View Topic

Title
1. This act shall be cited as the Grammar Amendment Simplification Act.

Legislation
2. Errors of punctuation, capitalization, and formatting in statutory and procedural legislation may henceforth be amended at the discretion of the Speaker of the Underhusen and Chairperson of the Overhusen in the contexts outlined below.
2.1. Formatting is to be defined as precedent-defined layout of legislation, limited to numbering, section titling, and citations of other laws.
2.2. Correction of these errors may not alter the plain meaning of the legislation.
2.3. This power does not extend to Constitutional Law, which shall continue to only be amendable pursuant to Section VII of the Fundamental Laws.
2.4. The Speaker of the Underhusen may only amend statutory and Underhusen procedural legislation.
2.5. The Chairperson of the Overhusen may only amend statutory and Overhusen procedural legislation.
3. The Speaker or Chairperson must report any proposed changes to both their respective chamber and Monarch and must ensure a minimum of 48 hours passes between making the report and making any such changes.
4. Where either the Monarch or a member of the Storting should dispute the change, the Speaker or Chairperson may elect to either explain their changes or, should the law in question be statutory, present the amendments as proposed legislation to the Underhusen.
4.1. Should there be no dispute for the minimum 48 hours, or should all disputation be withdrawn, the Speaker or Chairperson may make their amendments.
4.2. All members of the Storting, as well as the Monarch, reserve the right to contest any changes made at any time within the session during which the legislation was considered, so long as the legislation is not an amendment to the procedural rules of another chamber.

This is based on an older piece of legislation from the 28th term. I thought it would be nice to reintroduce with corrections based on the concerns raised back then. Feel free to point out any more.

2.6. The Speaker of the Overhusen may only amend statutory and Underhusen procedural legislation.

I'm guessing you probably meant Overhusen there?

My main concern is defining "typographical error" as only errors of punctuation or capitalization. While this is acceptable for the purposes of this particular law, that doesn't really reflect the common meaning of the term. I would prefer for the law to simply state that punctuation, capitalization, and formatting errors be fixable in this fashion (perhaps with each defined).

2.6. The Speaker of the Overhusen may only amend statutory and Underhusen procedural legislation.

I'm guessing you probably meant Overhusen there?

Oh my bad. Alot of this was copy-pasted from the older bill

My main concern is defining "typographical error" as only errors of punctuation or capitalization. While this is acceptable for the purposes of this particular law, that doesn't really reflect the common meaning of the term. I would prefer for the law to simply state that punctuation, capitalization, and formatting errors be fixable in this fashion (perhaps with each defined).

I agree. I’ll change that once I get to a computer.

Alongside the small errors noted by Wintermoot and taulover, the following changes have been made:
Section 2 is changed to read:

2. "Typographical errors" Errors of punctuation, capitalization, and "Formatting errors" in statutory and procedural legislation may henceforth be amended at the discretion of the Speakers of the Underhusen and Chairperson of the Overhusen in the contexts outlined below.

Section 2.1 is stricken, with following section numbers changed accordingly.

2.1. "Typographical errors" are to be defined as errors of punctuation or capitalization.

I feel like this oddly breaks the parallel structure though. May I recommend writing "errors of punctuation, capitalization, and formatting" instead? If the fact that the term defined isn't used verbatim is an issue, then perhaps define "errors of formatting" instead, or write "punctuation, capitalization, and formatting errors."

I feel like this oddly breaks the parallel structure though. May I recommend writing "errors of punctuation, capitalization, and formatting" instead? If the fact that the term defined isn't used verbatim is an issue, then perhaps define "errors of formatting" instead, or write "punctuation, capitalization, and formatting errors."

I like that, although I still think we should at least define the limitations of the term "formatting" as they seem to be sufficient already and removing those might open it up to abuse.

I feel like this oddly breaks the parallel structure though. May I recommend writing "errors of punctuation, capitalization, and formatting" instead? If the fact that the term defined isn't used verbatim is an issue, then perhaps define "errors of formatting" instead, or write "punctuation, capitalization, and formatting errors."

I like that, although I still think we should at least define the limitations of the term "formatting" as they seem to be sufficient already and removing those might open it up to abuse.

Of course, I'm not suggesting that we remove that definition.

Section 2 is changed to read:

2. Errors of punctuation, capitalization, and "Fformatting errors" in statutory and procedural legislation may henceforth be amended at the discretion of the Speaker of the Underhusen and Chairperson of the Overhusen in the contexts outlined below.

2.1. "Formatting errors" are is to be defined as precedent-defined errors in the formatting layout of legislation, limited to numbering, section titling, and citations of other laws.

Just noticed that the law still only refers to the Speaker in most instances, this should probably be fixed.

Along with the changes suggested by taulover, the following changes have been made:
Section 4 has been changed to read:

4. Where either the Monarch or Underhusen should dispute the change, the Speaker or Chairperson may elect to either explain their changes or, should the law in question be statutory, present the amendments as proposed legislation to the Underhusen.

Section 4.2 has been changed to read:

4.2. All members of the UnderhusenStorting, as well as the Monarch, reserve the right to contest any changes made at any time within the session during which the legislation was considered, so long as the legislation is not an amendment to the procedural rules of another chamber.

Wouldn't this change remove the ability to contest changes to procedural rules after the change is made?

Wouldn't this change remove the ability to contest changes to procedural rules after the change is made?

How so? I meant for it to limit UH members’ ability to contest OH procedural legislation changes and vice versa.

Wouldn't this change remove the ability to contest changes to procedural rules after the change is made?

How so? I meant for it to limit UH members’ ability to contest OH procedural legislation changes and vice versa.

Ah, that was what you meant by "another."

Ah, that was what you meant by "another."

Is there a way I could make it clearer? I really want to do this right

Edit: also, I'm not quite sure what this law would be modifying. Would it be its own standalone act as it applies to the whole Storting?

Yes, I think this would be a standalone statutory law.

I think you did the best possible for getting that idea across concisely in one sentence. The Monarch also being included does mess up the "other house" thing though.

For complete clarity, I might suggest "All members of the Storting, as well as the Monarch, reserve the right to contest any changes to statutory legislation made at any time within the session during which the legislation was considered. All members of the Storting reserve the right to contest any changes to procedural legislation of their respective chambers made at any time within the session during which the legislation was considered."

Also: just noticed that you changed section 3 to "respective chamber" but section 4 still refers solely to the Underhusen.