View Topic

I believe that just the monarch makes sense... although I do think that the public should be able to weigh in on certain debates to encourage some active participation.  Is that a good idea?  Or is it just rubbish? 

Note:  Edited to fix a couple grammatical errors and a bit of wording.

Hmm, I have been thinking over this, and I think monarchical intervention in the legislature is not something I approve of particularly... I would rather that, the monarch (and royal family) stayed out of legislation personally.

Though I hold this position, I realise also that realistically it would be necessary for Wintermoot to post here from time to time, for admin reasons and such, and that a presence like that may be required from time to time.

So while in principle I would like to see a democratic legislature unhindered by intervention I must concede that it seems necessary...

So with that discursive piece out the way:

I would say I am in favour of the act in it's current form, while I can see the argument that from Chanku's perspective it may seem that he is being singled out, I would like to say that (for me at least) this is far from the case, I really appreciate his input in laws and the running of the UH, and I think it is sad that he not be allowed to post here... However I also believe that this is the most democratic while still practical method. Most input can still be provided via the Citizen's Platform anyway.

But never the less, I apologise to Chanku for this apparent injustice.

tl;dr - I support this act

Since, in practice, this is a constitutional monarchy, I would support this Act.

Can I motion to vote now?
How long now do we have to talk about things these days?

Its been over 2 days, so I think its ok to motion if the procedural rules are right. I motion to bring this to a vote.

I second that motion.

The motion to vote passes, the topic will be created momentarily.

And this topic will be moved to archive.