i tyhiiiink it looks good but im studying for a test rn so would hvae to look later
1 Like
(1) There is no mention of the word plebiscite anywhere else in our concordat and citizen-wide votes are referred to consistently throughout the concordat as a referendum. I would prefer that terminology.
(2) inactivity and dereliction of duty are different things but inactivity implies dereliction of duty, so i may prefer that only.
(3) i dont want the magisterium alone to remove a delegate. the plebiscite is a good idea i feel.
(4) i think votes of no confidence should maybe be examined more closely. what would be the grounds? what would be the cooldown period? i dont like spamming it but i dont like limiting it to one per term because what if something happens? maybe a complex system of seconds and thirds before one even goes to a magisterial vote?
(5) would the delegate be suspended for the course of the vonc?
I don’t know how complicated it would have to be. Maybe require the second to be the Provost, which would mean the Provost wouldn’t be able to call for votes of no confidence, but that might be good because a vote brought by the Provost might unduly influence other Magisters. Perhaps a third should be required in the event the Provost formally refuses to second the motion.
The thing is, a vote of no confidence happens when a Magister loses confidence in the ability of the current Delegate to govern and, if he thinks the Magisterium agrees, he makes a motion of no confidence. There is not necessarily a specific reason, but this usually happens with bad things that happen that are done by the Delegate, but that are not crimes.
I’m really thinking a lot about timing and how to avoid spam, but nothing comes to mind right now… Any idea?
I’m sorry, but what exactly would that do? Even with the Provost, a Magister can still propose this endlessly and fill the Magisterium with unnecessary things.
The seconds system you mentioned is already included here on the Standing Order of the Magisterium:
I think it could also refer to this no-confidence motion.
one thing to note is that inactivity and dereliction of duty can be construed as different things, if we tie inactivity to your general NS presence and not just whether you’re doing things in your job.
1 Like
I agree.
1 Like
Amendment to Section 10 to make things clearer.
Section 11 created, but not final yet.
Thoughts?
I’d rather the Citizenry or Registered Voters be able to propose a petition for recall with a minimum % of Registered Voters approving said petition in order to kick off a recall referendum.
I do not forsee a instance where the Magisterium should be able to topple a Delegacy through a “Motion of No-Confidence”.
TEP’s Magisterium doesn’t function like a traditional Westminister parliamentary system where the Delegate (or Prime Minister) in this case is also a member of the legislature. It functions more like a republic/Presidential (ala USA) where the Delegate (or President) is a separate entity that isn’t affiliated with the Magisterium.
We can keep both.
Not necessarily wrong.
Changes were made. The creation of a new article is why Motions of No Confidence encompass more than just one TEP entity.
So, what do y’all think?
I remain opposed. I favor making dereliction amd inactivity indictable offences. I also would prefer to keep the Concordat short and as general as possible.
But this is not the purpose of the proposal and if it were, we would have to change something even deeper.
Wasn’t the purpose of this to remove an inactive or derelict official? I think it’s better as an indictable offence in an act instead of a Concordat amendment.
In addition to the objections and dissent made by Vessul against my proposal, is anyone else against the proposal or has something to add to the discussion?
I can see dereliction being an indictable offense, with perhaps sentencing including being barred from office for a period of time and/or removed from office, but inactivity should not be a crime IMO.
My proposal:
Three Registered Voters may present a motion of no confidence, citing reasons for their motion. This initiates a discussion like any bill proposal. Any of the three Co-Sponsors may motion to vote. A Magister must second the motion. The Magisterium goes through a majority vote. If it passes, a Referendum is held.
Caveats:
- For VoNCs of Viziers and Arbiters, members of the affiliated branch may not be sponsors of the motion. I don’t want it to be like getting rid of coworkers you don’t agree with. I’d say this for the Delegate, too, but the Executive branch is an eldritch mass of staffers and there’s very few gov folks not involved.
- For VoNCs of Arbiters, the affected Arbiter may not preside over the referendum.