My concerns about this proposal remain the same as they were when Barnes and Gerrick first outlined it in September.
It does not make sense to vest legislative power in the Cabinet. People join the Cabinet to do/lead specific Civil Service work. These are specialized roles, meant to serve and better a specific aspect of the region. Some Cabinet members may also then actively participate in, or rather more likely in my experience, get dragged into, more general discussions about the functioning of the region, on a case-by-case basis. What is definitely true is that Cabinet members are not there to pass laws, many if not most have zero desire to do so, and having that on the job description muddies the waters.
This merging of powers also could potentially be confusing. The Monarchy already declares its own laws via Royal Decree. The Riksrad (at least under our current legal system) is a part of the Monarchy. Having two different sources of laws stemming from the same power is strange. (Another point of confusion which Excalibur pointed out on Discord is that you'd then be considering two very different things - civil service and legislative abilities/platform - when voting for someone.)
It is clear that fellow prominent current/former Cabinet members agree with me on this, based on initial reactions on Discord:
Don't make the riskrad have to pass legislation I don't wanna do that. That's actual work, I didn't agree to that
(which I get is probably at least partially in jest, but the sentiment is there nonetheless)
Yeah I'm all for UH burning, but don't give the Riksrad legislative power
...
I will continue to advocate for a citizens assembly. The reason I do so, is I feel the cabinet has a separate purpose than legislating resolutions. When you vote for someone who’s running for, let’s say, Thane of Gaming, you don’t vote for that person because you think they are going to be good at passing laws, you would vote for that person because they are good at the field in which they are running, in this case, gaming. By making the cabinet have to handle both functions, you introduce more prerequisites that voters have to take into consideration for voting, and further complicate the process. In contrast, a citizens assembly would allow every Wintrean citizen we have a say in legislation. While yes, I agree the UH is not as active as it used to be, consolidating the government in this way I believe would not be in the best interests for the region
...
I don’t run for Thane of Roleplay because I want to pass laws. In fact, while serving in the UH I figured that passing laws is boring when that’s the only thing you can do. I run for Thane of Roleplay because it allows me to make immediate changes to the area of expertise that I focus in. I don’t want to have to handle foreign relations and RP at the same time, because I am only the Thane of Roleplay. I wasn’t elected because I’m good with opening and/or closing embassies, or establishing new positions in government. I run because I am passionate about RP
People join the UH because they want to be a part of a formalized quasi-RP legislature that nonetheless retains a modicum of power. This power (especially in the citizenship area) allows Skrifa to suspend their disbelief about the fact that they're participating in a fake legislature in a fake sovereign kingdom, and have fun drafting laws that regulate themselves and the citizenry. On the other hand, people join the Cabinet because there is some specific part of the community they want to help improve and take a leadership role in. People participate in these two bodies for completely different reasons and it doesn't make sense to put them together.
The idea commonly floated in response to this is that perhaps we should try making a fully RP legislature. This doesn't work for a variety of reasons, especially from a recruitment/integration perspective. (And from a practical perspective, we've tried legislature RPs before and they were DOA.) The key issue is that a purely RP legislature has no stakes. People join NS because they're interested in playing a government simulation game; then they join regional government because they can see that as an extension of the nation game. Wintreath has long provided a uniquely complex legislature with its own independent and storied traditions and philosophies, while being free from the partisan politics that tend to mar similarly complex NS legislatures. This makes the UH interesting and fun to participate in. NS legislatures require a buy-in, where people can truly convince themselves that the work they're doing is real and significant to some degree. It draws people into participation in regional government, makes them more comfortable navigating themselves in that area, and prepares them for deeper participation in the leadership of the community.
Back to the proposal at hand, to reiterate, Cabinet ministers want to run the region and not pass laws, and UH Skrifa want to pass legislation and not deal so much with the busywork of civil service and other executive duties. Combining the two together is a mistake, that only creates more confusion and complications.
Honestly, I think we have a bunch of shitty options, with this proposal being one of the worse ones. I'm not particularly fond of an open assembly, but at least that seems like a cohesive idea from a design perspective. I also get the concern that our current dedicated legislature seems wasteful when it seems to do so little, but it does still work and helps drive some fun regular activity in the region. There also isn't necessarily anything wrong with a body that generally messes around with procedural laws but stands ready to do its work when need be. Especially when it's in a community based on a nation simulation game. (It might be different if we'd actually successfully moved away from NS, but we have not.) It's not perfect, but considering all factors, it does decently well.
The ability for the Storting (and Monarch) to revoke citizenship is apparently statutory law, not constitutional. The only bit that is constitutional is that the Storting can currently overturn a Monarch's decision to revoke citizenship. This section doesn't restrict or give the right to revoke citizenship to any branch. So we don't need to worry about that now. Besides, the CC is by royal decree, so we can't really add that clause unless we add a completely new section making the CC a part of the fundamental laws.
Well, citizenship isn't defined in the Fundamental Laws but is partially regulated in it, so
technically you could empower the Citizens' Council to do things without defining it.
Or you could just define the Citizens' Council, same as how you defined the Riksrad, when both were previously only established by decree. I don't like the Citizens' Council, but you already did one, might as well also do the other.
(Though considering that Wintermoot was already concerned about how this proposal codifies the Riksrad into constitutional legislation, not sure how he'd feel about that.)
