NSG Senate Coffee Shop: We don't serve decaf

[Ikania]

I do not want to see single parents with young children forced to look for work,

Alright, the rest of this post is fine, but you might have phrased that a bit wrong, or else the banana welfare state is stronger than I ever imagined.

[Maklohi Vai]

I do not want to see single parents with young children forced to look for work,

Alright, the rest of this post is fine, but you might have phrased that a bit wrong, or else the banana welfare state is stronger than I ever imagined.

That's what happens when you insert your subordinate clause where it shouldn't be inserted, if you know what I mean.

[Atlanticatia]

I do not want to see single parents with young children forced to look for work,

Alright, the rest of this post is fine, but you might have phrased that a bit wrong, or else the banana welfare state is stronger than I ever imagined.

Current single parents receiving a benefit don't have to look for work if their child is aged under 14.

I don't want to see single parents on the benefit forced to look for work. Work-testing single parent beneficiaries with young children would be cruel.

[Great Nepal]

Okay so with that terrible welfare cut act I'd an idea (well technically one about reusing a old from last senate)... Replace most benefits with one universal benefit which is enough for person to fulfil their basic needs - amount of which is dynamically determined by independent commission. Anyone who earns below that income and has less than x in savings gets subsidy to that amount.
As for exact benefits, I was thinking following to be excluded in present and future: state pensions, any contribution based benefits, child benefit upto two child, disability and sickness benefit. I'll write a bill ideally by tomorrow (might take bit longer) but just wanted to throw it out there to test the waters overnight before I start anything.

So you'd essentially combine the Housing Allowance, Unemployment Allowance, and Single Parent Allowance into one benefit? (These are the three means-tested, working-age benefits excluding the ones you mentioned.) How would that work?

This would also be means tested - essentially implemented as a minimum income. Lets take few examples and assume income needed to live (cost of fully meeting one's basic needs - adequate housing, healthy food plus cost of transport, utilities, internet etc) is £20,0000 per year for an adult and £5000 for a child (this will be set regionally by committee of experts in reality).

• An adult without dependants who is unemployed, has minimal savings and actively searching for work.
  
  Since they don't have any income government provides them with £20,0000 per year which should be enough to live on.
• An adult without dependants who is only employed part time and thus earns £8,000 per year.
  
  Since their income is £12,0000 per year below minimum expenditure, and they are working get £12,000 per year + 20% bonus for actually working so £13200 from the government ending up with income of £22,400 per year.
• A single parent with two children receiving £6000 child support from other parent.
  
  Their minimum income would be £30,000 so they'd get £24,000 + whatever child benefit is for two children (if they were a couple child's minimum expenditure would be equally divided up between two parents).
• A single parent with three kids receiving £9000 child support from other parent.
  
  Their minimum income would be £30,000 so they'd get £21,000 + whatever child benefit is for three children (if they were a couple child's minimum expenditure would be equally divided up between two parents).
• A single parent with two children earning £10,000 from work and £6000 from child support
  
  Their minimum expenditure is £30,000 so they'd get £16,800 from government (20% bonus for working) + child benefits ending with £32,800 + child benefits.
• A disabled individual without dependants with no source of income except disability benefits.
  
  They'd get £20,000 + disability.

I see two issues:
a) Single Parent Allowance pays a lot more than Unemployment Allowance.
b) Housing Allowance is based on the claimant's rent, so it's hard to have a fixed amount.
c) Work requirements are different for each benefits. For example, Unemployment Allowance claimants are required to look for work, but Single Parent Allowance claimants don't have to look for work if their child is aged under 14.

I do not want to see single parents with young children forced to look for work,

They won't, there will be requirement to actively seek work provided claimant is fit and able to do so or face upto 20% sanction. Having young kids could fall under this exemption (although 14 years seems bit too old; I'll look at what other nations limits though). Of course free childcare combined with 20% in work bonus means anyone who does does work will get extra income.

or see anyone on the benefit lose money from their housing allowance or benefit payment.

I'm not going to say no one will see their benifits income reduced; some will see it fall while others will see it rise. But no one will get money with which they can't fulfil their basic and some secondary needs and those in work will always get more than if they were unemployed. I'm not expecting this to save any significant savings from benifits payout (actually since it'll be automatically adjusted for purchasing power, bill will increase annually), but rather from administration as we can now get tax office to handle most significant portion of benifit claims as they have person's income and wealth readily available - just like tax is automatically levied from bank account, minimum income is automatically paid out without having to deal with most of paperwork - so that should see efficiency savings rise up significantly. Additionally it ensures a basic fairness (in so far as work should always pay more than benefits) as well as ensuring that no one earns less than they need to live on.

[Maklohi Vai]

I will be writing a Presidential communique soon-ish. May possibly post here.

[Stormvag]

What's everyone debating on right now?

[Davincia]

What's everyone debating on right now?

---

Euthanasia Regulation Act

Authors: Abraham Blakesman (CRP) and Vladimiro Huarcaya (NDP)
Sponsors: Jeffrey Lewis (FDP), Boris Johnson (LDP), Tarquin Biscuitbarrel (CRP), Carl Rhodes (CRP), Pedro Ramirez III (CRP)
To uphold standards of decency in the practice of healthcare.

---

Section 1: Definitions

Euthanasia- The killing of a patient suffering from a presumably incurable disease or condition.
Coma- A state of prolonged unconsciousness over an indefinite period of time.
Alzheimer's Disease- Slow deterioration of brain functions, including memory skills and motor functions.
Late Cancer- Point in which a tumor’s development cannot be averted by modern healthcare or medicinal practices.
Disease- A disorder present in a human being, from which harmful symptoms can originate.

Section 2: Regulation for Hospitals

A. No hospital shall have the legal ability to kill patients suffering from entirely curable/treatable illnesses. Conditions for which euthanasia is permissible includes, but is not limited to: comas lasting longer than two months, Alzheimer’s Disease, and late stages of any cancerous disease.
B. Families and/or acquaintances of a patient afflicted with a permanent illness must be informed of all healthcare options, when the possibility of euthanasia is recommended.
C. A minimum of three doctors are to have insight whenever a patient seeks out euthanasia, or when another doctor recommends its use, to offset the chance of misuse on the sick.

Section 3: Consent of the Afflicted

A) Healthcare providers who euthanize patients without the following requirements: consent from the patient themselves, or from their families if consent cannot be given, approval of two other physicians, as well as corresponding legal confirmation/documentation are warranted for arrest by law enforcement.
B) Any patient, before which euthanasia can be applied, must have the option to decline or to seek care in a hospice whenever it is requested.
C) Medicinal euthanasia used outside a hospital or hospice, and has not been properly registered within those institutions, may be considered a tool of murder if used for such purposes.
D) To determine which diseases make an patient eligible for euthanasia, a council will be created and composed of medical experts and ethicists, operating under the Ministry of Health.

First Amendment to the Protection of Religious Freedom for Minors Act

|Author: Abraham Blakesman (CRP)
|Sponsors: Maximilian Jakobiner (CNP),Willem de Ruyter (CRP), Carl Rhodes (CRP), Pedro Ramirez III (CRP)|

An act to defend the spiritual sensitivities of parents across the nation.

---

§1. Repeal

a. §2-1 of the amended bill is to be rendered null and void.
b. §2-3 will be amended to only apply to public education, whereas parents may not limit a minor's education on religion/irreligion if it is being taught within a public school.

Not these in particular, but would you consider sponsoring them?

[Stormvag]

I'll have to read more in to what your amending but I certainly will not support your euthanasia bill.

[Davincia]

I'll have to read more in to what your amending but I certainly will not support your euthanasia bill.

https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopi ... #p25130564
That is what I'll be amending.

[New Zepuha]

I will sponsor both.

[Monkeykind]

What's everyone debating on right now?

---

Euthanasia Regulation Act

Authors: Abraham Blakesman (CRP) and Vladimiro Huarcaya (NDP)
Sponsors: Jeffrey Lewis (FDP), Boris Johnson (LDP), Tarquin Biscuitbarrel (CRP), Carl Rhodes (CRP), Pedro Ramirez III (CRP)
To uphold standards of decency in the practice of healthcare.

---

Section 1: Definitions

Euthanasia- The killing of a patient suffering from a presumably incurable disease or condition.
Coma- A state of prolonged unconsciousness over an indefinite period of time.
Alzheimer's Disease- Slow deterioration of brain functions, including memory skills and motor functions.
Late Cancer- Point in which a tumor’s development cannot be averted by modern healthcare or medicinal practices.
Disease- A disorder present in a human being, from which harmful symptoms can originate.

Section 2: Regulation for Hospitals

A. No hospital shall have the legal ability to kill patients suffering from entirely curable/treatable illnesses. Conditions for which euthanasia is permissible includes, but is not limited to: comas lasting longer than two months, Alzheimer’s Disease, and late stages of any cancerous disease.
B. Families and/or acquaintances of a patient afflicted with a permanent illness must be informed of all healthcare options, when the possibility of euthanasia is recommended.
C. A minimum of three doctors are to have insight whenever a patient seeks out euthanasia, or when another doctor recommends its use, to offset the chance of misuse on the sick.

Section 3: Consent of the Afflicted

A) Healthcare providers who euthanize patients without the following requirements: consent from the patient themselves, or from their families if consent cannot be given, approval of two other physicians, as well as corresponding legal confirmation/documentation are warranted for arrest by law enforcement.
B) Any patient, before which euthanasia can be applied, must have the option to decline or to seek care in a hospice whenever it is requested.
C) Medicinal euthanasia used outside a hospital or hospice, and has not been properly registered within those institutions, may be considered a tool of murder if used for such purposes.
D) To determine which diseases make an patient eligible for euthanasia, a council will be created and composed of medical experts and ethicists, operating under the Ministry of Health.

First Amendment to the Protection of Religious Freedom for Minors Act

|Author: Abraham Blakesman (CRP)
|Sponsors: Maximilian Jakobiner (CNP),Willem de Ruyter (CRP), Carl Rhodes (CRP), Pedro Ramirez III (CRP)|

An act to defend the spiritual sensitivities of parents across the nation.

---

§1. Repeal

a. §2-1 of the amended bill is to be rendered null and void.
b. §2-3 will be amended to only apply to public education, whereas parents may not limit a minor's education on religion/irreligion if it is being taught within a public school.

Not these in particular, but would you consider sponsoring them?

I'm not going to support your Euthanasia Bill but I'll consider supporting your Amendment.

[Maklohi Vai]

A foreign policy bill for you:

Declaration of Calaverdean Armed Neutrality

Author: Eduardo Bustamante (Maklohi Vai | LD)
Sponsors: Anastacia Feria Castillo (Osea 767 | SDA), Shadak Fantom (Great Nepal | LD), Abraham Blakesman (Davincia | CRP), Eugenia Malgrave (Malgrave | SDA)

Government Support

Affirming Calaverde's role as an active member of the international community,
Observing the lack of codified foreign policy,
Believing that Calaverde is at its best when not embroiled in others' affairs,

§1 - Declaration of Armed Neutrality
1. Calaverde shall henceforth seek to remain neutral in all foreign wars and armed conflicts.

§ 2 - Provisions
1. Calaverde shall maintain armed forces for the defense of the Republic of Calaverde and the constituent nations of Calaverde.
2. Parliament may pass resolutions permitting Calaverdean forces to participate in international humanitarian missions conducted by organizations of which Calaverde is a member, such as the United Nations.
3. Calaverde shall maintain its membership in all international organizations of which it is currently a member.

[Osea 767]

I'll sponsor that, Maklohi.

[Maklohi Vai]

I'll sponsor that, Maklohi.

Thanks.

[Democratic Peoples republic of Kelvinsi]

Neutrality is for the weak it would be much better to align ourselves with NATO.

[Heraklea-]

Neutrality is for the weak it would be much better to align ourselves with NATO.

And here I thought you would want to align with Russia.

[Great Nepal]

A foreign policy bill for you:

Declaration of Calaverdean Armed Neutrality

Author: Eduardo Bustamante (Maklohi Vai | LD)
Sponsors: Anastacia Feria Castillo (Osea 767 | SDA)

Affirming Calaverde's role as an active member of the international community,
Observing the lack of codified foreign policy,
Believing that Calaverde is at its best when not embroiled in others' affairs,

§1 - Declaration of Armed Neutrality
1. Calaverde shall henceforth seek to remain neutral in all foreign wars and armed conflicts.

§ 2 - Provisions
1. Calaverde shall maintain armed forces for the defense of the Republic of Calaverde and the constituent nations of Calaverde.
2. Parliament may pass resolutions permitting Calaverdean forces to participate in international humanitarian missions conducted by organizations of which Calaverde is a member, such as the United Nations.
3. Calaverde shall maintain its membership in all international organizations of which it is currently a member.

Sponsor

[Maklohi Vai]

Sponsor

Thanks.

[Davincia]

I'll sponsor the D.C.A.N. as well.

[Maklohi Vai]

I'll sponsor the D.C.A.N. as well.

Thanks.

[Malgrave]

I'll sponsor that MV.

[United Provinces of Atlantica]

I'll also sponsor the DCAN.

[Maklohi Vai]

I'll sponsor that MV.

Thanks.

[Monkeykind]

A foreign policy bill for you:

Declaration of Calaverdean Armed Neutrality

Author: Eduardo Bustamante (Maklohi Vai | LD)
Sponsors: Anastacia Feria Castillo (Osea 767 | SDA), Shadak Fantom (Great Nepal | LD), Abraham Blakesman (Davincia | CRP), Eugenia Malgrave (Malgrave | SDA)

Government Support

Affirming Calaverde's role as an active member of the international community,
Observing the lack of codified foreign policy,
Believing that Calaverde is at its best when not embroiled in others' affairs,

§1 - Declaration of Armed Neutrality
1. Calaverde shall henceforth seek to remain neutral in all foreign wars and armed conflicts.

§ 2 - Provisions
1. Calaverde shall maintain armed forces for the defense of the Republic of Calaverde and the constituent nations of Calaverde.
2. Parliament may pass resolutions permitting Calaverdean forces to participate in international humanitarian missions conducted by organizations of which Calaverde is a member, such as the United Nations.
3. Calaverde shall maintain its membership in all international organizations of which it is currently a member.

Sponser.

[Maklohi Vai]

A foreign policy bill for you:

Declaration of Calaverdean Armed Neutrality

Author: Eduardo Bustamante (Maklohi Vai | LD)
Sponsors: Anastacia Feria Castillo (Osea 767 | SDA), Shadak Fantom (Great Nepal | LD), Abraham Blakesman (Davincia | CRP), Eugenia Malgrave (Malgrave | SDA)

Government Support

Affirming Calaverde's role as an active member of the international community,
Observing the lack of codified foreign policy,
Believing that Calaverde is at its best when not embroiled in others' affairs,

§1 - Declaration of Armed Neutrality
1. Calaverde shall henceforth seek to remain neutral in all foreign wars and armed conflicts.

§ 2 - Provisions
1. Calaverde shall maintain armed forces for the defense of the Republic of Calaverde and the constituent nations of Calaverde.
2. Parliament may pass resolutions permitting Calaverdean forces to participate in international humanitarian missions conducted by organizations of which Calaverde is a member, such as the United Nations.
3. Calaverde shall maintain its membership in all international organizations of which it is currently a member.

Sponser.

Thank you. What is your senator's name?