Ainslie wrote:I find it difficult to see why we require a Secretary-General beyond the idea of an administrator and a 'head' of various committees. Perhaps multiple commissioners may be more favourable than a set leader. A CU 'leader' would further portray to the rest of the Isles that we act as one nation - which is quite the contrary. This is part of the reason I believe Ahnslens are uneasy about this union. I also do not believe in a few nations looking to create this sort of change and motion in the union. Ainslie is not in favour of having a single 'chairperson' of the commission, nor will we be in support of a Secretary-General in the functions that we believe they will serve under the current proposals.
Summing up, chief administrator and commissioners we support, creating sole figures in charge of so much, we are not.
Frustrated, Entemont tried to respond as quickly as he could. "If you want multiple commissioners, submit an amendment to the Treaty of Coventry. Other than that, this is the procedures that the Commission will be following — for the sake of the stability of this organisation, at least stick around for the vote on Secretary-General. Afterwards, you can advocate your pluralist leadership style all you want. However, attempting to obstruct our already tight schedule is counterproductive and in serious bad taste."