NS Parliament Chamber [IC]

[Alozia]

"Mister Speaker, why are members casting their votes now when the division has not commenced?"

Filip shrugged. "No clue. The Honourable Members should be reminded that we aren't voting on a bill right now. By 'considering the bill' I meant debating it."

[Alozia]

House Floor - Chair

Filip sighed. "If Members do not wish to debate the bill we will proceed to a vote. Lock the door!"

Equal Opportunities Amendment
Author: Austin Miller (NPP)
Sponsors: Stefan Almeda (NPP), Lance Darrow (FPP)

---

---

In order to amend EENDA to protect cultural schools and to ensure every student has the right to a strong education, no matter their race/sex/color

BE IT THEREFORE ENACTED, as follows:

---

---

§1 - Repealing Harmful EENDA Provisions

1. Section 3b shall be amended to read “Public schools are encouraged to have a diversity plan and to pursue diversity.”
2. Section 3c shall be repealed and rendered null and void.
3. This law shall go into effect immediately upon its passage.

Code: Select all

[color=#008000]Aye:[/color] [ ]
[color=#FF0000]No:[/color] [ ]
[color=grey]Abstain[/color]

[Merni]

Anna Nilsson mutters indistinctly about the need for such a fuss if we were going to vote on it anyway.

Aye: [ ]
No: [ ]
Abstain [X]

[Borovan entered the region as he]

Aye: [ ]
No: [X]
Abstain

[Nokelon]

Anton Lindberg considers the bill at hand, but asks one final question: "What Section 3 does this bill in fact amend?"

[Nokelon]

Aye: []
No: [X]
Abstain

[Agarntrop]

Aye: [ ]
No: [X]
Abstain

[Nova Anglicana]

Aye: [ ]
No: [X]
Abstain

Salomon rather vigorously cast his "No" vote against the attempt to water down one of his prize achievements.

[Van Hool Islands]

Aye: [ ]
No: [X]
Abstain

[Lazarene Ryccia]

Aye: [X]
No: [ ]
Abstain

[Kowani]

Aye: [ ]
No: [ ]
Abstain [X]

[Pere Housh Alpha]

Aye: [X]
No: []
Abstain []

[Vedastia]

Aye: [ ]
No: [ ]
Abstain: [X]

[Rebels and Saints]

Aye: [X]
No: [ ]
Abstain

[Alozia]

"Order!"

"The voting period has concluded and the clerks have provided the tallies.

Ayes to the right: 3
Noes to the left: 5
Abstentions: 3

The noes have it. The noes have it! Unlock the doors!

The House will now consider the Charities Protection Act. The debate period shall last for 24 hours."

Charity Protection Act
Author: Stefan Almeda
Sponsors: Sara Nygaard and Austin Miller

---

---

An addition to the tax code that ensures charities and non-profit organisations are not catagorised like businesses.

BE IT THEREFORE ENACTED, as follows:

---

---

§1 - Definitions

1. Profit is to be defined as a gain that is allocated to an individual of an organisation.
2. Charities and non-profits are to be defined as funds collected that are not profitable for any member of the organisation
3. Donations are to be defined as, funds given to an organisation, that uses said funds to benefit their cause or pay for operation costs

§2 - Procedure

1. Organisations must register to be eligible to not pay any taxes on collected funds
2. Once registered, no organisations may not intentionally or negligently violate the requirements in Section 3
3. Citizens of Saint Hilda who donate directly to a non-profit organisation or charity are eligible, for the denomination to be removed from their yearly income
4. Those filing a donation must provide the original sum of income, and indicate the sum donated separately
5. Non-profit organisations a receipt to those who have donated to them.
6. Those indicating a donation must provide the receipt with their indication of the donation.
   /list]
   
   §3 - Requirements for Eligibility and Maintaining Status
   
   1. No funds may be allocated towards any individual for profit
   2. No funds may be allocated other than to their cause or for the cost of operations

[Agarntrop]

"Mr Speaker, I support this act as a common sense bill and members should. However, I will endeavour to amend it in order to provide set legal minimum and maximum penalties for the prohibited acts under section 3."

[Yaruqo]

Rosalía Aguado, the newly minted MP of Santa Catarina, looked over the bill and noticed a slight grammatical error which, in her view, could have led to some confusion in its implementation should the bill pass without amendment."Mr. Speaker, I would like to propose an Amendment to Section 2, Subsection E., to say instead 'Non-profit organisations must provide a receipt to those who have donated to them.'"

[The Archipelago Territory]

Rosalía Aguado, the newly minted MP of Santa Catarina, looked over the bill and noticed a slight grammatical error which, in her view, could have led to some confusion in its implementation should the bill pass without amendment."Mr. Speaker, I would like to propose an Amendment to Section 2, Subsection E., to say instead 'Non-profit organisations must provide a receipt to those who have donated to them.'"

“Madame Speaker, I second this.”

[Sensorland]

Quietly taking his seat, Matthias Holm examines the bill.

"Mister speaker, I am concerned about the definitions put forth in this bill. The definition given for 'profit' is rather vague and broad. The definition given for 'charities' and 'non-profits' are confusing, being given as a type of fund rather than a type of organization. Definition c is just written confusingly."

"Furthermore, mister speaker, I find that this bill is overly restrictive. For instance, section 3 completely prohibits funds allocated for profit, which may, per the definitions, prevent charitable organizations from being able to pay their members. For these reasons, I will be unable to vote in favor of the current version of this bill should it come to a vote."

[Kowani]

Seč raised his eyebrows, shocked at the proposal that had been put in front of him.

“Mister Speaker, I have multiple problems with this bill, beyond those aforementioned by my esteemed colleagues. Section 2, subsection a does not state with whom a charity must register, nor what requirements must be fulfilled in order to qualify.
Section 2, subsection b does not explain in any way how this would be enforced. As a matter of fact l, I fail to see any mention of an agency or other government program dedicated to preventing fraud. For that matter, I see no penalties for what would happen if one did commit fraud. Section 2, subsection b contains a double negative, which would, in fact, oblige charities or other nonprofit organizations to violate this bill itself.”

[Merni]

Seč raised his eyebrows, shocked at the proposal that had been put in front of him.

“Mister Speaker, I have multiple problems with this bill, beyond those aforementioned by my esteemed colleagues. Section 2, subsection a does not state with whom a charity must register, nor what requirements must be fulfilled in order to qualify.
Section 2, subsection b does not explain in any way how this would be enforced. As a matter of fact l, I fail to see any mention of an agency or other government program dedicated to preventing fraud. For that matter, I see no penalties for what would happen if one did commit fraud. Section 2, subsection b contains a double negative, which would, in fact, oblige charities or other nonprofit organizations to violate this bill itself.”

"Mister Speaker, I agree with all the above points. In addition, I would like to point out that definitions 1a and 1b are quite vague and insufficient, especially the latter. Also, sections 2c and 2d do not specify that their provisions are for the purposes of income tax, and do not say to whom the documents would have to be submitted. This bill, while well-intentioned, is not fit for purpose."

[Sensorland]

"Mister speaker, given the issues that my colleagues and I have mentioned regarding this bill, I believe we should move on to the next bill for consideration."

[Lazarene Ryccia]

"Mister Speaker", said Antonius de Montrouge "Section 2.b appears to have a grammatical error. As it presently reads, it says: 'Once registered, no organisations may not intentionally or negligently violate the requirements in Section 3'. This language forces organizations to violate the requirements in Section 3. Thus, I propose the following amendment: 'Once registered, no organisations may not intentionally or negligently violate the requirements in Section 3'. Moreover, Section 2.c seems to have a comma out of place. I propose the following amendment: 'Citizens of Saint Hilda who donate directly to a non-profit organisation or charity are eligible, for the denomination to be removed from their yearly income'"

"I concur with other honourable members of this Parliament that is bill is insufficient and faulty, despite its good intentions"

[Yaruqo]

"Mister Speaker", said Antonius de Montrouge "Section 2.b appears to have a grammatical error. As it presently reads, it says: 'Once registered, no organisations may not intentionally or negligently violate the requirements in Section 3'. This language forces organizations to violate the requirements in Section 3. Thus, I propose the following amendment: 'Once registered, no organisations may not intentionally or negligently violate the requirements in Section 3'. Moreover, Section 2.c seems to have a comma out of place. I propose the following amendment: 'Citizens of Saint Hilda who donate directly to a non-profit organisation or charity are eligible, for the denomination to be removed from their yearly income'"

"I concur with other honourable members of this Parliament that is bill is insufficient and faulty, despite its good intentions"

“I second both proposed amendments.”

[Merni]

"Mister Speaker", said Antonius de Montrouge "Section 2.b appears to have a grammatical error. As it presently reads, it says: 'Once registered, no organisations may not intentionally or negligently violate the requirements in Section 3'. This language forces organizations to violate the requirements in Section 3. Thus, I propose the following amendment: 'Once registered, no organisations may not intentionally or negligently violate the requirements in Section 3'. Moreover, Section 2.c seems to have a comma out of place. I propose the following amendment: 'Citizens of Saint Hilda who donate directly to a non-profit organisation or charity are eligible, for the denomination to be removed from their yearly income'"

"I concur with other honourable members of this Parliament that is bill is insufficient and faulty, despite its good intentions"

"I second both amendments, although many more would be needed to salvage this bill."