Const. Amendment Proposal for Chain of Succession



  • I move that we amend the European Union constitution to include a designated way for a Premier Commissioner to never be without a replacement, hoping to eliminate the inactivity that the Commission falls under with no Premier Commissioner.

    Here is the proposition:

    The European Union Premier Commissioner must assign when he ascends to office the order in which he would like the Commissioners to replace him in the event that the Premier Commissioner abdicates his position. The Premier Commissioner should base his opinion on the matter not as someone who is only a friend of the Commissioner but who would be the best candidate to lead the Union through his abdication.

    Based upon the amendment, the Premier Commissioner should find it in the best interest of the Union to not place someone in the post that would, in his mind, be in the next in line position, but rather continue to place the Commissioners in the positions that are their strengths and could lead to prosperity in the Union.

    However, in the event that the Premier Commissioner does not allocate who he or she would have in their chain of succession, an emergency protocol set out in the Constitution should therefore take over the decision. I motion that the Commissioner of Foreign Affairs be set as next in line for that event, followed by the Commissioner of Internal Affairs, Commissioner of Defense, and the Commissioner of Economic Affairs.


    The Rt. Hon. Francois Fillon, Commissioner of Internal Affairs



  • I second this motion.


  • administrators

    Thirded.


  • administrators

    Fourthed.



  • Then we are agreed?

    Let us set forth a vote on the proposed amendment.



  • Angleter votes YES.



  • French Albyon votes yes!



  • OOC:



  • This is a very important issue, people. We need all of you to vote!!!



  • According to Articles VI and VII of the Constitution, the voting phase has ended and the Amendment has been ratified 2-0 (100%). I thus believe that the Rt. Hon. Helen Smith EC is to be sworn in as Premier Commissioner as soon as possible, and I would like to express my amazement that only two delegates- myself and the French Albyon delegate- voted on this matter, which was of utmost importance.


  • administrators

    Hmmm, I thought I did vote on this. Make that 3-0.


  • administrators

    I though I had voted this as well. Count my vote For too.



  • As the incoming Temporary Premier Commissioner of the EU, I intend for the voting system in the European Council to be reformed in a way that would not lead to the current confusion and does not rely on the kind of activity that I have not seen in the EU for well over a year. I trust that I shall be sworn in in the very near future (possibly Monday) and aim to get on with the job immediately.

    The Rt. Hon. Helen Smith EC,
    Commissioner for Foreign Affairs.


  • administrators

    I do not second the proposal that the current voting system is confusing. Although this constitutional amendment did not get voted upon in full accordance with the Constitution, the Soviet Union will back and respect it. But it is our opinion that the current voting system is fine and that the issues with the lack of activity in part of the Commissioners is chronic and related to other reasons.

    OOC: And they are all off-character. To name a few: the population of NationStates has been shrinking, and like many other regions we have been badly hit. Also I am not sure what people get to expect from our forum when they see the Neo-Venetia war, political discussions, and continuous zombie outbreaks in the same board. Recruitment from NationStates will bring us little to no extra activity and you all know it. We need to act off-character and not in-character to see the forum functional again. While we are at that, we may or may not have to separate ourselves completely from NationStates, which has declining popularity.



  • Firstly I would like to welcome the USSR back to the European Council.

    The current voting system allows for just two days of debate, two more days of amendments and then three days of voting. Judging by the lack of activity that has blighted us for a long period, this is a completely inadequate timeframe for a functioning system. It would be quite facile for a small group of extreme nations to push through their designs in such a small period of voting time for wont of lack of activity from moderate states.

    It is my opinion that debate time be extended to four days, amendments time be extended to three days, and voting to last an entire week. That way we can attain enough votes to make the European Council function once more.

    The Rt. Hon. Helen Smith EC,
    Commissioner for Foreign Affairs.

    OOC: I agree that we need to increase emphasis on the OOC side of the forums to see us more active again. The Chamber of Loose Lips has been more a Quiet Zone for at least the time that I've been active (which is just over a year), and that has to change if we are to attract more activity. Also I do not think we should split from NS. NS remains our sole feeder of active 'nations' and if we split from it then we would have much less chance of gaining activity than if we remain tied to it.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to NS European Union was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.