Amendment to the European Constitution on Raising the Definition of Majority
-
Given the problems this Council faces in placating majorities as is, the Empire of Inimicus is opposed to this Amendment. Making it harder for legislation to pass will in no way solve any of the issues we face as a Union. This is why the Empire of Inimicus also opposes Cllr Zachary's amendment. Councillors can vote on whichever legislation they prefer, and occasionally situations will arise where not voting is as much of a political act as voting Yes or No. Forcing Councillors to vote is a restriction on our representative ability.
The Empire of Inimicus recognises the points made by Cllr Lallana, about the spiteful and personal way business is conducted in this Council all too frequently -- although I suspect the Inimician government isn't one for advancing the "people's liberation from the shackles of oppression" -- one could say, far from it. Nevertheless, this is not an issue solved by legal ways, at least not mainly. We could, for instance, make it more difficult for councillors to simply withdraw legislation which has been amended by the Council and subsequently no longer serves the purpose of the proposing Councillor, as happens time and again from the side of our Reitzmic colleagues. We could prevent Councillors from introducing hundreds of nonce amendments changing single words in legislation to obfuscate the process, as I'm sure you all know occured at least once courtesy of our Istkalenian colleague.
These are things that would help our work and make us a more effective and relatable Council that works for, in Cllr Lallana's words, the proletarian masses. Making it harder for a 40% minority to block proposals backed by a clear majority will, clearly, not.
Cllr Nicholas Benfield
Deputy Speaker -
I would like to welcome Councillor Kalessed to the European Council and thank her for this very interesting proposal.
However, it being interesting does not mean that it arises my concerns for a series of reasons already addressed by Councillor Lallana on her first and second concerns, yet I will not comment on the third one because I am suspicious of, under the Inquistan Councillor's criteria, 'wishing to crush and trample on the workers of the European Union'. Still, Councillor Lallana, let me correct you on something that you have said about the consensus: many of us would agree if some of the proposals made by your Eurogroup were not on the far-left ideological spectre.
That said, the Council usually relies on short majorities, and if it is already difficult to pass legislation with the 55% threshold, which in my opinion should be turned into a 50%+1 majority; the Commissioner needs to be reminded about the low activity this chamber has had during the past months. It is clear that the European Council has a huge activity problem, and it will have to be addressed at some point in the future. Another issue that this institution has is, as the Deputy Speaker mentioned, the increase of fillibusters as well as the behaviour of some Councillors (Tusk looks at Cllr. Yahontov for a moment) that take the Council procedures as a joke and withdraw their proposals when an amendment they do not like is passed. Maybe an update of the Council's Code of Conduct could work?
The Council needs to be active and effective, and as a matter of fact, we all need to cooperate towards that, incluiding the European Commission. Here is my advice for you, dear Commissioner: make proposals that do not hold up the Council, but that gets this institution moving.
Donald Tusk
Councillor for Spain
The Kingdom of Spain
His Majesty the King, Felipe VI
President Alberto Núñez-Feijóo
Councillor and Council Speaker Donald Tusk -
Having considered the proposal I am opposed to this amendment. We already have great difficulty passing much needed acts and reforms as it is due to the 55% +1 ,60%+1 added with a minimum of 10 will only make this worse. I wouldn't be opposed to a quorum of 10 if the majority was lowered to 50%+1 . The system should either remain the same or be changed like I just mentioned to avoid gridlock in the EU Council. We don't want a council easily passing radical euro-federalising acts with ease but neither do we want nothing to ever pass or be accomplished. We must strike a balance.
James Mizrachi-Roscoe , Councillor for United Duchies
-
Before beginning voting, I would like to clarify whether Cllr. Zachary proposed his amendment merely as an example or as an actual amemdment.
Iras Tilkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen -
Councillor Tilkanas, I would like to clarify that the amendment I proposed was a mere example and I wish for it to be not up for voting.
Liam Zachary, Councillor for Elthize
-
Voting starts NOW and will continue until 23:55 GMT on 9 July 2022.
On behalf of the Republic of Istkalen, I vote AGAINST this amendment.
Iras TIlkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen -
On behalf if United Duchies I vote AGAINST this ammendment
Councillor for United Duchies, James Mizrachi-Roscoe -
On behalf of the Kingdom of Spain, I vote AGAINST this amendment.
Donald Tusk
Councillor for Spain -
The State of Elthize votes AGAINST this amendment.
Liam Zachary, Councillor for Elthize
-
On behalf of the United Principalities of Ineland I vote AGAINST this amendment.
Dominic Ferry, Councillor for Ineland
-
With five votes against, this amendment has failed.
Iras Tilkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen
