IFC Council (IC)

[Aigeantir]

Nay to 43. We have a great number of objections:
1. Regarding typical orders of business: It is highly burdensome to the Council to require them to go through a whole farce every time they want to anything. If there is only one thing to discuss; why not simply discuss that without extraneous, unnecessary, and bureaucratic rules?
2. Regarding the general rules of debate: It is quite ridiculous that members should have to be recognized by the chair; it will take forever; and by the time that the chair gets round to recognizing the delegation the delegation might have gone away; and equally to curtail speaking time is utterly ridiculous.
3. Why do we need all these confusing and pedantic and superfluous rules anyway? The chamber is very rarely out of order and whenever it is all we need to do is act with some common sense and according to normal parliamentary convention. Why should we lock ourselves in a straight-jacket like lunatics? I know a few historical delegations should perhaps have been consigned to lunatic asylums; but they were the exception and are certainly not the rule.

EDIT: Forgot to put that this was in regards to Resolution 43

While I do see what Libraria and Ausitoria is saying, as this would be much easier if this was a face-to-face debate rather than over a forum, however I do believe that this resolution sets a standard that is needed so that all members are heard equally. While I understand the resolution has been altered due to the issue with limiting speaking to two questions, I do have to throw it out there that limiting the number of questions per individual will cut down on the "superfluous", and "extraneous" problems as it will keep debate moving. Sorry I wasn't on earlier to discuss it, and as someone who has had my share of rules of order, this looks excellent. It is clear, concise, and with the exception of a missing space I saw in the "General Procedure for Handling a Motion" I fully endorse this with an AYE

C. A motion must normally be seconded by another member before it can be considered.Before the motion is restated by the chair, any member can rise, without waiting to be recognized, and suggest a modification of the wording to clarify the motion.

should read

C. A motion must normally be seconded by another member before it can be considered. Before the motion is restated by the chair, any member can rise, without waiting to be recognized, and suggest a modification of the wording to clarify the motion.

I thought I saw another missing space, but can't seem to find it right now.

My only question is: will this discussion take place on NS Forums or in some other manner?

[Elemental North]

Nay to 43. We have a great number of objections:
1. Regarding typical orders of business: It is highly burdensome to the Council to require them to go through a whole farce every time they want to anything. If there is only one thing to discuss; why not simply discuss that without extraneous, unnecessary, and bureaucratic rules?
2. Regarding the general rules of debate: It is quite ridiculous that members should have to be recognized by the chair; it will take forever; and by the time that the chair gets round to recognizing the delegation the delegation might have gone away; and equally to curtail speaking time is utterly ridiculous.
3. Why do we need all these confusing and pedantic and superfluous rules anyway? The chamber is very rarely out of order and whenever it is all we need to do is act with some common sense and according to normal parliamentary convention. Why should we lock ourselves in a straight-jacket like lunatics? I know a few historical delegations should perhaps have been consigned to lunatic asylums; but they were the exception and are certainly not the rule.

EDIT: Forgot to put that this was in regards to Resolution 43

While I do see what Libraria and Ausitoria is saying, as this would be much easier if this was a face-to-face debate rather than over a forum, however I do believe that this resolution sets a standard that is needed so that all members are heard equally. While I understand the resolution has been altered due to the issue with limiting speaking to two questions, I do have to throw it out there that limiting the number of questions per individual will cut down on the "superfluous", and "extraneous" problems as it will keep debate moving. Sorry I wasn't on earlier to discuss it, and as someone who has had my share of rules of order, this looks excellent. It is clear, concise, and with the exception of a missing space I saw in the "General Procedure for Handling a Motion" I fully endorse this with an AYE

C. A motion must normally be seconded by another member before it can be considered.Before the motion is restated by the chair, any member can rise, without waiting to be recognized, and suggest a modification of the wording to clarify the motion.

should read

C. A motion must normally be seconded by another member before it can be considered. Before the motion is restated by the chair, any member can rise, without waiting to be recognized, and suggest a modification of the wording to clarify the motion.

I thought I saw another missing space, but can't seem to find it right now.

My only question is: will this discussion take place on NS Forums or in some other manner?

It'll still be placed on the forums, also, thank you for the ringing endorsement! We appreciate it very much. This Resolution took a lot of research, and time to write out. So it's nice to see it is appreciated!

[Elemental North]

With a vote of:

6 AYES
2 ABSTENTIONS
1 NAY

The voting is closed. The Resolution numbered 43 is therefore ADOPTED.

The Rules therein said legislation will be placed into effect immediately.

It is so ordered.

[Bratislav]

Republic of Bratislav Dimitri Sledan SANCTION ACT ON THE REPUBLIC OF ORDIA Resolution 44 Given the continuous aggression of the Republic of Ordia against IFC Member State, Republic of Zernovyl, (http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=315046&start=150) and the recent incursion of Ordian Forces into the sovereign territory of Zernovyl, this sanction act serves to punish and deter Ordia from further aggression against Zernovyl and its sovereign territory. This bill recognizes that Zernovyl is not requesting IFC Military Assistance; and thus, the need for punishing Ordia on the political and economic front is of utmost important This Sanction Bill stipulates that all IFC Members: 1) Cut all diplomatic ties with the Republic of Ordia 2) Cut all economic ties with the Republic of Ordia and freeze any assets of Ordian Government officials 3) Strongly affirm the territorial integrity of the Republic of Zernovyl This bill also recommends that fellow IFC Members give financial and military assistance to the Republic of Zernovyl in its time of need. Signed, Dimitri Sledan [Dimitri Sledan, Republic of Bratislav]

[Zunkwentania]

(Image) Republic of Bratislav Dimitri Sledan SANCTION ACT ON THE REPUBLIC OF ORDIA Resolution 44 Given the continuous aggression of the Republic of Ordia against IFC Member State, Republic of Zernovyl, (http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=315046&start=150) and the recent incursion of Ordian Forces into the sovereign territory of Zernovyl, this sanction act serves to punish and deter Ordia from further aggression against Zernovyl and its sovereign territory. This bill recognizes that Zernovyl is not requesting IFC Military Assistance; and thus, the need for punishing Ordia on the political and economic front is of utmost important This Sanction Bill stipulates that all IFC Members: 1) Cut all diplomatic ties with the Republic of Ordia 2) Cut all economic ties with the Republic of Ordia and freeze any assets of Ordian Government officials 3) Put political pressure on Ordia in the international sphere and economic sphere 4) Strongly affirm the territorial integrity of the Republic of Zernovyl This bill also recommends that fellow IFC Members give financial and military assistance to the Republic of Zernovyl in its time of need. Signed, Dimitri Sledan [Dimitri Sledan, Republic of Bratislav]

"Please more clearly define 'political pressure' in the bill."

[Bratislav]

(Image) Republic of Bratislav Dimitri Sledan SANCTION ACT ON THE REPUBLIC OF ORDIA Resolution 44 Given the continuous aggression of the Republic of Ordia against IFC Member State, Republic of Zernovyl, (http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=315046&start=150) and the recent incursion of Ordian Forces into the sovereign territory of Zernovyl, this sanction act serves to punish and deter Ordia from further aggression against Zernovyl and its sovereign territory. This bill recognizes that Zernovyl is not requesting IFC Military Assistance; and thus, the need for punishing Ordia on the political and economic front is of utmost important This Sanction Bill stipulates that all IFC Members: 1) Cut all diplomatic ties with the Republic of Ordia 2) Cut all economic ties with the Republic of Ordia and freeze any assets of Ordian Government officials 3) Put political pressure on Ordia in the international sphere and economic sphere 4) Strongly affirm the territorial integrity of the Republic of Zernovyl This bill also recommends that fellow IFC Members give financial and military assistance to the Republic of Zernovyl in its time of need. Signed, Dimitri Sledan [Dimitri Sledan, Republic of Bratislav]

"Please more clearly define 'political pressure' in the bill."

"That part has been removed."

[Elemental North]

The Assembly will be called to order.

The approval of last meetings agenda will now commence.

In the last meeting of this Assembly:

- in a vote of 6-2-1, the Rules of the Floor were passed.
-The R.R.F. Cyber Division bill was postponed indefinitely.
-The meeting was closed at approximately 11:34 pm PST, on Monday, November 2, 2014-by default.

The Speaker recognizes the minutes as valid, and motions for them to be accepted. Is there a second to that motion?

[Novo Wagondia]

The Assembly will be called to order.

The approval of last meetings agenda will now commence.

In the last meeting of this Assembly:

- in a vote of 6-2-1, the Rules of the Floor were passed.
-The R.R.F. Cyber Division bill was postponed indefinitely.
-The meeting was closed at approximately 11:34 pm PST, on Monday, November 2, 2014-by default.

The Speaker recognizes the minutes as valid, and motions for them to be accepted. Is there a second to that motion?

The delegate from Wagondia, César Emilio, seconds this motion, and would like to request that a voting session commence for Res. #44

[Elemental North]

The Assembly will be called to order.

The approval of last meetings agenda will now commence.

In the last meeting of this Assembly:

- in a vote of 6-2-1, the Rules of the Floor were passed.
-The R.R.F. Cyber Division bill was postponed indefinitely.
-The meeting was closed at approximately 11:34 pm PST, on Monday, November 2, 2014-by default.

The Speaker recognizes the minutes as valid, and motions for them to be accepted. Is there a second to that motion?

The delegate from Wagondia, César Emilio, seconds this motion, and would like to request that a voting session commence for Res. #44

The Second is noted. The agenda is accepted.

Seeing as there are no reports from ad hoc committees, or committees of any sort, and no officers currently have any statements to make, we can thus skip to new business, where your motion would lay Delegate. The motion is recognized by the Speaker.

The motion to place Resolution 44 into immediate voting is placed to the floor for a second. Be there one?

[New Roma Republic]

The Assembly will be called to order.

The approval of last meetings agenda will now commence.

In the last meeting of this Assembly:

- in a vote of 6-2-1, the Rules of the Floor were passed.
-The R.R.F. Cyber Division bill was postponed indefinitely.
-The meeting was closed at approximately 11:34 pm PST, on Monday, November 2, 2014-by default.

The Speaker recognizes the minutes as valid, and motions for them to be accepted. Is there a second to that motion?

"Excuse me, one moment please, why is my nations Resolution postponed indefinitely?"

[Elemental North]

The Assembly will be called to order.

The approval of last meetings agenda will now commence.

In the last meeting of this Assembly:

- in a vote of 6-2-1, the Rules of the Floor were passed.
-The R.R.F. Cyber Division bill was postponed indefinitely.
-The meeting was closed at approximately 11:34 pm PST, on Monday, November 2, 2014-by default.

The Speaker recognizes the minutes as valid, and motions for them to be accepted. Is there a second to that motion?

"Excuse me, one moment please, why is my nations Resolution postponed indefinitely?"

"You are motioning for a Point of Order, Delegate, and are out of order until the previous motion has been taken care of."

[New Roma Republic]

"Excuse me, one moment please, why is my nations Resolution postponed indefinitely?"

"You are motioning for a Point of Order, Delegate, and are out of order until the previous motion has been taken care of."

"I apologize about being out of order. I digress."

[Elemental North]

"You are motioning for a Point of Order, Delegate, and are out of order until the previous motion has been taken care of."

"I apologize about being out of order. I digress."

Noted. The Speaker thanks the Delegation for his apology. Now is there a second to the motion at hand?

[New Roma Republic]

"I apologize about being out of order. I digress."

Noted. The Speaker thanks the Delegation for his apology. Now is there a second to the motion at hand?

"I shall Second the motion."

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

On a point of Parliamentary Inquiry, Mr. Speaker; how are you to recognize someone to speak without them asking if they can speak first; and if you do recognize someone to speak and then someone else starts speaking; do they have to start over again; and can anyone else speak in the meantime; and if so, would it be in order for me to raise a point of order against myself; and if so, can we please end this appalling nonsense as soon as possible?

[Elemental North]

On a point of Parliamentary Inquiry, Mr. Speaker; how are you to recognize someone to speak without them asking if they can speak first; and if you do recognize someone to speak and then someone else starts speaking; do they have to start over again; and can anyone else speak in the meantime; and if so, would it be in order for me to raise a point of order against myself; and if so, can we please end this appalling nonsense as soon as possible?

The Vice President is recognized for Parliamentary Inquiry. I should state this here and now, perfect chance to do so-the recognition to speak is implied automatically-we can move to amend the rules later, if you'd like. Also, if someone else starts speaking, then they must simply wait, like the Delegate from New Roma did, to have their business recognized by the Speaker. And no, you may not raise a point of order against yourself until the current motion is off the table.

The second is noted. Resolution 44 is placed into voting, unless there is an objection?

[Novo Wagondia]

On a point of Parliamentary Inquiry, Mr. Speaker; how are you to recognize someone to speak without them asking if they can speak first; and if you do recognize someone to speak and then someone else starts speaking; do they have to start over again; and can anyone else speak in the meantime; and if so, would it be in order for me to raise a point of order against myself; and if so, can we please end this appalling nonsense as soon as possible?

The delegate from Wagondia seconds this, seeing as there is an excess of formal minutia, namely the recognition process, which the delegate feels will muddle the flow and freedom of debate

The delegate would also like to record a vote of AYE for Res. # 44

[Zunkwentania]

On a point of Parliamentary Inquiry, Mr. Speaker; how are you to recognize someone to speak without them asking if they can speak first; and if you do recognize someone to speak and then someone else starts speaking; do they have to start over again; and can anyone else speak in the meantime; and if so, would it be in order for me to raise a point of order against myself; and if so, can we please end this appalling nonsense as soon as possible?

The delegate from Wagondia seconds this, seeing as there is an excess of formal minutia, namely the recognition process, which the delegate feels will muddle the flow and freedom of debate

"The Zunkwentanian delegation thirds this, for similar reasons. We need less bureaucracy, not more."

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

"May I object? Continuing my point of Parliamentary enquiry, is it not the case that if we cannot debate more than one subject at a time then those of us who do not have time to wait for the gaps between motions will never be able to speak, except by raising points of Parliamentary enquiry? Is this not what we warned this house about?"

[Elemental North]

"May I object? Continuing my point of Parliamentary enquiry, is it not the case that if we cannot debate more than one subject at a time then those of us who do not have time to wait for the gaps between motions will never be able to speak, except by raising points of Parliamentary enquiry? Is this not what we warned this house about?"

The objections are noted. And I would like to remind the Delegations that the bill, allows for the Rules of the Floor to be amended, and amended is defined in the bill, by a simple 2/3 majority vote. You propose an amendment to the rules, get 2/3 of this Assembly to vote to accept it, and the Speaker will gladly adjust. The rules are a guiding stone, and whilst meant to be followed they are not absolute when it comes to a majority wishing to change them.

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

"On a point of information, how can or could or did a majority legally pass a rule which requires a supermajority of two-thirds to be amended instead of the invariable simple majority that has always been required by this chamber? I can find absolutely no provision for such a rule in any previous rules?"

[Elemental North]

"On a point of information, how can or could or did a majority legally pass a rule which requires a supermajority of two-thirds to be amended instead of the invariable simple majority that has always been required by this chamber? I can find absolutely no provision for such a rule in any previous rules?"

"I'm sorry, could you please clarify Mr. Vice President? I'm a bit confused as to what you're asking."

[Zunkwentania]

"On a point of information, how can or could or did a majority legally pass a rule which requires a supermajority of two-thirds to be amended instead of the invariable simple majority that has always been required by this chamber? I can find absolutely no provision for such a rule in any previous rules?"

"I'm sorry, could you please clarify Mr. Vice President? I'm a bit confused as to what you're asking."

"As in, a 51% majority could have passed this bill, which requires a 2/3 supermajority to overrule."

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

[OOC: Pending retcon. This was Resolution 45.]

[Zunkwentania]

The Delegation from Zunkwentania, although out of order (but who isn't?) is quite correct.

On a point of Parliamentary privilege, we would like to have this debated on post haste:

(Image) Libraria and Ausitoria His Grace Alexias Stella Parliamentary Procedures Act [Resolution Number: 45] Concerned at the immense delay imposed by the cumbersome regulations passed from Resolution no. 43, Observing that the resolution is far too cumbersome to be easily amended, and lacks any sort of division into subsections, Hereby repeals Resolution no. 43 and decides: Section 1: Basic Parliamentary Principles a) The council has legislative supremacy and sovereignty over the coalition. b) Any decision by a majority of the Council is the decision of Parliament, wherever or however it may be reached; and any past decision contrary to the most recent decision is invalid. c) The Council may set whatever conditions it likes for membership of the Council; and all nations in the Coalition shall continue to automatically be granted membership. d) The Council may not bind a future majority under any conditions whatever. e) Councils are advised to be sensible. Section 2: The Conduct of Members a) Members, subject to future limitations, have the right to communicate with other Council members whenever someone else finishes and may communicate on any subject they like or however they like except for personal remarks. b) Members are advised to be sensible. Section 3: The Conduct of Meetings a) Members may from time to time elect a Speaker. Should there be no speaker, the Prime Minister shall function in that capacity. b) Elections shall be held by the Secretary-General or any other person demanded by the Senate, whenever more than three Senators demand such an election. During the period of an election, which should be long enough for grievances to be aired; the Secretary-General or any other person demanded shall maintain order. c) The Speaker may maintain order by any measures he regards as necessary, including formulating rules pursuant to this Resolution. d) The Speaker is advised to consult with the Council and revise such measures frequently according to popular demand. Signed, [His Grace Alexias Stella, Libraria and Ausitoria]

"I apologize for being out of order. But I wholeheartedly endorse this bill."