QUOTE (Gun-Toting Animals @ November 16th, 2013 - 7:05)
Well there are a lot of things we can do to do this and it will be a focus of the next Commission. In fact this is something I ran on during the Commission elections. So I'm glad that you are interested in this and hope that you will be someone who will be willing to put the time in to achieve this goal.
This is certainly what the EU needs, and I am hoping to achieve this goal.
Without a doubt I would. The death penalty is an abhorrent and brutal punishment, and must be stopped.
There is no such thing as a "painless and quick" execution. I've heard time and again stories of inmates lying for agonizing minutes while the poison of lethal injection courses through their veins. Electrocution can and has failed many times to end the life of its victims in a timely and humane manner. The gas chamber slowly suffocates its victims. In addition to this, studies have shown time and again that the trial process alone costs more than life imprisonment due to the amount of evidence and deliberation required for such a ruling. Some may believe that convicted killers and rapists deserve no better, but facing a lifetime of confinement left with only their conscience for company is already severe enough.
That is why I believe personally that the laws of my country, which abolished the death penalty thirty years ago, are the most logical and correct, and will continue to be honored into the future.
Councillor for Embria
We must keep in mind that there are two kinds of environmental issues: local and global. Those that're considered global, like the state of the planet's oceans or the climate change, affect all nations and peoples despite their geographical locations. Some are inarguably affected more than others, but in the end there's an impact on everyone. Proceeding from here, I fail to see how -- for instance -- landlocked nations should benefit from opposing oceanic legislation simply on the grounds that they've got no coastline, especially since most of the regulations in such a piece of legislation wouldn't affect on them in any rate.
Speaker Devoy brings, as always, a reasonable and well-grounded argument on the table. As much as we might want it, we simply can't ignore the needs of the economy altogether. We can't continue hogging around like a swarm of locusts, but we also can't just shut down all our factories overnight. It's a dangerous and difficult situation we've driven ourselves in with the industrial development over the past 200 years, but it's also a reality we can't run from.
Our nations are unique when it comes to geography, economy, industry, and population. What works well in one country may not be as easily applied to the neighbour. That's why I'm personally convinced our best chance of success in environmental legislation lies in commonly shared goals, but a more broad set of tools and methods to reach those goals. To put it another way, as long as the agreed-upon quotas are met, nations should have a plethora of means to go around to achieve them.
I'm not convinced the European Union would benefit immesurably from optional climate treaties. Call me a cynic, but I fear the already green nations would sign them without hesitation, while the more industry-oriented would just opt out. As a result, not much would change. That's why we are in dire need of Union-wide, non-voluntary environmental regulation -- fast.
It's good if old legislation attempts are re-visited, if we can introduce a new perspective to the issue and avoid the deadlocks that prevented the previous attempts from succeeding in the Council.
Councillor of Pax Aurea
I'd like to say that after the recent amendment to the 'overall' section of the EPECA, I am satisfied with Davishire's legal and Constitutional recognition of the European Union, and would like to thank Davishire's government for its patience and its willingness to work with the Commission over this process.
Okay, now I've just about had enough of this. Those who originally championed for the release of Mr. Speller had their own right to free speech and to voice their opinion, but this is just getting ridiculous. This is mostly in response to the Agencia de Noticias de Occoron, but some others too. I'm going to clarify a few things. Firstly, Mr. Speller was found guilty and pleaded guilty in a free and fair trial. Secondly, it is not a fake story created by the government; Mr. Speller did in fact arm himself with soap and attempt to kill the Emperor. You have no evidence to suggest otherwise, however, there has been evidence to prove it. The intension behind it certainly wasn't a joke, and if it was, that would have been clarified by now. I'm all for disrespecting nations by calling them out on their ideological beliefs and such, but actually undermining and pretending to know what happened when you clearly don't is another thing. All of this went down in Inimicus, and they have all the information on what happened. They know what happened. He is clearly guilty. This has gone unto borderline bullying, and I don't want that going on. The European Union is a collection of cooperating nations working together to promote certain ideals. Under my watch it won't be a place where nations tell other nations what to do and demand things, unless they are violating the laws of the Union, but in this case they are not. If they had been clearly defying the laws of the Union surely they would have found themselves in the court by now. The reason why I'm constantly defending the Inimican government is because they have done nothing wrong, and it's the other nations that are the ones infringing upon them. I won't tolerate bullying. Instead of working against each other, let's stay unified and celebrate our differences.
If Occoronian government is further uncomfortable working with nations different than it's self then I can arrange a meeting with your leaders and some of the others in different parties. However, if they feel like they can handle being in a political environment with many ideas such as our great European Union, then there shouldn't be any further fuss. This is not intended to be some sort of war of words I'm trying to create here, I'm just trying to clarify the situation and end the baseless and almost laughable accusations being made towards Inimican government.
Commissioner of Internal Affairs
((OOC note: Inimicus is in charge of his own people, including Mr. Speller, so whatever he says goes. You do not control his nation.))
Alright, this discussion is going nowhere fast so I'm just going to drop the mentoring discussion. If you have a suggestion for mentoring, just message me and we can discuss it further and perhaps standardize it. As forum recruiting goes, I will likely take up the task of sending the welcoming TG's myself. Thank you everyone for your input.
Thank you all for your invaluable input and constructive criticism. I have now updated the draft based on everything we have discussed in this think tank, and will bring it to the full Council session shortly.