Realpolitik of the Smoky Skies - The Reboot

((Did anyone notice anything interesting about the non-interview articles just published in the Herald? ))

For our sanity's sake I think we should try and keep it at one bill at a time. Just to make things a little bit less confusing.

I vote in favor of passing the Ministerial Reform Amendment Act 1822.

I vote aye for ministerial reform.

((Sorry for introducing so many bills, I might be inactive next week and didn't want to forget) )

((I didn't see your post before Melda, but yes, I did notice something interesting! The Royal Academy of Music in London was founded in 1822, and Sweden lifted a ban on coffee in the 1820s. Nice touch. ))

((Will you be away, or just less active than usual?))

((Just less active) )

Gurra09 said:

((I didn't see your post before Melda, but yes, I did notice something interesting!

Click to expand...

((You mean you missed your interview.

Gurra09 said:

The Royal Academy of Music in London was founded in 1822, and Sweden lifted a ban on coffee in the 1820s. Nice touch. ))

Click to expand...

((That they did indeed. It was the latter in particular that I thought you might notice. ))

Et_Absoluti said:

((Just less active) )

Click to expand...

((Fair enough. I was concerned if you weren't around at all there would be less Opposition around. Not so. ))

(( Ok, so with the amendment passed, the final bill will be voted? I need to catch up on this))

EDIT:
I vote yes on the final bill.

((We could let this vote go on so that everyone has a chance to vote but I think we know where everyone's votes will fall on this bill by now and we've already got a majority to pass it.))

The vote for the Ministerial Reform Amendment Act 1822 closes after one and a half days.

I think the ayes have it.

The bill passes in the affirmative. Unless the Grand Majah opposes it on constitutional grounds the bill passes into law.

The vote tally is below:



So the new ministerial system proposed by Senator the Honourable Ernest Barnard stands, albeit with the newly added limitation that no person shall serve as minister of more than three ministries or portfolios at one time.

I thank everyone involved in this tripartisan endeavour.

This now clears the floor for consideration of the Honourable Opposition Leader's Private Senator's Bill The Commission for Military Education and Conscription Act 1822.

I propose this bill shall be debated for three full days from when it was commended to the chamber one and a half days ago, which means there are one a half days left to debate the bill. After the debate is concluded, if any amendments have been proposed then there should be a maximum timeframe of two days to vote on them. After amendments have been voted on, or immediately after the conclusion of the three days of debate if there are no amendments proposed the bill will be put to a final vote which will last up to two days.

I'm fairly sure that I voted for that Bill. If not, consider this post my Aye.

((I just read the interview, once more, if this descends into war, I'm gonna have a lot of fun

Plus, I kinda think that Jingoism is not exactly the point of our campaign, but I guess I'm not surprised that everyone is gonna take a stab at this. Facing the majority will always be like that))

((Mainly I want public support for my upcoming campaign) )

Magnive said:

I'm fairly sure that u voted for that Bill. If not, consider this post my Aye.

Click to expand...

If you're referring to the Ministerial Reform Amendment Act 1822 introduced by the Opposition Leader and amended by me, you voted to amend the bill but the voting on the bill as a whole closed once a majority vote in favour of the bill's passage into law was received.

I'm not sure I explained it well enough. Once we have the senate voting rules properly established it will be a bit clearer and make more sense, rather than my on-the-fly ad hoc explanations.

Today's edition of the Haven Herald contained the following article:

Constitutional Conundrum Cleared
by Harland Godwin

It here follows:




Today's edition of the Haven Herald also contained the following article:

Dalmacian Develops Drawing Device
by Calvin Orville

It here follows:

((Can any old guy start a newspaper?))((Do they have to be entirely factual?))

((In the real world political parties often have accompanying newspapers pushing their views to a broader audience. So go for it.

But if you're posting articles that anyone thinks are incorrect people probably will speak up about it. Bring on the newspaper wars!

I've deliberately kept the Herald impartial and non-partisan, because Harland Godwin, et al. have no relationship with W. Melda other than having interviewed him a few times.

I'm incorporating real life history, just twisted to fit our scenario, just for flavouring purposes.

So you could start a newspaper like that, or a partisan propagandistic one; go for it.))

Before I begin, firstly let me commend the Honourable Leader of the Opposition for recognising the reality that is the inequality inherent in our society. We in the Pulias People's Party agree that this is a problem and that action must be taken, however we have different ideas about how to achieve these outcomes. I also commend the Leader of the Pulian Imperial Party for recognising the problems a lack of education and a lack of employment can cause in our society, and for proposing suggestions to remedy it. We in the Pulias People's Party agree that these are real problems of great importance and they are why we became Senators in the first place: to reduce inequality, improve outcomes for all classes, and make Pulian society the best in the world.

However, I must say that while we in the Pulias People's Party applaud the Official Opposition for trying to be part of the solution to these very real problems by proposing their suggestions in the form of this bill, we sadly must disagree with the content of this bill. Like many serious problems, these issues in our society can be solved through a number of different ways. There are many viable options we might take to remedy our ills. Some will be better than others. Some cures could be more damaging than the illnesses they seek to remedy. We believe actions less drastic than those proposed in this bill should be taken. We believe more appropriate actions to deal with these problems have already been proposed by the parties that make up this Senate and Government.

With regard to the existing low education rates in our society, during this year's election campaign my party promised a secular revolution which would see an unprecedented investment in education and science, providing free universal education. Pending Cabinet approval, the Ministry of Culture will implement the "Secularisation of Education" plan that the hard-working civil servants in my ministry have been working on and developing since day one of this Government being sworn in. If I may take up my fellow Senators' time, I would like to read from a transcript of a speech I gave on this very subject during the recent election campaign:

When turning my mind to the future I realise we need to improve literacy levels in the community. The most effective way to pursue this will be to improve the education of our children, and ensuring all children have access to adequate and effective schooling. Do not forget: the children of today will be the leaders of tomorrow. At the next general election, many children, including my own son Charles, will be old enough to vote! We need to ensure our children receive a truly modern education in order to compete with the other nations of the world. And a highly educated populace will lead to extra innovation in the sciences, pushing the boundaries of technological development. A vote for the Pulian People's Party is a vote for your children. It is a vote for increased investment in science and better technological outcomes. Progress is a key feature of my party's campaign platform. If elected we will implement a secular revolution which will provide us with the requisite teaching to improve the education of our children and allow our nation's sciences and technological progression to advance in ever-increasing rapidity.

Click to expand...

As for strategies to deal with unemployment, I firmly believe that the national railway network which enjoys tripartisan support will bring a boost of employment to the nation. Beyond all the workers building the track, there are the engineers designing the steam engines, the miners who mine the ore, the smelters who make the steel, the owners of the horses required to transport materials and goods and so on. And even after the network is fully established there will be a host of new job types that we can't even begin to imagine. This national railway will allow all new ventures for enterprising businessmen to take advantage of, and extra jobs will grow from that. Another point is that with the increased investment in science by the time the national railway network is finished construction the students who will benefit from going through school during our secular education revolution will find an increased number of science and technology jobs waiting for them by the time they are ready to enter the workforce.

So I say this bill is not required because there are other Government and Party proposals which will seek to improve the outcomes for our citizens without going down this path.

I have outlined sensible proposals to be pursued in lieu of this bill, so let us now let us consider the bill on its moral and ethical issues.

I must say that I find this attempt to link educational benefits with bondage to the machinery of war as perverse in the extreme. It seems very much like an attempt to defend the proposal from legitimate criticism because defenders of this proposal will be able to pretend anyone who opposes the bill is against jobs and education! What folly! What cynicism!

Also, if I did not know better, I would assume that it was delivered in such a way as to provide bait for pacific parties such as my own to oppose it on pacifist grounds and therefore make us appear out of touch or against jobs and schooling. But I am sure the Honourable Opposition Leader has not intended to use such tactics and this must be purely coincidental.

In summary: while we agree with the aims of this proposal and acknowledge that the problems it seeks to redress are real, we think other proposals under consideration will achieve these outcomes without going down this path of militarism and education in return for voluntary servitude. We in the Pulias People's Party do not support this proposal and we would encourage other peace-loving people to not support this proposal, or to at least take a long, hard look at it first before casting your vote. And I can confirm we in the Pulias People's Party will be voting against it.

You misunderstand the intention of this bill. It is not meant to send our children from the schoolyard to battlefield so to speak. This bill is mean to provide for adults in our community who wish to educate themselves in matters civilian and military in exchange for service. The bill is mean to work in tandem with any others bill proposed for our education system. This War College is exactly that, a college therefore catered to adults who wish to seek out opportunities among a burgeoning demand for officers. Voluntary citizen soldiers so to speak.

((Will make another speech shortly))

((Oh, my character knows it's not for children. He's suggesting it's wrong to provide a service to help people better themselves if the cost is being sent to war. Better to provide an education in childhood with no strings attached so that by the time they're adults they won't need education such as this. It's a genuine and clear policy disagreement between the two parties. ))

((These pacifists really grind my gears ))