% - 0 seats Mayoral: 686,970 voters *First Round: ## Soo-min Rivlin 55% ## Nicole Tulia 20% ## Tracy Herring 17.5% ## Lynda Curtis 5% ## Carol Downey 1.5% ## Unity 1% Peridot: City Council: 364,436 votes, 8 seats * FDG 34% - 3 seats * SRLF 25% - 2 seats * Dawn 13% - 1 seat * Unity Coalition 12% - 1 seat * The Community - 10% - 1 seat * FSP 6% - 0 seats Mayoral: 364,448 votes * First Round: ## Kyra Petrov 34% ## Elijah Theodotos 25% ## Cheryl Ruiz 14% ## David Brown 12% ## Thomas Ecklemore 10% ## Myrtle Franklin 6% * Second Round: ## Kyra Petrov 37% ## Elijah Theodotos 25% ## Cheryl Ruiz 14% ## David Brown 15% ## Thomas Ecklemore 10% * Third Round: ## Kyra Petrov 37% ## Elijah Theodotos 28% ## Cheryl Ruiz 21% ## David Brown 15% * Fourth Round: ## Kyra Petrov 41% ## Elijah Theodotos 33% ## Cheryl Ruiz 26% * Fifth Round: ## Kyra Petrov 52% ## Elijah Theodotos 48% Remember that drafting and voting phases are the same for City Councils as they are for Parliament. You can suggest bills for NPCs from your party to submit, but whether they will actually agree to it and vote for it in the voting phase depends on the bill itself and your party type, similar to the way NPCs work in Parliament. AFancyQuestionMark fucked around with this message at 20:31 on Jan 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 17:36
|
|
|
 Comrade Radek Minister of Security I am certainly pleased by our results in these elections, and vow to redouble my own efforts to prove worthy of the faith shown in us by the Sirtan people. May our successes only grow from here. --------------------------------------------------------- From: Radek, Minister of Security To: All NSP Precincts Subject: A New Day Dawns Policemen of Sirta! I congratulate you on taking the first steps into a new era, an era where the uniform and badge you wear will become unwavering symbols of safety and justice for the people of Sirta. The task ahead of us is daunting - our predecessors, such as they were, allowed crime to thrive through their incompetence and corruption. They allowed a parasite to feed off the people of Sirta, and it falls to us to begin burning off the leech. Every precinct has individualized circumstances, and most day-to-day operational decisions will be made by the local chain of command. However, a few overarching directives.
Onwards! Radek --------------------------------------------- Brief Outline of the Citizen's Auxiliary Local organizations formed to create conduits of information from civilians to the Security Forces. Rewards given for information leading to lawful arrests. Hosts "Station Days" where local civilians can visit their police stations, get to meet-and-greet officers and kids can play on equipment, etc. sniper4625 fucked around with this message at 18:33 on Jan 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 18:22
|
|
|
 Rutherford Vanderbush, Citizen Seat Via Teleconference in Topaz The people of Topaz have spoken, and while our results are... unusual, to say the least, I think that our mayor and our city council will prove that they are fully capable of working together and finding compromises to help ensure greater prosperity for our fair city. To that end, I would like to work with my friends in the FDG to introduce a piece of legislation, which will require some negotiation with SIRTRAK for permission, but I believe should be widely acceptable: quote:The Topaz Local Railway Improvement Act I cannot speak for my competitors, but should this bill be passed, it would be the intent of Apex Industries to submit a bid at cost. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ At Parliament At the behest of my good friend Hospes, I was reviewing the recent transcripts of the Property Appropriation Committee. While I will not comment on the conclusions reached at this time--aside from noting that it is highly unusual for the chair to first abstain from a decision, and then return for the deciding vote--I did find a... technicality, if you will, that I believe has unfortunate implications. That being the provision that once a valuation is made by the committee, it is locked in permanently. Let's examine the particular example of Panorama for an explanation of the issue. Even assuming that their revenue and costs remain stable, and that they take no other actions that require funding, it is going to take a period of several years for the local government to fulfill its goal of appropriating all private property within its region. And during that time, the value will not change. Now let's consider that you are a business owner within Panorama. You now have a value for your business that is fixed, and unchanging. At some nebulous point in the next few years, your business will no longer be yours, and you will be compensated. What, then, are you doing in this entirely nonspecific period of time? It is impossible to better or worsen your own situation--any effort you put in to growing your business will have no impact on your final result, nor will any lack of effort and upkeep. You can't sell to an outside party, either--why would they make that investment if there's no room for it to grow? So the natural conclusion, the simplest course of action, is to let it rot. Your stake is already guaranteed. And now Panorama is obligated to overpay for distressed properties--unless, of course, a double standard is created that the present owners can only be punished for neglect, and not rewarded for success. No, to ensure the best deal for all parties involved, the valuation cannot be allowed to sit for years at a time. To do so creates a system of flawed incentives. To remedy this, I would propose the following: The Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act posted:The valuations determined by the Property Appropriation Committee for purposes of government appropriation of private property shall be considered valid for a period of one year, after which a new appraisal of the property must be conducted to determine its fair market value.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 21:11
|
|
|
 Denver Axo Panorama Regional Government June 3062 Budget Proposal Income: * Profits from Voluntarily Appropriated Business 3.6 0.1 * [Donation from Denver Axo 0.1 - 0] Overall Income: 3.7 Expenses: * Advisory Committee - 0.5 Overall Expenses: 0.5 Remaining: 3.2 million NSC Expenditures Compensatory Payments for: * Vital Real-Estate: Wind Farms (820,000 NSC) Hydroelectric Dam (1,300,000 NSC) Agricultural Fields (325,000 NSC) * Vital Other Assets: Private Clinic Equipment (130,000 NSC) Basic Medicines (85,000 NSC) Canned Food (95,000 NSC) * Not-Vital Other Assets: Vehicles (342,000 NSC) Totaling: 3.097 million NSC Miscellaneous: Panorama Agronomy Research Institute funding (100,000 NSC) Totaling: 100,000 NSC Expenditure Total: 3,197,000 NSC Remaining: 3,000 NSC Comrades, it is appropriate that in our first steps towards independence and self-sufficiency we should harness the power of Sirta itself. We will grow food for ourselves in our fields, and power our homes with energy from the wind and water of our native valley. Also in this budget proposal are expenditures for an emergency supply of food, medicine, and advanced medical technology to treat ourselves with, as well as a monopoly on commercial and personal transport. Finally, with the groundbreaking funding for the new Panorama Agronomy Research Institute, we will lift ourselves up not only economically but intellectually, and begin not only to contribute food and labor, but scientific research and philosophy. Our thanks to the Sirta Biotechnological Institute, which has partnered with us in our effort to reclaim our Sirtan heritage of pioneering biotechnological sciences.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 21:21
|
|
|
Comrade Radek Minister of Security I applaud the Honorable Minister for skipping straight to the stage where he sponsors legislation to create opportunities for his private company. I'm sure the SRLF political establishment in Topaz will be enthusiastic to help him in this. sniper4625 fucked around with this message at 21:25 on Jan 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 21:21
|
|
|
If you have an alternative proposal for swift repair of Topaz's railways, then by all means, do share.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 21:39
|
|
|
Comrade Radek Minister of Security It is with no small sadness that I announce the resignation of NFP Commissioner Eager on health grounds. His replacement, Michael Saint-Just, will lead the charge against Crime in all of its forms. With regards to the TLRIA - my issue is not so much with the the text of the bill, though I believe that SIRTAK and it's Advisory Board is the due authority and natural starting point for the discussion of railway repair. My problem lies with the fact that with one breath you create a commercial opportunity, and in the next you announce your intention to seek it yourself. If you attempt to hide behind the idea of putting in a bid at "cost," as if any construction project ever avoided intentional or unintentional budget overflows, don't be surprised when the idea is treated with the respect it deserves. sniper4625 fucked around with this message at 21:50 on Jan 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 21:44
|
|
|
Michael Saint-Just I congratulate my opponent on her successful campaign! I hope to see many successes for Opal under its new government! I gratefully accept Minister Radek's appointment, and thank him and the government for extending me this chance to serve the people!
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 21:52
|
|
|
From the desk of Michael Saint-Just Commissioner of the New Federal Police cc'd to Minister Radek To all NFP department, precinct, and taskforce heads: An update on your current status is needed. Please send me as soon as possible a report containing the following: 1. All current manpower, material, logistical and funding levels and needs. 2. The status of all current major investigations and initiatives, especially those mentioned in the Minister's latest directive i.e. recruitment and training, the progress of the OC task force, and progress on setting protection details for all government buildings. 3. All available information on general crime levels and organized criminal activities in Sirta. To the Minister of Justice: In the spirit of inter-ministerial cooperation, I request a status update on any cases currently on trial that were brought to your Ministry by the NFP's predecessor organization (if any). I also request your and Minister Radek's permission for us to appoint an individual or individuals to act as a liaison officers between the prosecutor's department and my own. For Minister Radek's eyes only: Minister, If at all possible, please pass along a request for any pertinent information The Intelligence Services possess to be released to our investigators, as well as a request that we cooperate on bringing these criminals that threaten our society down together. I'm not at all certain that this will be any sort of priority for them, but one can always hope. Your Comrade, Commissioner Saint-Just Saint-Just will spend the time waiting on the reports to come in reviewing the files left by the previous commissioner, going over what information he has on the NFP's recruitment and training processes, and meeting and greeting the HQ staff. paragon1 fucked around with this message at 22:39 on Jan 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 22:36
|
|
|
Ministry of Foreign Affairs Overview (June 3062): Status of Foreign Relations: The Greene administration has done enormous damage to Sirtas ties with other countries pulling out of agreements, defaulting on loans, invalidating debt and running Sirtas economy into the ground, all of these contributed to the other countries recalling their ambassadors and the drastically reducing their trade with Sirta. Very few foreign organizations maintained their representation in Sirta mainly charity foundations. After the revolution, things have changed and some companies and investment groups have renewed their interest in the country, anticipating a period of gradual economic recovery which makes local companies a cheap and attractive investment prospect, especially those involved in specialized manufacturing and biotechnology. The Industrial Council for Frontier Development has released reports indicating as much. However, uncertainties over the governments continued stability and the influence of organized crime prevent most investors from fully committing to this venture. Their representatives have already arrived in Sirta and made some exploratory investments and agreements, but the sheer distance from the nearest countries means that information takes significant time to travel back, making investors even more reluctant to make any major commitments. Aside from the delegations sent out back in March, the Ministry mainly busies itself with courting these representatives and those of other foreign organizations. Ministry Budget Breakdown: These are the divisions inside the Ministry: * Interstellar Communications The division responsible for coordinating information exchange between the SCN and the networks of Sirtas nearest neighbors. It utilizes a few small interstellar ships that make regular rounds to other countries and retrieve important publicly available information and content from their networks, while uploading similar information and content obtained from the SCN. Such exchanges allow the citizens of all the countries involved access to information from all of their networks, albeit with a big time lag in Sirtas case. Current Funding: 8.5 million NSC * Foreign Analysis The division responsible for using the available information to determine the status of other countries economies, politics and attitudes toward Sirta. Neglected under Greene. Current Funding: 1.5 million NSC * Diplomatic Service The people that go out abroad to represent Sirta and negotiate treaties and agreements with other countries and organizations. Includes Ambassadors and embassy staff. Current Funding: 7 million NSC * Hospitality and Accommodation The division responsible for hosting foreign envoys and dignitaries, providing for their comfort and safety during their stay in Sirta. Current Funding: 1 million NSC
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 09:38
|
|
|
Della Jalbert (a Guardian Council appointment) and Lenore Hughes jointly submit a bill for Parliaments consideration:The Urgent Rescue Act posted:
Introducing a bill like this has been my number one goal since being appointed to Parliament. says Della Jalbert, I am very grateful to Member Hughes for lending me her support and invaluable advice. From my years of experience with victims, I can tell you that this bill is the best way to help them escape their circumstances and return to regular society. I cant overstate its importance. This bill aims to help the most powerless members of our society. explains Lenore Hughes, It is important that, as the New Sirtan Police makes its first steps, they put combating human trafficking as one of their top priorities. There are many people who have been going through a living nightmare for many years with no visible means of escape, people who deserve our help. I and my party have no intention of abandoning them to their fate, and I ask the other Members of Parliament to join us in their rescue.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 11:29
|
|
|
A worthy bill, and one I am happy to lend my support to both in Parliament and as Minister of Security. We must always strive to do what we can for the most vulnerable among us.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 15:10
|
|
|
To: Della Jalbert, Lenore Hughes CC: Minister Radek From: Minister Bookchin Re: The Urgent Rescue Act Esteemed Colleagues, First let me congratulate you both on your excellent proposal to Parliament. Defending the most vulnerable in our society is a worthy project and one that I will be publicly supporting. My only concern is whether the act's scope is too limited and that we are neglecting people in similar situations - ones of domestic violence or sexual assault, for instance. Would it be possible for us to draft an amendment this act to offer support and protection for such victims as well? Regards, Bookchin
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 15:22
|
|
|
HiHo ChiRho posted:
Minister, While I wouldn't dare minimize what domestic violence and sexual assault victims go through, many of the measures in our bill are tailored for the specific circumstances of human trafficking victims. In my years of running Safe Place, I've dealt with these circumstances first hand - human trafficking is often, if not always, tied to organized crime and therefore would require special attention from the police to be combated effectively. Furthermore, many victims are poor and vulnerable people with a history of illegal substance use and petty crime, which often prevents them for approaching the police for help. There are some victims smuggled into our country from abroad who have no valid documents and no friends or relatives that could help them here. Our bill is intended to circumvent these problems and make victims feel secure enough to ask for aid and protection. These circumstances aren't commonly present in cases of domestic violence and sexual assault. That doesn't mean that they don't need our help! I am sure there is something this Parliament can do for them, aimed at their specific circumstances and needs. It's just that I am not as intimately familiar with their cases and so wouldn't feel qualified to attach them to our bill. Should someone else bring forward another a bill aimed at helping them, I would support it wholeheartedly. Sincerely, Member of Parliament Della Jalbert
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 17:35
|
|
|
Denver Axo Panorama Regional Government Proposal for Holidays The PRG will allot 18 days out of the year to be designated as Government holidays, when all PRG-owned businesses will shut down for the day with the exception of any power, transport, or emergency services administered by the PRG. Any businesses which choose to remain open on these holidays must pay employees double their wages for the first three hours of work, and four times their normal wages for every hour after, up to a maximum of eight hours worked. Proposal for Truth and Reconciliation in Panorama The PRG will invite representatives from the Truth and Reconciliation Committee to Panorama to set up an office where the TRC can hear grievances from the region's residents.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 22:14
|
|
|
Defence Objectives Committee Directives (June 3062): The following directives are binding and have the power of orders: 1. The SDF shall cease all policing duties over civilians by the 1st of July 3062. 2. The Ministers of Defence recent directives on orbital construction and fleet expansion are to be disregarded. 3. The SDF Corps of Engineers shall be deployed under the auspices of Central Command to help SIRTRAK restore the main sections of the Sirta Transportation Network. 4. The NFP may request to borrow equipment from the SDF for defined periods of time, contingent on the approval of Central Command. Additionally, NFP officers may be granted access to SDF training facilities for the purpose of acquainting themselves with the equipment in advance. Meeting Transcript: Transcript for the second meeting of the Defence Objectives Committee. The date is the 5th of June 3062. Those present are Committee Chair Councilor Saturn, Defence Minister Hill, Member Valance Farasi, Member Amnesty and Central Command Representative Lt. General William Worrel. Saturn: Before we broach the main topic for today's meeting, I want to get a simple directive out of the way. Does everyone agree the SDF has done its' share of the work as law enforcement and can now stop? William: Given that the new police forces appear to be fully operational, I don't believe we have much else to contribute on the streets. Inexperienced as they may be, the new police officers are far better suited for this type of work. Hill: I agree, having the military function as a police force was an ad-hoc measure at best. Having them stop now would do a lot to increase the perception that the government is stabilizing William: I propose the withdrawal of all troops from public order duties by the end of the month. Any objections? Hill: Not from me. Amnesty: No objections. Saturn: Very well. This committee proclaims the end of the transitional period of policing and orders the cessation of all SDF policing duties by the 1st of July 3062. Now we can move on to the main purpose of this meeting - the Minister's recent directives. I would like you, Minister, to explain the reasoning behind using the SDF's very limited resources on orbital construction and the expansion of the fleet, without any apparent external threat or other impetus. [A few seconds pass in silence.] Saturn: Minister, this committee's time is not without limits. Nor is my patience. Hill: Orbital infrastructure is not needed simply for defence against outside threats. Much of Sirta's industry could benefit from being moved into orbit, allowing heavy industrial processes to be done in areas where it will not pollute the surrounding area. Furthermore, expansion on the ground will not protect us if a threat does come about. A rudimentary system of defense stations and a moderately enlarged fleet will help defend against any attempts to capitalize on our relative weakness. We are neutral in a quickly factionalizing galaxy, we must have some small way of defend ourselves. If this committee has another area where those funds and resources will be better spent, I would be happy to hear about it. But for now this is what I think is best to help better Sirta. William: Sirta's industry could benefit from being moved into orbit? This is the first I am hearing of this. Even if so, the SDF is not part of the Ministry of Infrastructure. We aren't responsible for civilian industrial projects, except in clear times of need, which these are not, as Sirta's industry seemed to be just fine working mostly on the ground for decades. As for your other assertion, no external country has any motive to attack us, and the distances involved would make such an operation a costly affair - one not even the Solar Union could afford in the past. Amnesty: Moving industry and military assets into orbit disempowers the civilian government. William: The funds could be put into much better use in continuing the restructuring efforts we are currently carrying out within the SDF. Having an effective and unified defence force is imperative, especially since we all know that internal violence isn't an improbable event. The civil war wasn't that long ago. There is the possibility of future clashes with the CLF or even a tyrannical government. It may not seem likely now, but look where we were just two years ago - who knows where we'll be on this day, two years from now? Amnesty: I question your choice of words there. The last time we had tyrannical government, it was not the SDF that were on our side. William: Is that so? As I recall, it was an SDF coup that ended the old criminal regime, aided by several SDF divisions that were fighting for six months prior to that. History has proven the virtues of competent military force acting in the defence of the people. Hill: Now is not the time to debate who did what or killed who. Instead it is better to focus on where those resources should go. Amnesty: Your proposal is probably going to be voted down, we might as well get right to it. Valance: Voted down? What happened to honest debate and defending your directives? Surely, the Minister wasn't acting arbitrarily? The way this government goes about its' business is often very brazen and thoughtless, I find. Amnesty: Leave the sideways jabs at the door, please. Saturn: Any objections to proceeding to a vote on the Minister's directives on orbital and fleet expansion? Hill: I have nothing more to say on the subject of the orbital expansion - the mood of the committee is clear, and I have no objections in that light to pushing it off towards another time. What I do object to, however, is the stated notion that the SDF has somehow derived the power to make in its sole determination the decision of what is a legitimate civilian government. We are certainly grateful for the belated assistance of elements of the SDF in toppling the Greene regime, but the statements both publicly and in this committee are concerning indeed. With that, I suppose we may as well move to the vote. I would also appreciate a full report on what exactly the SDF is doing in way of "restructuring efforts," as they have not seen fit as of yet to so brief the lawful civilian government.. Saturn: Very well. Register your votes now on ordering the SDF to comply with the Minister's orbital expansion directive. Saturn: Oppose Hill: Support William: Oppose Valance: Oppose Amnesty: Oppose Saturn: The motion is defeated in a 1-4 vote. Can Lt. General Worrel address the Minister's concerns? William: Certainly. The restructuring efforts are merely the latest in a process ongoing since the coup. While we can boast of removing most of the corruption from within the officer corps, there is still plenty to be done when it comes to transforming the SDF into an effective unified force. Central Command makes no secret of these efforts. On the contrary, they are something all of us need to look forward to being completed. History has shown us the value of such things, after all. Amnesty: If our country is so hard to invade, why do we have a profesional army in the first place? What purpose does it serve the Sirtan people? William: You ask that after we just discussed the coup and the crucial role the SDF played in protecting the people from tyranny. Hill: After, of course, having contributed a great deal to it in the beginning Amnesty: The SDF did not start the revolution William: But it did end it. Amnesty: No, it helped finish it. Big difference. William: You assessment of the CLF is much more generous than that of most people. I am sure they are grateful for it. Hill: I disagree with my colleague that a professional army has no place in Sirta, much as we have place for professionalized police et al. It is merely the due and proper subjugation of the military to the civilian that concerns me, as it should concern anyone who does not wish to see an unaccountable force claiming the power to topple the government at will. Amnesty: And what was the SDF doing during the regimes duration? Saturn: I believe we have strayed quite far off-track. Let us return to more pressing matters. Hill: Let us table that discussion for a moment: As you all know, SIRTAK is now up and running restoring the transit links that bind Sirta. The SDF corps of engineers has a body of knowledge and expertise that may prove helpful, and I ask this committee to authorize their deployment. William: We can lend you expertise. There will be no full scale involvement. Hill: I am always glad for the army to inform the government what it will or will not do. William: I am a member of this committee, just as you are. Our purpose here today is to discuss various proposals, orders and directives. Is this your first day at work, Minister? Hill: When one makes the statement, "There will be no full scale involvement," it rings of finality and a decision, not of an opinion. I invite the other members of the committee perhaps to weigh in. William: It is my opinion. I believe it to be final, though perhaps you could persuade me otherwise? Valance: The Minister is far too eager to go ahead with his ideas, without regard for us. Constructive debate is far from his mind, I assure you. Hill: The faster we restore our rail lines the faster our economy booms - to that end we should be eager to dedicate all potential resources to the problem, resources which include the Sirtan Corps of Engineers in as large a capacity as this committee will commit. Valance: I can agree with that much, at least. William: I think this should only be the case until main rail sections are restored. Of course, Central Command will be heavily involved with determining our engineers' role in the project. Hill: As long as engineers are on the ground and working, how they do so is of less importance. William: We are agreed then. Saturn: Is anyone opposed to those terms? Hill: No. Saturn: This committee hereby directs the SDF Corps of Engineers to aid with restoring damaged main sections of the Sirtan Transportation Network, under the auspices of Central Command and in cooperation with SIRTRAK. Now, we should discuss one more aspect of the Minister's directives - handing some of the SDF's arms to the NFP. Can the Minister explain his reasoning for this move at a time when the SDF is most needed as a stabilizing force? Hill: Certainly. Saturn: We await with rapt attention. Hill: As has not been publicly announced, the NFP has begun the first stage of its anti-organized crime efforts. The opposition we may face is unknown - years of corruption in the SDF have doubtlessly led to a great deal of "surplus" finding its way into the hands of those who have been preying on our society with impunity. We seek to even the odds - while the men of the NFP are ready and willing, to send them into this great conflict for the soul of our nation's future with a materiel disadvantage is to do them, and the people of Sirta themselves a discredit. Surely the SDF has materiel to spare - as was made perfectly clear earlier, we have no external threats, and the types of materiel we're looking to transfer: largely small arms, personal gear, and some armored personal carriers and heavier equipment for specialized units will hardly put a damper on the overall efficiency of the SDF as a whole. William: I believe it would be prudent to set up a process by which the NFP could request the loan of certain equipment for defined periods of times, with direct input from Central Command. Hill: I disagree - attempting to introduce equipment on a timeshare requisition basis makes it far more difficult to achieve the necessary training and familiarization, and I do not see the need for military involvement in civilian policing. William: You don't see the need for military involvement, but you do see the need for military equipment. What a peculiar stance to take. Hill: Materiel performs its function regardless of who is using it. Allowing the military to extend tendrils into civilian functions, whatever the arena, is a precedent I would like to avoid as much as possible. William: And yet you felt comfortable with asking for our help with civilian orbital construction and railway repair? Hill: You weren't asking for input on SIRTAK - the better analogy with regards to the police would be our requisitioning a SDF raid on a fortified gang compound, for which operational control would duly remain with the SDF, as control of the Corps of Engineers remains with you when it comes to railway repair. If you refer to the minutes most of the hard discussion relating to orbital construction were military related - orbital defenses and the fleet, with civilian construction as a hypothetical. I welcome other voices on the matter. William: You ask for our equipment without granting us the opportunity to control when and to whom to give this equipment. That seems unreasonable to me. If the NFP need to be familiarized with its' use, we can invite them to make use of our training facilities. What is it that you find so objectionable about this, Minister? Hill: The notion that you see it as your equipment, to be doled out as you see fit, and not property of the lawful government of Sirta. This, I fear, is a philosophical debate we are unlikely to sway one another on anytime soon. As I said, I welcome other voices. Amnesty: The SDF will do as it is told by the civilian government. To do otherwise removes its entire purpose. Valance: I take it "the lawful government of Sirta" here stands for the Ministry of Defence and the Ministry of Internal Security? I don't recall Parliament being consulted on this plan. Hill: Are you debating sophistry of government now? This government became lawful as soon as we passed our motion of confidence, in itself derived from the duly empowered parliament. To suggest that Parliament is the only actor of civilian government is nonsensical! Valence: Is the same not true of this committee? Hill: Do you have a point you're attempting to make, Commiteeman? Valance: Only that your attitude here is emblematic of the way your government handles things - you come in with your proposal, you go out with your proposal. No respect at all shown to the checks and balances in place, no compromises with others. Hill: Well not if you expand that purpose to include "decide what governments are legitimate". Better pushing forward than desperately wishing to return to Greene's welcoming embrace. Amnesty: Your party lost the election, member Valance. The government does not have to consult with you, nor care about your tiresome opinions. Hill: I am happy to discuss and compromise with any who are willing to do so in good faith, but there are some lines and principles which must be held to. Civilian supremacy being one of them. But please, some sympathy for the good Committeeman, he is in mourning after all. Valance: Typical. There is a reason members of the opposition are represented in these committees and its' not so we can be ignored with impunity. And lest you forget Member Amnesty, you too are a member of the opposition, so your words apply equally to yourself. Hill: This is also increasingly non-Germane. William: Do you accept my equipment loaning proposal, or can the NFP do without it after all? Hill: Does he speak for the committee? Saturn: Minister, we are here to arrive at a decision. If you have an alternative proposal, speak your mind. Hill: Is this to say that his sole objection is all it would take to scuttle the original proposal then? If the committee will not support the directives as proposed, then compromise we must. I'm merely confused as to the extent of one generals veto threat. Saturn: What veto threat? What are you talking about, Minister? Do you want to take a vote on your original proposal? Hill: Call the vote on the directives as proposed, then. Saturn: Very well. Let us vote on the Minister's directive to hand over SDF equipment to the NFP for an unlimited period of time and without further supervision. Saturn: Oppose William: Oppose Amnesty: Support Hill: Support Valance: Oppose Hill: Unsurprising, but the point had to be made. Saturn: The motion fails in a 2-3 vote. Do you want to vote on the Lt. General's proposal? Amnesty: Yes. Hill: Very well. Saturn: Let us vote on directing the SDF to loan military equipment to the NFP upon request with the approval of Central Command and an agreed period of time. William: Support Hill: Support Saturn: Support Amnesty: Support Amnesty: I think there may be some bias in the way youre presenting these proposals. Valance: Abstain Amnesty: Come on Valance, now of all times you decide not to provide us with an opinion? Saturn: The motion passes in a 4-0 vote. The directive will enter into force tomorrow. Now, let us hear these accusations of bias from Member Amnesty. Amnesty: Best to leave it for a later date. Hill: Indeed. Though I appreciate the fact the SDF believes it's "supervision" is necessary. Saturn: Is there anything else anyone wants to bring up? Valance: No. William: Not that I can think of. Quite the productive meeting we had today. Hill: Glad you don't think necessary to topple us quite yet. William: The Minister jokes, of course. After all, the present government can hardly be called tyrannical, with the wealth of different parties represented in the coalition. Saturn: Is that all for today? Hill: I believe so. Saturn: Then, this meeting is adjourned. AFancyQuestionMark fucked around with this message at 12:39 on Jan 21, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2018 12:32
|
|
|
The voting phase begins now and ends on Wednesday - the 24th of January - at 14:30 UTC. Bills under Parliament's consideration: 1. The Parliamentary Confirmation Act, submitted by Minister of Internal Security Radek. 2. Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition, submitted by Member Amnesty. 3. The Rehabilitation Act V2, submitted by Member Amnesty. 4. The Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act, submitted by Minister of Foreign Affairs Vanderbush. 5. The Urgent Rescue Act, jointly submitted by Member Jalbert and Member Hughes. Proposals brought before the Sard People's Assembly: 1. Sard Appropriation of Blighted Properties Act, submitted by Minister of Education Bookchin. Bills brought before the Topaz City Council: 1. The Topaz Local Railway Improvement Act, submitted by a City Councilor from the FDG. Proposals brought before the Panorama People's Assembly: 1. June 3062 Budget, submitted by Citizen Axo. 2. Proposal for Holidays, submitted by Citizen Axo. 3. Proposal for Truth and Reconciliation in Panorama, submitted by Citizen Axo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2018 18:46
|
|
|
Yes 1-3, 5. No to 4. Yes to the local act.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2018 19:06
|
|
|
Bills under Parliament's consideration: 1. The Parliamentary Confirmation Act, submitted by Minister of Internal Security Radek. AYE 2. Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition, submitted by Member Amnesty. AYE 3. The Rehabilitation Act V2, submitted by Member Amnesty. AYE 4. The Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act, submitted by Minister of Foreign Affairs Vanderbush. NAY 5. The Urgent Rescue Act, jointly submitted by Member Jalbert and Member Hughes. AYE Proposals brought before the Sard People's Assembly: 1. Sard Appropriation of Blighted Properties Act, submitted by Minister of Education Bookchin. AYE
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2018 19:18
|
|
|
Denver Axo Proposals brought before the Panorama People's Assembly: 1. June 3062 Budget, submitted by Citizen Axo. - Aye 2. Proposal for Holidays, submitted by Citizen Axo. - Aye 3. Proposal for Truth and Reconciliation in Panorama, submitted by Citizen Axo. - Aye
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2018 20:44
|
|
|
The Lord of Hats posted:
Denver Axo Panorama Regional Government Property Appropriation Committee Comments given to The Panorama Evening Star As both a resident of Panorama and a member of the Property Appropriation Committee, the Committee that would be subject to the changes made by this proposed legislation, I felt that I should offer a nonpartisan opinion about the legislation's problems. The reason the Committee makes one and only one valuing, the result of which is binding, is our method of combating the twin threats of profiteering and predatory investments. If this legislation passes, it creates opportunities for unsavory financiers or speculators to game the system by manipulating both the perceived value of the property and the category into which it is sorted. Let's use a concrete example, say a few dozen acres of land near Panorama's downtown. Some parts of it are used for growing grain and the rest has been given over to a small processing plant for some kind of toy, all of it owned by a Topaz industrialist. The presence of food-growing capacity marks it as Vital Real-Estate. The Topaz manufacturer knows that the Committee has ruled that he'll receive 100% for his company shares and 40% for the property itself. Out of greed, he decides to take a bulldozer and salt to the grain fields and renders it useless for many seasons. Since only the toy factory remains, it is now Non-Vital: he'll make 90% of it back if he asks the Committee to make a new valuation. The wheat that could have fed people was destroyed, and the difference flows out of Panorama into some industrialist's pocket. On the other hand, let's look at the opposite problem. Say an Opal financier hears that the Committee will now re-value properties one year from now. He sends someone to Panorama with the goal of buying as much land as possible, makes a few impressive-sounding but inexpensive improvements, and claims that the land is now worth 300% what it was in the previous valuing. Or he might not even need to make any real improvements at all: with a few of his financier friends, he forms a conglomerate and assembles tens of millions of credits, earmarked publicly as invested in improving the properties but with no real intention of doing so. When the re-valuing comes around, he can point to the assembled money already slated for improvements: surely the committee must take that into account when compensating the conglomerate. So Panorama ends up paying him more, the "earmarked" money is pulled back out in an "unfortunate but unavoidable decision, based on market research and analysis", and the profit goes back into the pockets of the financiers. Now, the Committee is not stupid. We will be able to find fraud and we won't let any corruption stand once we find it. But the addition of these massive complications would slow our work to a crawl. We would have to take days determining that each property is being honestly managed and not pumped up for a quick gain. Panorama alone would have taken months, maybe years of valuings instead of being dealt with so swiftly. Instead, we made it so that the will of the people could be faithfully implemented, and that order could be maintained during this transition. In fact, our initial valuings already take into account patterns of growth and interest. But make no mistake, our loyalty belongs to the people of Sirta, not an idly rich minority that sees a crisis and thinks only of how it can profit, no matter the cost to society. I ask all Members of Parliament, in the spirit of the revolution, to protect our work from speculators and financial vultures. Please vote no on this proposed legislation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 01:29
|
|
|
Sirtan Budgetary Office Estimates (June 3062): * Parliamentary Confirmation Act - No budgetary implications. * Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition - No budgetary implications. * Rehabilitation Act V2 - This version of the bill specifies the number of rehabilitation centers to be established - 6. It also provides the Minister of Health with discretion in the amount of funds to allocate. According to our analysis of similar private facilities, we estimate that 1.5 - 2 million NSC in bulk are necessary for the establishment of a single rehabilitation center, meaning 9 - 12 million NSC in bulk total. Additionally, 250,000 NSC each month are required to maintain the most minimal facility possible, with 600,000 NSC a month being ideal, meaning 1.5 - 3.6 million a month total. * Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act - No direct budgetary implications on the national level. * Urgent Rescue Act - Most of the provisions of the act take advantage of already existing programs, so almost no additional funding is required. The maximum cost of a single ticket to a nearby country is 4,500 NSC, so the provision regarding non-citizen victims shouldn't prove to be a significant burden on the Ministry of Interior. The only upfront cost is that of establishing the new HTPUs in the NSP, which is about 100,000 NSC. The only recurring costs are the cash rewards for informants, for the purpose of which we recommend setting aside 500,000 NSC and to replenish this fund whenever it runs out (likely each 3 - 5 months, longer as time goes by and the amount of human trafficking operations decreases, assuming the HTPUs succeed in their work). AFancyQuestionMark fucked around with this message at 15:30 on Jan 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 15:20
|
|
|
Rutherford Vanderbush, Citizen Seat The Parliamentary Confirmation Act. - AYE Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition - Abstain The Rehabilitation Act V2 - AYE The Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act - AYE The Urgent Rescue Act - AYE Proposals brought before the Topaz City Council (assuming my opinions hold sway): 1. The Topaz Local Railway Repair Act. AYE
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 16:20
|
|
|
 Danube, Minister of Interior 1. The Parliamentary Confirmation Act, submitted by Minister of Internal Security Radek. AYE. 2. Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition, submitted by Member Amnesty. NAY. I've come to reevaluate my position on this issue. Less than a year ago, 89% of our voting population approved of our Constitution. I don't believe making such a large change to the Constitution so soon is prudent. 3. The Rehabilitation Act V2, submitted by Member Amnesty. AYE. 4. The Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act, submitted by Minister of Foreign Affairs Vanderbush. AYE. 5. The Urgent Rescue Act, jointly submitted by Member Jalbert and Member Hughes. AYE. Additionally, I would favor the act in Topaz.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 16:31
|
|
|
Bills under Parliament's consideration: 1. The Parliamentary Confirmation Act, submitted by Minister of Internal Security Radek. AYE 2. Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition, submitted by Member Amnesty. AYE 3. The Rehabilitation Act V2, submitted by Member Amnesty. AYE 4. The Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act, submitted by Minister of Foreign Affairs Vanderbush. NAY 5. The Urgent Rescue Act, jointly submitted by Member Jalbert and Member Hughes. AYE Proposals brought before the Sard People's Assembly: 1. Sard Appropriation of Blighted Properties Act, submitted by Minister of Education Bookchin. AYE
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 17:33
|
|
|
Comrade Radek Minister of Security Working Budget Total - 84m NSC NSP - 47% (40 million credits) NFP - 21% (18 million credits) Our front line against crime, the police forces rightfully receive the bulk of our support. CRA - 13% (11 million credits) Reform is on the horizon for our prisons, and thus an increase in funding is necessary. IS - 13% (11 million credits) The Intelligence Service, considering the unnecessary need to maintain the entire status quo apparatus, takes a minor haircut. I'm confident they'll be able to maintain their core functionality, and should they have any particular concerns or need for funding are welcome to petition me personally. Militia Union - 5% (4 million credits) Providing grants to be disbursed to individual militias to support training, recruitment, and equipment.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2018 18:41
|
|
|
New Federal Police Overview (June 3062): The NFP is a result of a merger between the Investigative Agency, the Government Guard and an influx of motivated, trained and carefully vetted recruits. Its remit is high-level crimes, government security and whatever else the Ministry of Internal Security finds necessary. The NFPs internal organization is still provisional and could be easily changed on short notice. Currently, the following divisions are present: * Administration Manages the NFPs properties, wages, accounts, etc. Everything is still new, so it might take some time until various administrative issues are sorted out, but otherwise the division seems to be coming along nicely. Current Funding: 1.5 million NSC * Internal Affairs Handles investigations into NFP officers, internal corruption and other sensitive personnel matters. Hasnt had a real opportunity to test its own capabilities yet. Current Funding: 1 million NSC * Government Guard Provides security for all government offices, warehouses and other buildings as well as public events. Somewhat bolstered by the influx of new recruits. Current Funding: 3 million NSC * Investigations Carries out investigations into high-level crimes and related matters. Organized by task forces focusing specific areas of interest, which can be added and removed as necessary. The current task forces are: Organized Crime, Large-Scale Corruption, Financial Crimes, Illegal Substances and SCN Security. Current Funding: 8 million NSC * Enforcement Responsible for carrying out arrests and other targeted operations. Mainly made out of retired CLF members and some of the more violent Popular Resistance activists. Outside of minor clashes with some of the gangs, has yet to truly flex its muscles. Current Funding: 4.5 million NSC
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2018 19:52
|
|
|
To Finance Minister ReSeAu Gen, Minister, I'm reaching out to you in the hope of forming a joint task force between your enforcement people and my Financial Crimes people. Many of the organizations we are up against have highly sophisticated financial sides to them, and we'd be greatly aided by the expertise available within the MoF. A joint task force will enable our ministries to share information, avoid duplication of efforts, and help us avoid our people's operations tripping over each other. Most of all, it will help speed the organized crime investigations and help show that citizens will not be able to go around the tax man just because they possess wealth. I hope to hear you find the idea favorable. Sincerely, Commissioner Saint-Just To SDF Central Command, I am hearby authorizing the organization of High Threat Response Teams within the Enforcement Division of the NFP. I will be sending these men and women to you to be trained in the use of and tactics associated with military equipment, in accordance with the directive issued by the Defense Objectives Committee. I request that you focus on urban combat especially, as that is the context that they will be primarily operating in. These same units are to be issued SDF equipment and deployed in response to resistance from any criminal elements demonstrating the possession of military grade equipment and/or capabilities, per approval by SDF Central Command. I also personally request that, if you have not already done so, you establish some sort of procedure that will allow central command to review the facts at hand issue authorizations quickly. I am sure you are all well aware that the situations I intend to use the HTR Teams for can evolve and escalate very quickly, and the safety of the public may well be paramount. Though I know you are busy with your reorganization efforts, I hope our organizations can coooperate well, and that that cooperation will soon bear fruit. Sincerely, Commissioner Saint-Just Notice to all NFP Department and Taskforce Heads, your eyes only: Friends, we have a great deal of work ahead of us, and though the dangers are great I feel we must begin immediately. To that end I'm handing out the following assignments: Administration is to collate all available records on departed Investigative Agency agents, and former municipal police officers, to be forwarded to the Large Scale Corruption Task Force. Otherwise, continue as you were. Internal affairs is to conduct a financial review, background check, and check on the personal and familial safety of everyone in the NFP, starting with myself and the department and taskforce leadership. While this work is important, it is not a criminal investigation and should not be allowed to impede other departmental efforts. The people we are up against are as ruthless and dirty as they come, and so we need to find the pressure points of our people and safeguard them against criminal exploitation. The Government Guard is to continue its good work of safeguarding government buildings and personnel, though I am ordering a special focus to be placed on sensitive institutions like Parliament, The Intelligence Service, and nuclear facilities. The Intelligence Service in particular just took a bit of a budgetary haircut, and so we'll be helping to ease their burden a bit by allowing them to focus on their operations over mundane security concerns. I am ordering the Organized Crime Taskforce to begin an immediate full scale investigation into the organization known as the Chappelle family. Financial crimes will support where able. I am ordering Illegal Substances to take point on investigating the group commonly called "The Old Cartel", with Large Scale Corruption assisting where able. However, Large Scale Corruption's primary focus is to be on the investigation of corrupt former IA and municipal police officers, particularly those known to have openly associated with gangs. These investigations will act as our starting point for the eradication of gang activity on Sirta. It is imperative that we gain the public's trust, and one of the most vital ways to do this is by showing the people of Sirta that in this government, wearing a uniform does not place you above the law. In SCN Security and Financial Crimes are to cooperate on locating and identifying the primary facilitators and users of the so-called "Special Exchange" The investigations into the Chappelle family, the Old Cartel, the Special Exchange, and the former police and their associated gangs are all to be treated as likely leading to OSCAR Act indictments. I know that you will all have many smaller, but equally as urgent cases coming to your desks in the months ahead. These cases are vital as well, but in combating these organizations we may end up finding ourselves leaving these investigations to the side. If you find yourself in such situations, I urge not to let the case lie, but instead work with our partners in the the municipal police and the Milita Union to see justice done for everyone. The Enforcement Division is to select the best people we have available (though I know, new as some of us are, that that is somewhat difficult to determine) for assignment to High Threat Response Teams to begin training with the SDF for use of military equipment in, you guessed it, High Threat situations. Everyone else in Enforcement: I want you to roll out as soon as you feel able and organized in Sard, Topaz, and especially Opal. Drive the gangs off the streets. Help the municipal police bring in violent and well protected perpetrators. You are the hammer to the NSP's anvil. Let every gang on Sirta know that they aren't in charge, they were never in charge, and that their days are numbered. All of you are to seek the cooperation of the public and your fellow government organizations where you deem appropriate. I expect great things. Good luck to you all. Your Comrade, Commissioner Saint-Just
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 03:11
|
|
|
June 3062 Parliament Votes: The voting phase is over. Remember that, in the narrative, these votes were separate and took place over the duration of the month, rather than all at once. Proposals under consideration: 1. The Parliamentary Confirmation Act, submitted by Minister of Internal Security Radek. 2. Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition, submitted by Member Amnesty. 3. The Rehabilitation Act V2, submitted by Member Amnesty. 4. The Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act, submitted by Minister of Foreign Affairs Vanderbush. 5. The Urgent Rescue Act, jointly submitted by Member Jalbert and Member Hughes. Party Breakdown: * SRLF: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Support 17, Abstain 1, Oppose 0 ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Support 17, Abstain 1, Oppose 0 ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support 17, Abstain 1, Oppose 0 ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Support 0, Abstain 1, Oppose 17 ## Urgent Rescue Act Support 17, Abstain 1, Oppose 0 * Dawn: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Support 8, Abstain 1, Oppose 0 ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Support 0, Abstain 9, Oppose 0 ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support 8, Abstain 1, Oppose 0 ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Support 0, Abstain 9, Oppose 0 ## Urgent Rescue Act Support 8, Abstain 1, Oppose 0 * UCS: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Support 0, Abstain 3, Oppose 3 ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Support 0, Abstain 3, Oppose 3 ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support 3, Abstain 3, Oppose 0 ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Support 3, Abstain 3, Oppose 0 ## Urgent Rescue Act Support 3, Abstain 3, Oppose 0 * FDG: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Support 6, Abstain 0, Oppose 0 ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Support 0, Abstain 0, Oppose 6 ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support 6, Abstain 0, Oppose 0 ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Support 6, Abstain 0, Oppose 0 ## Urgent Rescue Act Support 6, Abstain 0, Oppose 0 * DAL: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Support 0, Abstain 0, Oppose 6 ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Support 0, Abstain 6, Oppose 0 ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support 0, Abstain 6, Oppose 0 ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Support 0, Abstain 6, Oppose 0 ## Urgent Rescue Act Support 6, Abstain 0, Oppose 0 * FSP: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Support 0, Abstain 0, Oppose 3 ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Support 0, Abstain 0, Oppose 3 ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support 0, Abstain 3, Oppose 0 ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Support 3, Abstain 0, Oppose 0 ## Urgent Rescue Act Support 3, Abstain 0, Oppose 0 * Unity Coalition: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Support 0, Abstain 3, Oppose 0 ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Support 0, Abstain 3, Oppose 0 ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support 0, Abstain 3, Oppose 0 ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Support 0, Abstain 3, Oppose 0 ## Urgent Rescue Act Support 0, Abstain 3, Oppose 0 * KNK: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Support 0, Abstain 3, Oppose 0 ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Support 0, Abstain 3, Oppose 0 ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support 0, Abstain 3, Oppose 0 ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Support 0, Abstain 3, Oppose 0 ## Urgent Rescue Act Support 0, Abstain 3, Oppose 0 * The Community: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Support 3, Abstain 0, Oppose 0 ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Support 3, Abstain 0, Oppose 0 ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support 3, Abstain 0, Oppose 0 ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Support 0, Abstain 0, Oppose 3 ## Urgent Rescue Act Support 3, Abstain 0, Oppose 0 * VM: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Support 0, Abstain 3, Oppose 0 ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Support 0, Abstain 3, Oppose 0 ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support 0, Abstain 3, Oppose 0 ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Support 0, Abstain 3, Oppose 0 ## Urgent Rescue Act Support 0, Abstain 3, Oppose 0 Guardian Council Appointments: * Vera Albright: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Support ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Abstain ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Abstain ## Urgent Rescue Act Support * Thomas Gill: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Support ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Oppose ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Abstain ## Urgent Rescue Act Support * Frank Probst: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Oppose ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Oppose ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Support ## Urgent Rescue Act Support * Lucia Caldera: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Support ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Abstain ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Abstain ## Urgent Rescue Act Support * Sander Hansen: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Oppose ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Abstain ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Abstain ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Abstain ## Urgent Rescue Act Support * Lisa Wyatt: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Oppose ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Oppose ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Support ## Urgent Rescue Act Support * William Viner: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Oppose ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Oppose ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Abstain ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Abstain ## Urgent Rescue Act Support * Roger Rockwell: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Support ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Abstain ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Abstain ## Urgent Rescue Act Support * Janet Oliphant: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Oppose ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Oppose ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Support ## Urgent Rescue Act Support * Silvia Collins: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Oppose ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Oppose ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Abstain ## Urgent Rescue Act Support * Rachel Hoffman: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Oppose ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Abstain ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Abstain ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Abstain ## Urgent Rescue Act Support * Paul Thiede: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Support ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Abstain ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Abstain ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Abstain ## Urgent Rescue Act Support * Della Jalbert: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Abstain ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Abstain ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Abstain ## Urgent Rescue Act Support * Sofia Juhl: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Oppose ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Oppose ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Support ## Urgent Rescue Act Support * Jade Ross: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Oppose ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Oppose ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Support ## Urgent Rescue Act Support Citizen Seats: * Rutherford T. Vanderbush: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Support ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Abstain ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Support ## Urgent Rescue Act Support * Jessica Ramsey: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Abstain ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Abstain ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Abstain ## Urgent Rescue Act Support * Susanne Brandt: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Abstain ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Abstain ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Support ## Urgent Rescue Act Support * Autumn Black: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Abstain ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Abstain ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Abstain ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Abstain ## Urgent Rescue Act Support * Grace Wright: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Support ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Oppose ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Support ## Urgent Rescue Act Support Overall: ## Parliamentary Confirmation Act Support 41, Abstain 18, Oppose 21 (Is a constitutional amendment, requiring an absolute majority of 61 votes to pass.) ## Constitutional Amendment on Parliament's Composition Support 20, Abstain 39, Oppose 21 ## Rehabilitation Act V2 Support 52, Abstain 28, Oppose 0 ## Property Appropriation Re-evaluation Act Support 20, Abstain 40, Oppose 20 ## Urgent Rescue Act Support 66, Abstain 14, Oppose 0 Outcome: The following bills were passed into law: * Urgent Rescue Act * Rehabilitation Act V2
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 19:34
|
|
|
June 3062 Peoples Assemblies Votes: In narrative, all listed votes represent not only the individual characters vote but the votes of a segment of the population that voted similarly. Sard: Proposals: 1. Sard Appropriation of Blighted Properties Act, submitted by Minister of Education Bookchin. Votes: * Prime Minister Luxemburg: ## Sard Appropriation of Blighted Properties Act - Support * Minster of Education Bookchin: ## Sard Appropriation of Blighted Properties Act - Support * Minister of Internal Security Radek: ## Sard Appropriation of Blighted Properties Act - Support * Minister of Finance ReSeAu Gen: ## Sard Appropriation of Blighted Properties Act - Abstain * Minister of Health Dr. Xavier Dubois: ## Sard Appropriation of Blighted Properties Act - Abstain * Member of Parliament Stefan Borisov: ## Sard Appropriation of Blighted Properties Act - Support * Member of Parliament Lenore Hughes: ## Sard Appropriation of Blighted Properties Act - Support Total: ## Sard Appropriation of Blighted Properties Act Support 5, Abstain 2, Oppose 0 Accepted Proposals: * Sard Appropriation of Blighted Properties Act Panorama: Proposals: 1. June 3062 Budget, submitted by Citizen Axo. 2. Proposal for Holidays, submitted by Citizen Axo. 3. Proposal for Truth and Reconciliation in Panorama, submitted by Citizen Axo. Votes: * Citizen Denver Axo: ## June 3062 Budget Support ## Proposal for Holidays Support ## Proposal for Truth and Reconciliation in Panorama Support Total: ## June 3062 Budget Support 1, Abstain 0, Oppose 0 ## Proposal for Holidays Support 1, Abstain 0, Oppose 0 ## Proposal for Truth and Reconciliation in Panorama Support 1, Abstain 0, Oppose 0 Accepted Proposals: * June 3062 Budget * Proposal for Holidays * Proposal for Truth and Reconciliation in Panorama
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 19:46
|
|
|
June 3062 City Council Votes: For the sake of brevity, I omit all NPC controlled cities with no player suggested bills. They still pass various bills, which I will summarize or provide in full upon request. Topaz: Proposals: 1. The Topaz Local Railway Improvement Act, submitted by an FDG City Councilor. Votes: * SRLF: ## Topaz Local Railway Improvement Act Support 0, Abstain 5, Oppose 2 * FDG: ## Topaz Local Railway Improvement Act Support 7, Abstain 0, Oppose 0 Total: ## Topaz Local Railway Improvement Act Support 7, Abstain 5, Oppose 2 Outcome: The following bills were passed into law: * Topaz Local Railway Improvement Act AFancyQuestionMark fucked around with this message at 20:09 on Jan 24, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 20:06
|
|
|
The July 3062 drafting phase starts now and will last until Sunday - the 28th of January - at 8:30 UTC. I will edit this post later today or tomorrow with the Income and Expenses Summary for July.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 20:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 01:14 |
|
|
Comrade Bookchin People's Assembly of Sard Sardines of the Sard Advisory Committee and Professional Advisory Council: We are graced to have come into a budget meaningful, but we certainly need to start utilizing it in ways that benefit every Sardine, and not just for the very few. Would you please advise the Assembly on where we should focus first?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 20:42
|
|