Aurentine Constitutional Convention [NSG Senate]

[Great Nepal]

Great... so thoughts on this text outlawing rights and responsibilities of provinces?

"Outlawing?" Do you mean, outlining?

Damn auto correct.

[Jetan]

Well, since you even included the possibility of mid term changes, from my point of view, yes.

Then... we can drink now? I mean... I've been drinking this entire time, sir... but I'm perfectly willing to pour another.

Sure.

[Distruzio]

"Outlawing?" Do you mean, outlining?

Damn auto correct.

In that case, I oppose the flag bits. That's for legislation. It shouldn't be in the constitution.

[Great Nepal]

Well, since you even included the possibility of mid term changes, from my point of view, yes.

Then... we can drink now? I mean... I've been drinking this entire time, sir... but I'm perfectly willing to pour another.

So, we are upholding long political tradition of agreeing to important things when drunk?

In that case, I oppose the flag bits. That's for legislation. It shouldn't be in the constitution.

As I said, I dont mind that bit much but I think that will show supremacy of federal authority over the state...

[Distruzio]

Then... we can drink now? I mean... I've been drinking this entire time, sir... but I'm perfectly willing to pour another.

So, we are upholding long political tradition of agreeing to important things when drunk?

Abso-*hic*-lutely.

In that case, I oppose the flag bits. That's for legislation. It shouldn't be in the constitution.

As I said, I dont mind that bit much but I think that will show supremacy of federal authority over the state...

True enough. And I don't disagree with the substance. I just don't know that the constitution should stand in the place of legislation.

[Jetan]

Then... we can drink now? I mean... I've been drinking this entire time, sir... but I'm perfectly willing to pour another.

So, we are upholding long political tradition of agreeing to important things when drunk?

Hey, traditions are meant to be upheld, aren't they?

[Welsh Cowboy]

Then... we can drink now? I mean... I've been drinking this entire time, sir... but I'm perfectly willing to pour another.

So, we are upholding long political tradition of agreeing to important things when drunk?

In that case, I oppose the flag bits. That's for legislation. It shouldn't be in the constitution.

As I said, I dont mind that bit much but I think that will show supremacy of federal authority over the state...

Why not just write a clause that says: 'the federal government is supreme over the provinces"? Although isn't that essentially already in the text?

[Distruzio]

So, we are upholding long political tradition of agreeing to important things when drunk?

Hey, traditions are meant to be upheld, aren't they?

Of course. I'm a monarchist. I would know.

[Maklohi Vai]

I say that we should get this set for the record:

- All provinces should have an unicameral legislature with all of it's members fairly elected under a proportional system.
- Each province may establish it's own judicial system, but appointments and the conducting of procedures are to be done by the Ministry of Justice (please do this, otherwise some provinces will elect biased judges; the Judicial Act ensures that proper professionals conduct the proceedings, not a politically biased guy). All provinces are required to follow the principle of civil law and codify them However, courtrooms may be established by the province.
- Each province shall have a chief executive (titled Prefect/Governor/King/whatever), who may be appointed via a hereditary or through proportional form of election, and a Council of Ministers (headed by a Premier/Prime Minister/Chief Minister/First Minister/whatever) which relies on the confidence of the provincial legislature.
- Provinces shall have responsibility for Education, Housing, Strategic planning, Transport, Roads, Fire, Health Care (we have universal health care, get over it), Social services, Libraries, Leisure and recreation, Waste collection, Waste disposal, Local constabularies, and Environmental health, to name a few things. It is required to follow oversight, laws and regulations as set out by institutes of the national government.
- The supremacy of the national government is to be recognised by all provinces.
- In regards to taxation, how much freedom should provinces have?

No hereditary process for provincial leaders, period. If it's an elected monarch, I'll grumble but be ok with it. Hereditary processes are completely out. Also, you have it's/its mistakes.

[Distruzio]

I say that we should get this set for the record:

- All provinces should have an unicameral legislature with all of it's members fairly elected under a proportional system.
- Each province may establish it's own judicial system, but appointments and the conducting of procedures are to be done by the Ministry of Justice (please do this, otherwise some provinces will elect biased judges; the Judicial Act ensures that proper professionals conduct the proceedings, not a politically biased guy). All provinces are required to follow the principle of civil law and codify them However, courtrooms may be established by the province.
- Each province shall have a chief executive (titled Prefect/Governor/King/whatever), who may be appointed via a hereditary or through proportional form of election, and a Council of Ministers (headed by a Premier/Prime Minister/Chief Minister/First Minister/whatever) which relies on the confidence of the provincial legislature.
- Provinces shall have responsibility for Education, Housing, Strategic planning, Transport, Roads, Fire, Health Care (we have universal health care, get over it), Social services, Libraries, Leisure and recreation, Waste collection, Waste disposal, Local constabularies, and Environmental health, to name a few things. It is required to follow oversight, laws and regulations as set out by institutes of the national government.
- The supremacy of the national government is to be recognised by all provinces.
- In regards to taxation, how much freedom should provinces have?

No hereditary process for provincial leaders, period. If it's an elected monarch, I'll grumble but be ok with it. Hereditary processes are completely out. Also, you have it's/its mistakes.

No longer an issue. I agree to such terms. I anticipate OT's assent as well.

[Maklohi Vai]

No hereditary process for provincial leaders, period. If it's an elected monarch, I'll grumble but be ok with it. Hereditary processes are completely out. Also, you have it's/its mistakes.

No longer an issue. I agree to such terms. I anticipate OT's assent as well.

Again, I'm not happy about it, but if they're elected fairly and it is the wish of the majority of the province, I would only be harming the democratic process if I did not allow that to happen.

[Great Nepal]

So, we are upholding long political tradition of agreeing to important things when drunk?

Abso-*hic*-lutely.

As I said, I dont mind that bit much but I think that will show supremacy of federal authority over the state...

True enough. And I don't disagree with the substance. I just don't know that the constitution should stand in the place of legislation.

All right, I will remove that bit... will write a normal bill instead.

Hey, traditions are meant to be upheld, aren't they?

Of course. I'm a monarchist. I would know.

If something goes wrong here, we are blaming it on you for pushing tradition of agreeing while drinking... *asks waiter for another round*

[Britanno]

Can so done give me the text agreed on by Distruzio, Great Nepal and others here. That way I can know what I'm supposed to be debating. I read GN's original one, what changes have been made?

Sorry about this, I'm in merging negotiations.

[Great Nepal]

Can so done give me the text agreed on by Distruzio, Great Nepal and others here. That way I can know what I'm supposed to be debating. I read GN's original one, what changes have been made?
Sorry about this, I'm in merging negotiations.

We have agreed to have a elective monarch in provinces, if people of province want it like that however when current monarch dies, next one will have to go through elections and to remove the flag bits from constitution...
Updated text that we are debating currently:

In Regards to Provinces
1. Aurentina shall be divided into provinces which may not be altered unless by ammendment of this constitution, these divisions shall be in an attached document labelled "attachment 3(1)".
2. Provinces shall have powers stated in this clause, and no further unless authorised by presiding federal government for the term of the said federal government.

a) Legislation: Provinces shall have right to pass laws which shall be in effect within the said province provided the said laws do not violate federal laws, this constitution or any applicable directive issued by presiding federal government. If any new directives is issued by presiding federal government which contradicts the provincial laws, contradicting provincial laws are to be suspended for duration of effectiveness of federal governmental directive. Through new laws, provinces may create a crime however these crimes may not be over a delict offence.
b) Executive branch: Provinces shall have right to create an executive branch, lead by an elected chief executive who may be named as per provincial constitution. Chief executive must be elected either from provincial parliament or directly by electorate themselves.
c) Social security: Provinces shall have complete authority over any social security payments in accordance to federal regulations. Social security shall include any form of payment paid by the state to a citizen to assist in the said citizen's livelihood including universal credit, social housing, universal healthcare.
d) Housing: Provinces shall have complete authority over housing regulations provided they do not violate federal laws, federal executive government directives or present clear and present danger to the welfare of the entire federation.
e) Energy: Provinces shall have complete authority over energy production provided, they are able to meet energy requirements of their province. If the province fails to meet energy requirement of their province for period of two weeks continuously or ten weeks over period of a year, federal government may suspend this right and take over production of energy.
f) Amenities: Provinces shall have complete authority other amenities (fire service, public transport, libraries, leisure and recreation, waste collection and waste disposal) unless they are deemed unable to provide any of these by a federal commission in which case, the federal government may suspend this right and take over.
g) Environment: Provinces shall have complete authority over environment of the province and any beautifications carried out within it.
h) Taxation: Provinces shall have right to levy total of five forms of taxation, each one not exceeding 10%.
i) Sub division: Provinces shall have right to create further sub divisions within their province and delegate it with powers, not exceeding the powers province government has. However, provincial government shall be ultimately responsible for any actions carried out by sub divisions they created.

3. 2. Provinces shall have responsibilities stated in this clause, and no further unless authorised by the senate by amending this document.

a) All provinces are to have a elected, unicameral legislature.
b) All provinces must respect and recognise supremacy of the federal government at all times.
c) Abide by federal laws passed by senate and directives issued by federal government at all times.

[Britanno]

An objection to the current text must be stated in the next 24 hours or I am forced to presume that everyone agrees to it.

[Maklohi Vai]

I like the proposed text in principle, but I don't like how vague the taxation section is. What were you thinking about for that?

[Yanalia]

Seeing as the monarchists seem to have been able to achieve their goal to put in their policy on a local level, socialist provinces should have this ability as well.

[Jetan]

Seeing as the monarchists seem to have been able to achieve their goal to put in their policy on a local level, socialist provinces should have this ability as well.

You can elect a monarch if you want to.

[Great Nepal]

I like the proposed text in principle, but I don't like how vague the taxation section is. What were you thinking about for that?

I wanted to avoid specifying exactly what taxes could be levied while preventing someone declaring 100% tax on everything!!!, so I thought 5 forms of taxes, each one capped at 10% each couldn't do much harm even when taken up by extremists.

[Yanalia]

Seeing as the monarchists seem to have been able to achieve their goal to put in their policy on a local level, socialist provinces should have this ability as well.

You can elect a monarch if you want to.

I meant the ability to implement nationally unpopular policy in areas where it is locally popular.

[Britanno]

Seeing as the monarchists seem to have been able to achieve their goal to put in their policy on a local level, socialist provinces should have this ability as well.

What kind of government do you want?

[Great Nepal]

Seeing as the monarchists seem to have been able to achieve their goal to put in their policy on a local level, socialist provinces should have this ability as well.

You can elect a monarch if you want to.

Or elected Premier for life...

[Yanalia]

Seeing as the monarchists seem to have been able to achieve their goal to put in their policy on a local level, socialist provinces should have this ability as well.

What kind of government do you want?

A socialist one. Economic policy, particularly property ownership rights, would be a major factor here.

[Jetan]

You can elect a monarch if you want to.

I meant the ability to implement nationally unpopular policy in areas where it is locally popular.

What do you mean with that? Note that this is in regards to the executive of the province, nothibg else. Do you mean you want to set up a council to fulfil that role?

[Jetan]

What kind of government do you want?

A socialist one. Economic policy, particularly property ownership rights, would be a major factor here.

This is only about the province executive. The ownership rights issue has already been debated.