Electing Ministers

— Begin quote from ____

I think there has been some very good discussion today on Discord regarding this. I think most people seem in favor of keeping certain Ministries such as FA, WAA, and RA as appointed positions, given their need for congruence with the Delegate in terms of policy and agenda, while allowing the other ministries to be elected positions. There have been some discussions regarding the specific ministries, combining them, removing some, and reforming others that I’d like to bring up officially here as well.

I will echo some of the thoughts I had regarding the Ministry of Education from the Discord:
“I think it’d be a positive change to remove Education as a ministry entirely and utilize the University as a regional institution instead of just part of the executive. I think the sort of care and attention it requires calls for that sort of approach and will ensure that the person in charge of staffing it and developing it is wholly committed to those efforts. Especially when the tangibles like developing courses and learning material does take quite some time and effort.”

So essentially, the ‘Dean’ or ‘Instructor’ or whatever we call the head of the University would be a citizen-appointed position that would serve indefinitely. That way the person standing for this position clearly has that sort of commitment and it isn’t changing hands (potentially) every few months which can directly impede productivity and progress within the University. I think those that are working within it now can attest to how long it takes to develop a well-thought out course.

[mention]Libertanny[/mention] and I discussed the role of the Ministry of Design and how this is not necessarily needed and is inherently ineffective at its aim. Design/writing/any creative pursuit is something that is fluid, as are the levels of ability across that spectrum. I might be good at making flags, someone else might be better at making banners, someone else might be even better at making dispatch graphics, etc. It’d be better to promote designers and writers as sort of fluid executive roles. If Integration needs someone to make certain graphics, they can ping a designer role in the exec server and see who is willing to contribute, same thing with writing, whether it’s regionwides or newsletters.

I think it makes sense to merge Integration with the Police or abolish the Police as a whole and just hold Viziers accountable to being the security watch-dog force they are meant to be to begin with. I wouldn’t mind hearing others’ thoughts on combining, merging, and reforming some of our Ministries as a whole if we are going to go the direction of electing some of them.

— End quote

I truly agree, as said on discord, with your ideas.

I would, however, add mine to this.

  1. As for ICU (Information and Culture) I would separate them into Ministry of Information (or old name, Propaganda) and Ministry of Culture. And now, before I can beging with explaining why, I will have to change the topic for a moment.

  2. To ensure that elected Ministers are doing their job and if we were to write a bill / act on it, we would have to include base / main responsibilites of each ministry. That means, that a given Minister still has got a field for his own ideas and creativity, however, he will have to make sure, that base responsibilites of a ministry are always accomplished.

Another way, to make sure, that the Ministries are doing their job, is to give the Magisterium the right to create a vote of no confidence on a given Minister and therefore the right to remove that Minister and recall elections for that given position (credits to [mention]Fedele[/mention] ).

  1. As for separating Information and Culture, it is because I think, that they have kind of lost their founding purposes.

As for Information, their main purposes were: writing newspaper, posting newspaper in form of a dispatch and on forums, creating useful dispatches (f.e. How do I get started in TEP?), sharing interesting statistics and information (in cooperation with Immigration), creating a base of useful links, creating a base of all the official designs (badges, seals etc) of TEP in form of a cloud (accesible to any citizen) - and I could listing and listing. Basically, taking care of any information within our region.

As for Culture - creating CYOAs, taking care of festivals and events, creating competitions etc etc. As Zukchiva (I believe at least) once suggested, Culture could also cover finding our the culture of our region - what is our slang (like caek), what is RMB like - simply, what creates us.

Have we considered what would happen if we had no candidates for a particular office or workgroup?

— Begin quote from ____

Have we considered what would happen if we had no candidates for a particular office or workgroup?

— End quote

I think it can be assumed with the Delegate being the head of the executive they would inherit the responsibilities of those positions or, we could just put in there that in those instances they can be formally appointed as well, but like, I’m not sure why they would appoint someone who didn’t want to run in the first place.

— Begin quote from ____

— Begin quote from ____

Have we considered what would happen if we had no candidates for a particular office or workgroup?

— End quote

I think it can be assumed with the Delegate being the head of the executive they would inherit the responsibilities of those positions or, we could just put in there that in those instances they can be formally appointed as well, but like, I’m not sure why they would appoint someone who didn’t want to run in the first place.

— End quote

That’s fair - in the event that no one runs, one would have to be appointed, then voted on?

— Begin quote from ____

— Begin quote from ____

— Begin quote from ____

Have we considered what would happen if we had no candidates for a particular office or workgroup?

— End quote

— End quote

I think it can be assumed with the Delegate being the head of the executive they would inherit the responsibilities of those positions or, we could just put in there that in those instances they can be formally appointed as well, but like, I’m not sure why they would appoint someone who didn’t want to run in the first place.

That’s fair - in the event that no one runs, one would have to be appointed, then voted on?

— End quote

Either that or the Delegate will just assume the responsibilities which I don’t think is too big of a deal. If we end up with, for instance, 4 positions that have absolutely no one running, we have bigger issues anyway.

— Begin quote from ____

— Begin quote from ____

— Begin quote from ____

— Begin quote from ____

Have we considered what would happen if we had no candidates for a particular office or workgroup?

— End quote

— End quote

— End quote

I think it can be assumed with the Delegate being the head of the executive they would inherit the responsibilities of those positions or, we could just put in there that in those instances they can be formally appointed as well, but like, I’m not sure why they would appoint someone who didn’t want to run in the first place.

That’s fair - in the event that no one runs, one would have to be appointed, then voted on?

Either that or the Delegate will just assume the responsibilities which I don’t think is too big of a deal. If we end up with, for instance, 4 positions that have absolutely no one running, we have bigger issues anyway.

— End quote

I really like that idea and solution for bigger problems. Still, we have to remember that there will be probably some staff in a given ministry, so WAD will be more of overseeing their job and giving them tasks, rather than working himself.

I’d like to give a testimonial as Minister of Education and Chancellor.

I know the original plan was to make Education electable, but Aleister pretty much voiced the concerns that I’ve had but wasn’t/couldn’t say. As he said, the University takes time.

As Bach and McStooley said in the Discord, the University takes a lot of time and dedication. And with how it’s such an on-going project, with various versions sitting in archives: it just makes it difficult since you need to build up an institution that’s been an ongoing experiment since a decade ago. You require breaks and it’s supremely easy to slack off (as I’ve sadly done.) and focus on other things, which makes the process even longer.

I’m not going to be campaigning here (heck, some of these phrases don’t describe me), but ideally the University should be led by someone who cares, who is willing to return to the project, and is able to ask for help and reach out to others if needed.

With that in mind, I would say a better system would be to have a certain month long term, followed by a tenure for the position, until the person can be reconfirmed by the Magisterium, or replaced. If we have an indefinite position, people may not look towards the position and ask how’s he/she actually doing, and if they should be resigned.

You know, something like the system in place for Arbiters, the Keeper of the Hall, or for the now defunct Editor of EPNS or the EPPS Commissioner.

Sent from my SM-J327P using Tapatalk

— Begin quote from ____

With that in mind, I would say a better system would be to have a certain month long term, followed by a tenure for the position, until the person can be reconfirmed by the Magisterium, or replaced. If we have an indefinite position, people may not look towards the position and ask how’s he/she actually doing, and if they should be resigned.

You know, something like the system in place for Arbiters, the Keeper of the Hall, or for the now defunct Editor of EPNS or the EPPS Commissioner.

Sent from my SM-J327P using Tapatalk

— End quote

I definitely agree with that! I should clarify too. When I say an indefinite position, I do think there should be checks and balances, such as the ability for the citizens who appoint the position to also propose a vote of no confidence to remove inactive or inept people within the position but otherwise it would be an indefinite role. That way there can always be someone in the role that is suited for that sort of commitment and workload.

— Begin quote from ____

— Begin quote from ____

With that in mind, I would say a better system would be to have a certain month long term, followed by a tenure for the position, until the person can be reconfirmed by the Magisterium, or replaced. If we have an indefinite position, people may not look towards the position and ask how’s he/she actually doing, and if they should be resigned.

You know, something like the system in place for Arbiters, the Keeper of the Hall, or for the now defunct Editor of EPNS or the EPPS Commissioner.

Sent from my SM-J327P using Tapatalk

— End quote

I definitely agree with that! I should clarify too. When I say an indefinite position, I do think there should be checks and balances, such as the ability for the citizens who appoint the position to also propose a vote of no confidence to remove inactive or inept people within the position but otherwise it would be an indefinite role. That way there can always be someone in the role that is suited for that sort of commitment and workload.

— End quote

Yep! [Meant voted by citizens, forgot that was the idea XD], but ye. It works well then!

Sent from my SM-J327P using Tapatalk

I’ve come to think that perhaps electing ministers would actually be something that we ought to pursue. Based on the conversation that has gone on, I can see the value these elections to stir up activity and bring forth a more open discussion of competing ideas as to what should be done in the executive. I would imagine that people would be constantly talking about what could be done better within the executive ministries on a ministry-to-ministry level that will end up making it all stronger as a whole.

[spoiler]

  • Minister of Culture
  • Minister of Information
  • Minister of Integration (Immigration and Police Service)
    [/spoiler]
    [spoiler]
  • Minister of World Assembly Affairs
  • Minister of Foreign Affairs
  • Minister of Regional Affairs
    [/spoiler]
    [spoiler]
  • Chief Minister of Justice
  • EPSA Commissioner (vice-leader)
    [/spoiler]
    [spoiler]
  • Ministry of Design is being abolished
  • Ministry of Culture and Information is separated into Ministry of Culture and Ministry of Information
  • Ministry of Education is abolished, University becomes an independent body - AN ACT TO BE WRITTEN HERE
    [/spoiler]
    [spoiler]
  • Is no longer a part of the Executive Branch
  • Headmaster is to be appointed in elections (by Citizens)
  • Headmaster answers to noone but Citizens
  • Headmaster is in office for until removed (by either Magisterium or Referendum)
    [/spoiler]
    [spoiler]
  • Following abolishment of Design, there shall be a Designer mask on Executive Server. If there is ever any design to be made, Designers are pinged and anyone willing to do the job is free to do it.
  • Writers becomes a mask on Executive Server. If there is ever a text to be written, they are pinged on the server.
  • Any Minister or the Delegate can accept Designers and Writers to the server. Any Minister or the Delegate can ping them if there is a job to be done.
    [/spoiler]
    [spoiler]
  • Once nominations start, there should be 5 days for nominations and accepting them.
  • Once nominations end, there should be 3 days of voting period.
  • Voting shall happen in one forum thread, listing all candidates for each Ministry.
  • Candidate with the highest percent of votes for each Minister position becomes the Minister (even if they were to have 20% of votes in total).
  • In a case of only one candidate running for a given position, voting shall become Magisterium-like, letting people vote in favor or against the candidate. Candidate scoring more than 50% of votes in favor will be appointed as the Minister.
    [/spoiler]
    [spoiler]
  • Minister may be removed through vote of no confidence from Magisterium.
  • Any Citizen may propose a vote of no confidence to the Magisterium. Proposed by Citizen, shall require endorsement of at least 5 other Citizens
  • The Delegate may propose a vote of no confidence to the Magisterium. This proposals requires no endorsement.
  • Any Magister may propose a vote of no confidence to the Magisterium. This proposal requires no endorsement.
  • In a case of Magisterium voting against the vote of confidence, Citizens may petition for a Regional Referendum to Conclave. As long as the petition is legal and answer the possible concerns, Conclave shall hold the Referendum.
    [/spoiler]
    [spoiler]
  • In a case of no candidates running at all, Delegate inherits the responsibilities for the time being (or else, may delegate Minister of Regional Affairs for those tasks)
    [/spoiler]

So. I took a moment to write down our ideas. I have also added mine. Now, I would love to hear your thoughts, so we can clarify the idea.
[mention]Todd McCloud[/mention] [mention]East Malaysia[/mention] [mention]Aleister[/mention] [mention]Funkadelia[/mention] [mention]Fedele[/mention] [mention]Zukchiva[/mention] [mention]Bachtendekuppen[/mention]

Alright

  1. What happens if someone resigns? Does the same thing happen as if no one ran in the first place?

  2. I’m thinking a bit ahead, but it would be best imo to not name any Ministry in the Curia Act besides currently mentioned to avoid locking the Delegate in.

Annnnd that’s all I can remember

Sent from my SM-J327P using Tapatalk

If someone resigns, a special election seems unnecessarily cumbersome. Maybe a nomination and vote from the magisterium.

Sent from my BlackBerry Pearl using Tapatalk

— Begin quote from ____

If someone resigns, a special election seems unnecessarily cumbersome. Maybe a nomination and vote from the magisterium.

Sent from my BlackBerry Pearl using Tapatalk

— End quote

Hm. How about their deputy becoming the Minister? Would make more sense and would skip unnecessary votings.

— Begin quote from ____

— Begin quote from ____

If someone resigns, a special election seems unnecessarily cumbersome. Maybe a nomination and vote from the magisterium.

Sent from my BlackBerry Pearl using Tapatalk

— End quote

Hm. How about their deputy becoming the Minister? Would make more sense and would skip unnecessary votings.

— End quote

At that point the WAD should be the one who selects the provisional minister.

Maybe we could make it so that the WAD appoints the provisional Minister, but it is recommended that the new Minister would be the former Deputy Minister if they meet the requirements, but not enforced.

Either that, or we could just select the person who came in 2nd place.

Sent from my SM-J327P using Tapatalk

Conceptually, I’m definitely supportive of elected ministers. My main focuses here would be ensuring that they had enough freedom to feel that they’re not being stifled, while still being able to work within the Delegate’s agenda, and giving them some sort of protections/recall measures that make sense.

On the first topic, I think it’s fair that Ministers should still answer to the Head of Government (i.e the Delegate), and ultimately work within the confines of the Delegate’s agenda (which Fedele has done a good job of keeping broad for current Ministers and I hope future Delegates continue that). Ministry elections should stagger at a separate time from Delegate elections, so that there’s an established agenda being maintained by the Administration that Minister candidates are aware of going in that they can develop their own goals and ideas from. While some disagreement is good, we wouldn’t want to elect a Minister who is completely contrary to the Delegate’s goals, unless it’s specifically as an un-endorsement of that Delegate’s platform (which would beg the question why they were elected as Delegate).

Regarding point two, I want them to have some protections so that the Delegate can’t just rotate/dispose of them, but not too many so that Ministers are untouchable. I think the best set-up would be to have the Delegate be able to initiate a recall motion against any Minister, which then goes to the Magisterium who debate on it and vote on it. I think the Magis are a really solid body for this, and it would be compatible with our current efforts to increase the relevancy and worthwhile-feel of being in the Magisterium.

I agree. I think there should be a statement somewhere for each Minister election making note that Ministers are expected to follow the Delegate’s lead.

Otherwise, we may fool people into thinking that being a Minister means 100% domination over their Ministry with no guidance. Some people don’t like to be guided, and that’s fine, but in that case they shouldn’t run (depending if the Delegate helps the Ministries or maintains a more backed-off role.)

In all honesty, it depends on each Delegate’s stance on running the Executive. One may have an involved stance, another may try to give Ministers more autonomy. Potential Ministers should know that the Delegate can have different different levels of involvement and should be prepared to follow and ready to work on the Delegate’s agenda, as well as their Ministry’s baseline agenda and their own.

First of all, I’m very happy about the thorough debate in the Magisterium.

I would like to add some general elements to consider regarding the proposals being worked out for electing ministers. Secondly, I would like to list some practical issues to consider.

As it stands, there’s two ways the Magisterium can go here. Either a cabinet is (mostly) appointed, or (mostly) elected. The role of the Delegate differs between these two types of cabinets. An appointed cabinet offers the advantage of speed, loyalty to and control by the Delegate, one ultimate responsible party (the Delegate) and cohesion of policy. An elected cabinet offers the advantages that the ministers are more independent, have an explicit democratic mandate for the policies they are implementing, and have a specific term.

Both have their disadvantages as well.

An appointed cabinet means that every other delegate can (re)shape the Executive however he/she wants, fire ministers at will, and is only accountable directly to the Citizens of TEP. Such flexibility comes with an inherent instability, which we have witnessed in this region before. The Executive stands or falls with the aptitude of the Delegate at hand to organize it. An elected cabinet could lead to less cohesion in the cabinet, more political games, less control by the Delegate over Executive policy. Having a lot more elections could also impact continuity in the cabinet and Executive policy.

Both have advantages and disadvantages. I do like that this is going to a mixed form between both. That could prove interesting.

What worries me most, is that the proposed changes would require changing a lot of legislation :

  • The Concordat;
  • The Curia Act;
  • Education Act;
  • new election legislation, legislation on the positions in question, their responsibilities, their new relation towards the Delegate, requirements, terms, legislation to control what happens when a minister resigns, … .

That is a huge legislative effort.

As to the specifics now.

  1. Changes to the Executive;
    Abolishing the ministry of Design is a good point. I wonder, besides a Ministry of Culture and the Ministry of Integration, do we need a Ministry of Information? Can that not be abolished too?
    Making the UTEP independent seems good to me.

  2. Elected positions.
    If I understand this well, the Minister of Integration, the Minister of Culture, and the Chancellor of the UTEP would be elected. Why not add the Minister of Regional Affairs too? If the Ministry of Information is abolished, the related minister position does no longer exist.

This leaves the EPSA Overseeing Officer unelected, the Chief Officer of Justice (can’t that position be elected too?), the Minister of WA Affairs, and the Minister of FA.

  1. Election process.
    I think 5 days for nominations, and 3 days for elections, is too short. Why not week/week? I presume all Citizens could vote, without any further requirements?
    I’m in favor of staggered elections, whereby the ministers would have 4 month-terms, but would start in the middle of a delegate term. As such, you have elections every two months.

  2. Removal.
    I’d say, removal by resigning, by a motion from the Delegate to the Magisterium, or by a motion of no confidence of a Magister, and by the end of the term. Letting all Citizens introduce such motions could create too much chaos/instability. No petition to the Conclave. A minister leaving the position early, in whatever way, should be replaced by a new election I believe, for the remainder of the original term. If you restrict the possibility for motions as above, that should be less of a problem.
    In case of no candidate, the Delegate should be able to appoint someone at interim, until a new election is organized, or until the end of the original term.

Bachtendekuppen is going in a good direction here, in my opinion. My thinking is that the ministers should be as independent of the delegate as possible. Yes, this proposed change is a daunting legislative task but there are a lot of daunting legislative tasks before the Magisterium at present or shortly at hand.

Sent from my BlackBerry Pearl using Tapatalk