[Donna]

It seems that rule of law in this game has completely collapsed. Ingliz, today, declared the formation of a minority government which the Grand Coalition refuses to acknowledge and regards as illegal. Subsequently, the Grand Coalition has also announced a minority government which is larger than the SN-RF-THP coalition. The interim constitution authored by Clausewitz is effectively being ignored by SN-RF-THP as unratified despite the formation of their government depending on a recent alteration to the document that allowed the formation of minority governments. The SN-RF-THP has also accused Grand Coalition parties of ignoring the current interim constitution.

I propose the following.

(a) Before any government is announced, it is imperative that we all acknowledge the authority of our interim constitution. If the matter of ratification is explicit enough that some parties feel they can violate the conventions of the interim constitution because of it (the constitution) lacking parliamentary ratification, then naturally we must ratify the constitution before any government is to be announced.
(b) Among various issues that need to be addressed are bloc voting and the methodological application of minority rule.
(c) Since the SN-RF-THP coalition technically did announce their government first before the Grand Coalition did, it is appropriate that they are allowed to take a constitutional route in forming a goverment once we have agreed upon a ratified constitution, but, the government that is announced must be subject to a parliament-wide vote of confidence, thus negating the necessity for coalitions to use rogue tactics in forming governments.
[1] I propose that over the weekend until Tuesday (April 28th, 2009) that all parties deliberate on the matter of an agreed upon, ratified constitution once the matter of bloc voting and minority rule are addressed.
[2] Following the official ratification of the constitution, each coalition will have three days to deliberate and announce a minority government on May 1st, 2009.
[3] The coalition forming the largest minority in parliament will be subject to a vote of confidence by parliament before forming a government. This vote will take place on May 2, 2009 and will end on May 7, 2009.
[4] Once a government has been approved, parliament will enter session on May 7, 2009.

[Vladimir]

We have already proposed a constitution to ratify, why not take this to the "Parliament opening" thread

[Fasces]

That constitution was proposed by an illegal government. If they propose it legally, we will gladly deliberate on its merits.

[Vladimir]

That constitution was proposed by an illegal government.

It was by no merit illegal, your accusations are false

[Fasces]

According to the interim constitution, you comprise an illegal government, since it prohibits minority governments. There was no formal effort to ratify any constitutional changes, just an informal discussion.

[HoniSoit]

the government that is announced must be subject to a parliament-wide vote of confidence

I would agree to that if:

- We eliminate block-voting. Individual members have to vote for themselves. Otherwise, it is going to be reduced a game between a few party-leaders.

- We only count those who turn out to vote. In other words, if there are 40 people voting then a simple majority of 21 votes should have it passed.

[Donna]

Also, I might add, it would also be helpful if we elected a Head of State to oversee the creation of any government.

Bloc voting needs to be further discussed because it is technically a function of party sovereignty. But needs to be more tangible.

[Fasces]

I disagree. A quorum should be necessary for any legislation.

Eliminating bloc votes is agreeable, provided it isn't done just as an effort to disenfranchise parties which has voters, but non-participatory members.

[Vladimir]

According to the interim constitution, you comprise an illegal government, since it prohibits minority governments. There was no formal effort to ratify any constitutional changes, just an informal discussion.

there was no constitution, only a piece of worthless prose written by one dude.

I do not see why you refuse to retify the constitution proposed by us. We don't have to form a "government" to propose a constitution since either way are the largest coalition

[Dave]

No, the SLD-PNL-PUC-CA is the largest coalition.

[Fasces]

You didn't.

You did.

It's now a matter of principle. Your constitution was actually well written, and agreeable in many respects. The PNL liked it. The PoP liked it. It has nothing to do with the content, but the attitude and practices of the party that proposed it, and how it is currently be proposed.

You did not even show respect for the constitution you claim to support, and try for a vote of confidence prior to assuming power.

[Vladimir]

No, the SLD-PNL-PUC-CA is the largest coalition.

But not when the constitution was proposed. You should have been faster; now you have to vote on the proposed one. If it fails, your new coalition can propose another one

You did not even show respect for the constitution you claim to support, and try for a vote of confidence prior to assuming power.

How exactly did we "assume power"? We proposed the constitution, full stop.

[Fasces]

You also instituted a government, and act under the false pretense that it is both recognized, welcomed, and legitimate.

Is it a coincidence that you assumed the role of government prior to endorsing a constitution that would make a vote of no confidence against your government impossible? That you did not seek a vote of confidence prior to assuming power, knowing full well you had no way to convince the other 64% of the Parliament to allow you to form it?

[Vladimir]

The voting rules were clear, and the vote results were clear and legal. And the result implies that we are the government, like it or not
Despite that, all we used this position for is to propose the constitution, which may well change the the arrangement. What's the problem Don't you want to finally have a constitution so we can proceed with the game?

[ingliz]

You are perfectly at liberty to introduce amendments to the proposed constitution in Parliament

ingliz, SN(R)RF; Speaker and Clerk of the House

[Fasces]

Will the RF/SN/THP follow the constitution, and seek a vote of confidence prior to assuming power in the various Ministries?

[Vladimir]

Of course we will follow a ratified constitution, the game won't work otherwise....

[Oxymoron]

This is why fucking Anarchy cannot and will never work. I am suprised the game lasted so long.

[Fasces]

So, if the constitution is ratified, the SN/RF will put its proposed government up to a vote, and end this charade?

[Vladimir]

That is so, and if the "grand coalition" will get its act together they might even start proposing legislation (if the final const. permits this to coalitions)