Amendment to the Constitution: European Assembly Act (2017)
Councillors, I, Dame Viviana Ricchetti, Premier Commissioner, hereby propose the following amendment to our Constitution:
European Assembly Act (2017)
Article __: The European Assembly
Section 1: Principles
I. The European Assembly is the institution tasked with the oversight of European policy. It is formed by the Heads of State or Government of each Member State.
II. The European Assembly has no power over the European Council, as it is a mere observer of the development of European politics.
III. The European Assembly will meet twice a year, or in exceptional circumstances, in Europolis.
IV: The presidency of each years' gathering of the European Assembly will fall upon two randomly selected Member States at the start of the year. Consecutive presidencies are discouraged and should be avoided.
Section 2: Powers and Duties
I. The powers of the European Assembly do not overpass those of the rest of European institutions. It shall only provide counsel on the situation of the European Union at the time.
II. The duty of the European Assembly is to give a position in the European Union to every Member State government.
III. In case of a total collapse of the institutions of the European Union (i.e. cease of exercising of duties, complete shutdown due to human/natural catastrophes...), the European Assembly shall gather and takeover control of the European Union until the situation is resolved.
Debate will begin the 1st of August 2017, 18:00 GMT.
Voting on amendments will then begin and lust until the 10th of August, 18:00 GMT.
Final voting will then begin and last until the 16th of August , 18:00 GMT.
(OOC: Sorry guys, July is just being a bit complicated... Just posted this in advance to be free during my vacation, gives you more than enough time to think about amendments)
First of all what on earth is the Premier Commissioner doing presenting legislation, I ask the speaker to throw this out of the house immediately. If we were to assess it,this project is a waste of money and a bureaucrat's wet dream, we don't need such pointless over sight, I know I have the full trust of Viscount Mitrij Kolm and any inadequacies felt by the Derecta councillor who should be presenting this legislation, should not be projected on us. - Dr Jens Nørreport
Cllr. Nørreport, I would first of all like to welcome you back to the European Union.
I do admit the method is unorthodox, but we are speaking of a Constitutional reform here, not of the proposal of legislation. This is a proposal I am submitting under my own responsibility and will, with no ties to the Derectan State or it's office of Collaboration with the E.U., led by Cllr. Maverick, who is himself engaged in his own project with the European Common Culture and Education Act. Thus my actions have nothing to do with my homeland. I believe other Premier Commissioners have led significant reforms of the system in the past, so why would this occasion be different? My intention was to propose such amendment to the Constitution, which serves and protects every European, myself included, to the very supreme body that has the power to modify it.
I also find the way you have moved for the withdrawal of this proposition is completely out of place, given the formality that is expected from the honourable members of the EC. I do accept criticism, but not in the way of scatological comments about this proposal's drafting.
Concerning the costs of such summits being celebrated, I don't think the Union's coffers will suffer much. We are currently in a situation of surplus due to over-contribution, and a summit that would be celebrated, under normal circumstances, twice a year, won't put us in the red. The European Assembly would only be functioning during the period of time the summits lasted. When not needed, it would be completely inactive. I believe it could even be placed under the jurisdiction of a larger European agency, if needed.
This is why I invite any Councillor to submit the amendments he or she sees fit. But a withdrawal would only be counterproductive, and I so ask that the future Speaker let it reach the final stage of voting.
Dame Viviana Ricchetti,
Dame Ricchetti there is no place for the executive to interfere in what is rightfully a council affair, you have no business presenting anything to be voted on here. Your presence disrespects procedure we have kept since the foundation of this council.
Cllr. Nørreport, may I refer to article II, sections III.1 and III.2 of our Constitution? Any Councillor and Commissioner can propose bills or amendments to the Council. As I am solely first among equals, I believe this grants me the right to address this honourable Council and propose such amendment. I do not think my presence here can be regarded as "disrespectful", but as rightful.
I encourage you to wait until the voting and support or oppose this amendment.
I shall make no further comment on this issue,
Dame Viviana Ricchetti,
May I say that this seems to me a useful instrument within the EU and its further development. It is logical that the Heads of State gather together to discuss and advice, comment and speak. A legal framework in the shape of this amendment is normal and complementary.
And mr. Nørreport, reactions as those are misplaced. The EU is based on mutual respect even if we do not agree, also in this house.
mrs. Esnith Annayewa
Councillor of the State Turkmenbaijan
I thank Cllr. Annayewa for her support, whilst congratulating her country for its recent democratic elections, its outcome seeming favourable to the EU as a whole.
As she has stated, it seems logical the Heads of State/Government have a more active role when it comes to set the Union's direction, with their advice.
Dame Viviana Ricchetti,
Councillor Nørreport, I find your mean-spirited and malicious remarks to be completely out of order. Councillor Annayewa is right, we ought to treat each other with mutual respect. That is definitely not how you ought to speak to our Premier Commissioner. Besides lecturing you on how to behave like a decent human being, you probably ought to know that you're also blatantly in the wrong. Commissioners have the power to propose legislation, and thus the Premier Commissioner has every right to present whatever he or she wants. I would give you the benefit of the doubt, since the EU has made many reform in recent times, but these specific changes were made to the Constitution over two years ago. If you're going to be mean, at least get your facts straight next time, Councillor.
I wholeheartedly support this proposal. Our heads of states rarely get together as a large group, and when they do, it's usually to attend coronations or festivities. Even when they do get together for bilateral or multilateral meetings, it's only to discuss national affairs, not the affairs of the European Union and our institutions. There is a clear disconnect there. This legislation would be a step in the right direction of filling that gap.
I do want to make some amendments to this legislation, however. I will wait until the appropriate time (August) to propose them, so that you have an adequate time to also consider them.
Councillor of Inquista
Has this chamber gone to the pits in our nation's absence to have commissioners proposing legislation. I remember a time that the idea of such a proposal would be denied a place in this chamber. Can someone explain why on earth the executive should be proposing legislation? I don't have respect for commissioners who make a mockery of this chamber by determining that they should take over with legislation and have law-making power, this is the journey to affronting national sovereignty. This is a dark day for democracy to see councillors openly supporting commissioner law making, patronising me on my objections with superfluous derailing about conduct, the snowflakes are here , what's the point of us being here is commissioners are making laws? I'm not here to rubber stamp their will. All I ask if for a councillor to present legislation, was it that hard for the Premier Commissioner to find a councillor to do this?
Councillor Nørreport, not only have you addressed me in a disrespectful way, but are now subverting the Council's ways and decisions, and that I shall not tolerate. To state that, during your nation's absence, the Union has fallen into dark pits, is completely outrageous, an it is an argument you should avoid in the near future. I believe Os Corelia has been a fundamental member in the past, but changes have arrived, and it's either a case of adapting or departing.
Now, I shall try and explain why the amendment that gave me the rightful power to propose legislation to this chamber got to be implemented:
In countries such as the United Kingdom, the European Councillor is not appointed, but chosen by the people. If the next Premier Commissioner were to be from the UK, but were to be from a different party than that of its elected Councillor, the proposing of legislation by the Premier Commissioner through the British Councillor would simply be an impossible task. Due to complications and loopholes such as this particular case, this amendment was proposed and accepted by our honourable Councillors and, even though my country wasn't part of the European Union at the time, I commend those men and women's vision on the future of our institutions and on the way we could improve them.
I would also like to evoke a principle that is as democratic as voting itself: the Right of Initiative. One of the very tools many countries' Executives have to rule their nations, primarily in parliamentary systems, such as the one in place in Derecta.
I do agree with you that it would be a travesty if the executive meddled with the passing of laws, but certainly not with its participation in the process of proposing them. after all, separation of powers is needed, but isolation only brings instability, lack of progress and the futility of our institutions.
The European Council and the European Commission ought to collaborate, but not become an interdependent heap of corruption. And I believe my proposal is definetly not a step in that direction.
Also, as I have stated, even though Cllr. Maverick and I have a good professional relationship, this is an Amendment my team and I drafted, and it shall be me who proposes it to the Council.
If this attack is because of my nation's relative novelty in the Union, I tell you, it is a vile move, one that I would have never expected form a fellow colleague. We may not be as experienced as others, but we have initiative, and vigour and passion for this Union, and that is all we need.
I would now invite you to refrain from making any further defamatory comments about any of the members of the European Commission or any Councillor.
Slandering doesn't come with the chair, Councillor Nørreport.
Dame Viviana Ricchetti,
How have I been defamatory? Do explain Premier Commissioner. Is my assertion of the executive interfering with the legislature now being called defamation? I am allowed to make a marked opposition to such a principle, not having respect for you in this action is not the same as defaming your character, am I not allowed to be critical is that what you are saying? In simplicity the executive should not make law but merely act on it, that is your job not to do a councillor role by introducing laws, it shouldn't matter if you are of a different political party because to your councillor because it is not your job to make laws but rather to implement them, by that logic effectively you are giving nations with commissions and councillors two voices int his chamber which is wholey unequal and undemocratic.By making this argument you are inviting the interdependent heap of corruption you speak of. My opposition is not down to your nations new status but to the direct principle at hand, suggesting otherwise is attempting to attack me for opposing this act.
Now for the substantive debate as it appears my opposition is being disrespected and I am not allowed to speak out on anything our dear leader of a Premier does. We don't need an Assembly of heads of state to be institutionalised, sure have a conference once in a while but to waste so much money on supportive infrastructure, bureaucracy and civil service is nothing short of an irresponsible use of the budget, whether it is in surplus or not. My nation objects to our citizens money being used in such a careless manner feeding bureaucratic structures that benefit the many and not the few.
I believe you are misunderstanding my role in the Union, Councillor Nørreport. On the very moment this chamber elected me to be premier Commissioner, my political ties with my country ceased to exist, my duty to the Union becoming my sole objective and directive. Hence, the unfair dual representation you evoke is nothing but non-existent, my friend.
I interpret the attacking of this chamber's past decisions as defamation of its members, Councillor. It is certainly not the content of your critique that worries us, but its ways. Your statements have simply been a display of contemptible pettiness. Irony may be a good resource when trying to undermine your contrary's thesis, but it is certainly not a procedure that is acceptable when referring to your fellow Councillors or Commissioners.
Anyway, despite your tireless effort when it comes to criticising this proposal, I do accept it. I can understand your concerns on the establishment of a new European agency, but, I assure you, it is needed. If we were to let there be some sort of "consensus" about the dates and the form of these summits, they would never be celebrated. The setting of a strong legal base defining these summits is unavoidable.
Concerning the costs, when your nation starts contributing to the European coffers once more, the budgetary surplus will increase. Why not divert some of these funds in the creation of such institution? What I haven't understood is if you're opposing this Assembly because it benefits the many, or because it benefits the few. I can answer that question.
This Assembly not only gives our member states' leader the opportunity to manifest their concerns, but it gives the Peoples of Europe the chance to set the course of the Union. For isn't Government the representation of the people's general will?
Now, I know you may feel outnumbered, as you are the only Councillor that has expressed their doubts on this proposal, but playing the victim won't get you anywhere.
No-one has coerced you to stop asserting your beliefs, so don't try and overturn your faults on us. I think your ways have been lectured, not the content.
As I have already encouraged you to do, wait until the process of amending and voting starts to evaluate this proposition. I hope this pointless debate stops at once, for everyone's good.
Do as you wish, but do so in a pleasant manner, please. It seems as if the howitzers are only firing from one of the trenches, Councillor.
Dame Viviana Ricchetti,
Oh Dame Ricchetti how you patronise me, once again not understanding defamation and gaslighting me publicly. I doubt the sincerity of a lot of what you have said and now worry we as councillors are merely taking part in a rubber stamping exercise for your will. It sounds like this debate has already been discussed behind close doors when you point to me being outnumbered, I am not satisfied as to how this new level of bureaucracy is accountable and democratic and what decision making powers it will have. If you want democracy then I ask you this: why not call for all councillors to be democratically elected? why not demand your position be voted on by the citizens and not councillors where is this true reform? If we are having a surplus then return the money to the people not sitting on it and coming up with new ideas to play with. Many fine politicians in your position have been true democrats back through history, not introduced any policy or legislation and let the council make decisions.
Are we here to debate this proposal, or the merits of the Legislative Powers Amendment of 2016?
Cllr Gisela Stuart
I think the possibility of forcing member states to have their Councillors elected has been debated in the past, such proposal having been submitted by the Inquistan Councillor. Fortunately, it was deemed too federalist, as it would turn this Council into a European Parliament, and was rejected. That would mean countries with large populations would be over-represented, and countries such as my own, would be mere specks of dust in the Council. The people electing the Premier Commissioner would present the same problem. The Premier Commissionership would always fall upon the big Member States.
Now, don't start categorising and saying that I have this Council under my foot. Please, do not interpret consensus as submission, Cllr. Norreport.
Cllr. Stuart, my intention was to debate this proposal, but it has been turn into a debate about whether my office is democratic or not. I, personally, shall cease answering the never-ending concerns of Cllr Norreport, for the good of this chamber and the fluidity of this process.
Dame Viviana Ricchetti,
If you give me the permission premier councillor, I would like to go back on the actual debate: the amendment.
Mrs. Esnith Annayewa, Cllr of Turkmenbaijan
Commissioner and fellow Councillors,
Before we return to the debate of the matter at hand.
I wish to make a motion to have the Councillor for Os Corelia removed from the chamber for the duration of this debate, on the principle of disorderly conduct, in each he attempted to ursurp the rights and privelages of the members of this consitutionally elected executive. Such behaviour is not welcomed within this chamber, nor within this organisation.
Premier Councillor, I beg you to bring back the serenity in this house. There was a disagreement with councillor Norreport but a demand of exclusion for this debate is misplaced as well. Please return to the issue: the amendment. This is not the way how I want to work.
Councillor Annayewa, one thing is my right to propose legislation, and another are powers limited to the Speaker. It is not under my prerogative to moderate this debate or to judge on whether Cllr. Norreport should continue being part of such or not. I leave you Councillors to discuss those issues.
I shall not make any further comments until the dates I provided for the debating. Thank you.
Dame Viviana Ricchetti,
May the Councillor of Gallambria be minded that I am within my right to be critical of and cross examine legislation, just because you are a stooge of the premier ready to rubber stamp her legislation doesn't mean you can kick me out for trying to protect my fellow Corelian's money from being wasted on a vanity legacy project. How dare you try and affront democracy by kicking me out of the chamber, shame on you for being anti-democratic just because you don't agree with what I say.