[Ombrageux]

The SLD-PUC will form the bulk of the governing coalition. If they do not agree, either a coalition of right-wing parties including fascists or one 1/2 communist will govern. The most divisive issues seeming to be economic ones (in which compromise, I think, will be possible), social ones (on which the PUC is not monolithic) and which third parties (in all likelihood the PNL or CA) will be joining the government.

I invite Paradigm and Nets to begin negotiating their respective platforms.

[Paradigm]

The only contentious economic issue I see is health care, and even there we seem to agree that it should be universal. On energy, I would quibble with PUC's support of nuclear, but I think the proper policy framework should be neutral to any particular technology, and should simply give grants to energy companies based on meritocratic evaluations of efficiency and environmental standards. On social policy, we will accept the positions of the PUC-L. We would welcome PNL as a third part of our coalition.

[Nets]

Based on your party's platform, I can say the following:

Economics - we are basically in broad agreement, there was nothing there I disagreed with.

As for environmental policy, once again we are in broad agreement. Frankly, though, the PUC believes that at present time Nuclear power is the only viable energy source to even begin to replace fossil fuels, cost effectively. Solar is still pretty worthless at this point, but we agree with you on wind.

No complaints on healthcare, but I still do believe free healthcare should only go those who work, or are prevented from working.

Elective Surgery: Elective surgery (surgery that is not necessary for a basic quality of life) is not subsidised by government. This includes cosmetic surgery. Citizens can get these procedures completed at state-run hospitals but they will incur the full cost of the procedure. Individuals may see a payment plan with a private healthcare operator as beneficial in these instances.

Does this include cosmetic stuff that is unnecessary but improves quality of life? Say plastic surgery for babies born with cleft lips and orthodontia and such? I think such things, though "elective", should be covered.

Tertiary Education: The SLD believe that tertiary education is crucial to the advancement of the nation and its citizenry. To that end the SLD aim to put in place a system of free tertiary education for all of its citizens. This includes both traditional tertiary education providers such as universities as well as trade schools. However, every student, to attain entry into an institution must complete within their high school education a set number of hours of work within a community organization that has some relation to the course they wish to study at a tertiary level. Successful completion of this community involvement in addition to final year scores in Secondary Education determine a student’s entry into Tertiary education.

Disagree. Any student who has demonstrated actual talent in the field should be subsidized, its in society's interest. Those that haven't shown ability above and beyond but still want to pursue tertiary education then should have the fall back of national service in exchange for funding. There is no reason, IMO, for that service to be directly related to their studies though.

But this does raise the point of a broader national service program, whose completion is a requirement for high school graduation. This must be discussed further.

Otherwise, everything looks good Paradigm.

Onto the stickier social issues. Can the PUC at least get a pledge that the government will not elective abortions?

As for foreign policy, I think we generally agree. Do we both agree on favoring a strong NATO?

[Paradigm]

Does this include cosmetic stuff that is unnecessary but improves quality of life? Say plastic surgery for babies born with cleft lips and orthodontia and such? I think such things, though "elective", should be covered.

I agree. I hope my party members will concur as well.

Disagree. Any student who has demonstrated actual talent in the field should be subsidized, its in society's interest. Those that haven't shown ability above and beyond but still want to pursue tertiary education then should have the fall back of national service in exchange for funding. There is no reason, IMO, for that service to be directly related to their studies though.

But this does raise the point of a broader national service program, whose completion is a requirement for high school graduation. This must be discussed further.

I personally would be willing to accept voluntary national service as a precondition for free tertiary education(essentially an extension of the G.I. Bill into other volunteer activities). I'm not sure if my party would agree with me on this one, but as party chairman, I hope they would willing to go along with this compromise.

Onto the stickier social issues. Can the PUC at least get a pledge that the government will not elective abortions?

I take it you mean to ask whether we would pledge not to fund elective abortions. I can agree to that. I hope that you would agree that the best way to reduce abortions would be through poverty reduction and sex education. We could possibly even track abortions as an economic indicator.

As for foreign policy, I think we generally agree. Do we both agree on favoring a strong NATO?

Agreed.

[Nets]

I agree with all of your above responses.

I don't think there is any need to ink an actual coalition document, it appears we agree on basically everything.

Let's have our factions vote on whether or not to endorse this alliance, and after that we may turn rightwards and finalize the coalition. The PUC will likely endorse a coalition with the SLD under these terms unanimously, the SLD seems far more fractured.

[Dave]

Reducing the number of abortions would possibly increase poverty, thereby causing even more abortions.

[Cheesecake_Marmalade]

that's if you believe all that claptrap about abortion reducing the crime rate.

[Dave]

It depends on whether or not legalized abortion has increased the amount of premarital sex without birth control or not. I realize that John R. Lott argues that it has, but I have not reviewed either study in detail.

[Clausewitz]

Everything looks great so far.

A couple points:

• What do the SLDs think about amending the Constitution to establish a Supreme Court with the power to overturn laws as unconstitutional? (for that matter, what does Nets think? )
• What do the SLDs think of amending the Constitution to include a bill of rights? What rights may be included?
• Do the SLDs support establishing a central bank, and under what forms of administration?

[Paradigm]

I would support a bill of rights and a supreme court. My views on a central bank differ from what others in my party might support. I would favor that the central bank be placed under control of the Treasury, and that the government spend its own interest-free money on infrastructure rather than relying on borrowing. Nevertheless, I think we can all agree on the establishment of a central bank.

[dilpill]

What do the SLDs think of amending the Constitution to include a bill of rights? What rights may be included?

I think a Bill of Rights would be hard to pass, but I would support it. I would like almost all of the rights that the US Bill of Rights to be included. I'm can't decide on whether or not I would support a "Right to Bear Arms".

Do the SLDs support establishing a central bank, and under what forms of administration?

I agree with Paradigm on this issue.

[Okonkwo]

Good job on building the coalition so far, I really like where this is going.

I'm can't decide on whether or not I would support a "Right to Bear Arms".

[Clausewitz]

I think a Bill of Rights would be hard to pass, but I would support it. I would like almost all of the rights that the US Bill of Rights to be included.

Yeah. Well, we'd need 67 votes, and between PUC, PNL, SLDs, CA, and LC we'd have 70 seats. We may actually be able to arrive at broad consensus on something like freedom of speech.

I don't know if SN's going to just vote against everything or not - some individual SNs may be willing to vote for something like freedoms of speech and assembly, and they may vote for a high court if they realize that the only thing between them and being potentially banned in elections and barred from Parliament is a bourgeois court.

[Suska]

BIG government here we coooome

yeeeeeeehaaaaaaaawwww

[Cheesecake_Marmalade]

^ Dr. Strangelove is a good movie.

I don't know about the rest of the PNL, but I would personally support a bill of rights modeled after the American bill of rights.

[Infidelis]

I can't decide on whether or not I would support a "Right to Bear Arms".

We're a party of social liberties. Why wouldn't we?

I too agree with Para an the Central Bank setup.

[albionfagan]

The SLD should just drop the social from their name now, you're just the liberal democrats in disguise and to think people from SN where ever willing to negotiate, disgusting.

[Paradigm]

The SLD should just drop the social from their name now, you're just the liberal democrats in disguise and to think people from SN where ever willing to negotiate, disgusting.

I don't see why the "social" part is inappropriate. We are in fact social liberals. Let me know how those sour grapes taste.

[dilpill]

The SN-RF 'OMG why did you talk with the UPC Im going to cry now and call you evil rightists!' crap is getting old.

We're a party of social liberties. Why wouldn't we?

Well, I would personally support a limited right to bear arms, but there are some European members of our party who would want stronger restrictions.

[Ombrageux]

I am not sure if actual constitutional questions should be discussed prior to the formation of a government. As it stands I none of the potential governing parties have really thought through their positions on the myriad of constitutional issues, although I doubt on the fundamentals there would be much difference of principle between the PNL, PUC, SLD and CA. These things are the stuff of the legislative branch and can be debated and voted on while parliament is in session.

The important thing for now is to have a defined executive authority to end the Belgian-style governmental limbo the country is in. Then the government will be able to provide propositions and leadership on constitutional questions.