Amendment to the Constitution for the Neutralization of the Council Speaker and Deputy Speaker
-
Section IV. Speaker of the European Council
I. The Speaker is a Councillor responsible for presiding over sessions of the European Council and moderating the legislative process. The Speaker is the official record-keeper of the European Council and is responsible for managing its statistical productions.
II. The Speaker may call the opening and closing of debating and voting phases in the European Council, set what constitutes a valid vote in accordance with the Constitution, and count the votes when a voting phase has ended. The Speaker may extend Council proceedings if deemed suitable, however, no phase of the legislative process may be shortened and this power cannot be delegated.
III. The Speaker shall act as a mediator if a Councillor lodges an official complaint against another Councillor or against the Deputy Speaker. The process for hearing complaints and coming to a decision is up to the discretion of the Speaker.
Mediation responsibilities cannot be delegated.In the Speaker's absence, he/she may delegate this responsibility to:- The Deputy Speaker, if the complaint is against another councilor.
- A councilor not member of a political group, if the compaint is against the Deputy Speaker.
IV. The Speaker is elected for a period of eighteen months with unlimited terms. There is a seven day period for nominations and debate, followed by a seven day period for voting. Voting shall follow the Alternative Vote system.
V. The Speaker may not be a member of a political group, should the Speaker be a member then he/she must leave his/her political group.
Section V. Deputy Speaker of the European Council
I. The Deputy Speaker is a Councillor responsible for presiding over sessions of the European Council and moderating the legislative process in the absence of the Speaker.
II. In the absence of the Speaker, the Deputy Speaker may call the opening and closing of debating and voting phases in the European Council, set what constitutes a valid vote in accordance with the Constitution, and count the votes when a voting phase has ended. The Deputy Speaker may extend Council proceedings if deemed suitable, however, no phase of the legislative process may be shortened and this power cannot be delegated.The Deputy Speaker may delegate these responsibilities to any Councillor, or defer to the presenter of a proposal if they and the Speaker are both absent.
III. The Deputy Speaker shall act as a mediator if a Councillor lodges an official complaint against another Councillor or against the Speaker. The process for hearing complaints and coming to a decision is up to the discretion of the Deputy Speaker.
Mediation responsibilities cannot be delegatedIn the absence of the Deputy Speaker, he/she may delegate this responsibility to a councilor not a member of a political group.IV. The Deputy Speaker shall be elected at the same time as the Speaker.
V. The Deputy Speaker shall be elected in the same manner as the Speaker, omitting the seven days of debate.
V. The Deputy Speaker may not be a member of a political group, should the Deputy Speaker be a member then he/she must leave his/her political group.
-
Debate starts NOW and will last until 09:15 GMT on August 13th, 2020.
This proposal is a brazenly petty attempt to remove me as the Speaker of the European Council. In the recent session we just had on the Amendment to the Condemnation of the Coup in Icholasen, in which you withdrew your losing amendments and rather frustratingly wasted everyone's time on the matter, I said that your actions were quite dishonorable and unbecoming, but you've truly outdone yourself now. It's constant tantrums and personal feuds with you, Councillor Van Allen. I have no interest in feuding with a fellow colleague of mine. You can do that in your own spare time.
I oppose these changes for two very simple premises. Firstly, each and every Councillor of the European Union is entitled to be part of a eurogroup. All councillors are equal. Secondly, each councillor is first and foremost a representative of their country. As Speaker, yes, I oversee the proceedings of the Council. However, I am still the Councillor of Inquista, the country that represent, and the people who've elected me in part because of my eurogroup affiliation. I am not the Councillor for the European Council, I am the Councillor for Inquista. Banning the Speaker and Deputy Speaker from being part of eurogroups effectively hinders my agenda to represent Inquista, which is my real duty. Inquistans expect a certain voice in the European Council, which I should be free to deliver, and being part of a eurogroup is included in that.
-
Mr. Speaker, this is just like most legislative bodies in Europe. Speakers of the mediators are not counted as a member of a political group/party. This is what I want to implement Mr. Speaker. Neutrality as my proposal says. This is why I supported the creation of a European Parliament in our discussion regarding that matter.
Friedrich van Allen
Councilor, Kingdom of Reitzmag -
This is definetely a bad idea that is part of an ELDR campaign to get rid of the European Progressive Alliance members which don't agree with their concept of what Europe really is. Councillor van Allen is just like a 3 years old kid which complains about mostly everything you do and he does not like, and even sets up different shows to protest because you are going against the ELDR and his person. By the way Mr. van Allen, the Speaker must be neutral, and in Spain as in many other countries, it's elected by the different deputees and is affiliated to a political party. Cllr. Firoux has proven to be neutral, and he is just accomplishing the law, but ELDR strategy will always be the same. "Destroy the EPA."
About this amendment, there not much to say because everything is horrible or just an attept to get rid of Speaker Firoux. Also, you try to shorthen the terms but when Commissioner Juncker proposed to expand them, Reitzmag said: "This proofs you are hungry power Mr. Juncker". Now who's power hungry when you are trying to get rid of a really good speaker? I guess that, as you said some time ago Cllr. van Allen, I wonder if it was an ELDR member who was on the Speaker seat, you would do the same. I highly doubt about that, but we know that hypocresy it's article 1 on the ELDR's manifiesto, so, for sure you would not do this if it was you.
I would like to give you an advice. Instead of trying to get rid of great people who are just doing their work perfectly, try to not retire your amendments and proposals when you see they are getting refused, or try to be less hyprocrite. That's all I needed to say, thank you.
Donald D. Tusk
Councillor for Spain -
"I take huge issue with this blatant, petty attempt at removing Speaker Firoux by the Cllr from the Kingdom of Reitzmag. Just because the Speaker made a ruling, completely within his rights to do so, that Cllr Van Allen doesn't particularly like, does not entitle the Reitzmag Cllr to start attempting to circumvent these rules by bringing his petty EPA/ELDR dispute to the Council floor once again. This is unbefitting any respectable Cllr in this body. I know Cllr Van Allen is enthusiastic about this Counci, and he has made some valuable proposals to us over the last few weeks, but he is completely overzealous in driving through his will and will take any criticism of him to heart. This must stop.
"Cllr Van Allen's statement that presiding officers around Europe are generally not party members is also blatantly untrue and he should know better than to make statements like this. In Inimicus, the Speaker of the House of Commons is a party political figure, and indeed, just by browing through some of the short fact booklets in the Council library, this appears to also be the case in Gallorum and North Diessen. Presiding officers also having party political roles is not uncommon, not unheard of, and we can expect Speakers in this body to act responsibly in the discharge of their duties, regardless of party political affiliation. Creating two subsets of Councillors, one group allowed to be party political and one not, completely defeats the purpose of equal councillorship. The Speaker is not above us. He/she is, with no disrespect to Cllr Firoux, an administrator, and not much more.
"The fact I am making the case for this, despite having vast differences of political opinion with Cllr Firoux and the European Progressives, should be a case in point. I trust Speaker Firoux to run this Council, most efficiently and with the usual rigour and enthusiasm he has displayed so far. If Cllr Van Allen thinks he can do a better job at this, I would invite him to run for Speaker when the next contest arrives. Heck, he can resign his membership and leadership of the ELDR if he becomes Speaker, too. I will judge him, Cllr Firoux, and all other Cllrs present here, on their merit, on their legistlative capacities, and on their words and deeds, rather than by the Eurogroup they are a part of.
"Inimicus stands with the Speaker on this. A grown-up discussion about the role of the Speakership and the duties of European Councillors in in no way misplaced, but this petty attempt by Cllr Van Allen, who has just been reprimanded for not allowing other Cllrs credit where credit is due, and now sees fit to rant and bash the Speaker with yet another useless, time-wasting proposal in this body, cannot count on Inimician support. We #FightForFiroux."
Cllr Sir Augustus Barrington
Emipre of Inimicus -
Councillors will know my and Dragan Trympov's long-standing questions over how, exactly, the incumbent Speaker was able to return to his post without a by-election when he was reinstated after being fired, legally, by what was then universally recognised as the legitimate government of Inquista.
But this debate isn't about that.
The reason why the Speaker is not required to be non-partisan, is not subject to term limits, and has a longer term than most European, but not national, offices, is because it is a limited role. Unlike in most national legislatures, the Speaker cannot censor individual Councillors, he cannot pick and choose what business is debated, and he cannot pick and choose which amendments are voted on. Compared to the Pravoslaviyan National Assembly, the Council is a free-for-all, and that has worked for us.
Because we are such a self-regulating body, the Speaker has relatively few responsibilities, much less potentially controversial ones. He is a presiding officer, and little more. That is why he is not required to be non-partisan, nor to give up his right to speak, propose business and amendments, and vote. Obviously, if we were to impose those restrictions on the Speaker, it would deny an entire member state a full voice in the Council, which we certainly don't want. Therefore, I oppose this amendment.
One more thing, and I don't mean to single out Van Halen over this, but can Councillors please actually speak when they introduce business in this chamber, instead of dumping it on us to figure out what it's for?
Cllr Tupac Shakur
-
"There’s a saying that goes: ‘If you want something done, ask a busy man by the name of Firoux to do it. Our Council Speaker is living proof that when it comes to getting the job done, he delivers."
"And yes, he is part of our party bloc and under his leadership; he us entitled to be part of, we all are equal; and we Progressives had passed the first major needed european legislation. As Progressives continue fighting to protect our rights, protect Europeans and hold this Council to account, Councillor Firoux is leading the charge."
"This proposal is useless, please dismiss or vote against it. We are more than personal feuds."
Emma Granger
Councillor for Montenbourg -
"Obviously I stand against this amendment.
I don't believe that politicalisation of the council is the correct work for this...poolarisation definitely is however. Cllr. Van Allen is once again taking upon himself to fight a problem he only believes in, much to the embarassment of his country.
Speaker Firoux has been nothing short of fantastic, fabulous, and most importantly fair in his role as Speaker. In his role as councillor of Inquistan he has been nothing short of fierce, fercious, and as is anyperson is faulty. Speaker Firoux separates his duties, and carries them out with perfect zeal to ensure that this Council is operating at the best it has been since the inception of the European Union. I believe the phrase is, 'Don't fix what is not broken' and I think it definitely applies in this case.
Do I think a discussion on the role of the Speaker within the European Council is warranted? Possibly it was before this proposal was introduced. Instead of testing the waters, and asking what the council truly felt was needed, Cllr. Van Allen dived head in with a lust for blood after being called out on his honestly annoying habit of withdrawing obviously failed acts. If you believe in something you should see it through to the end.
I thought this chamber was better than personal feuds, but the last few months have obviously proven not. This Union is starting to have more drama than The Apprentice. "
Carita Falk
Archrepublic of Vayinaod -
Colleagues, what is the problem with having a non-partisan speaker? I have included in my proposals that the Speaker can leave his/her political party if he/she is a member. So, in that way I believe that Coun. Firoux can still break up from his party in order to be a speaker. And then he can return as member if he decides to stop being Speaker. That way, we can ensure that the speakership of the Council is non-partisan.
Friedrich van Allen
Councilor, Kingdom of Reitzmag -
But why do we need the Speaker to be non-partisan?
Cllr Tupac Shakur
-
First of all Coun. Shakur, a non-partisan speaker can ensure that there is no bias on the legislative rulings that he/she establishes. Such as for example the rules that Speaker Firoux had established yesterday. This is not some sort of ELDR/EPA conflict I want to open up. I have planned already to make this amendment since last month. It was just now that I had time to present more proposals. So, I hope you understand.
Friedrich van Allen
Councilor, Kingdom of Reitzmag -
Why does a Speaker need to be non-partisan in order to execute Speaker duties without political bias? As if a Councillor is magically without bias just because they don't belong to a Eurogroup? It's just a label, a label doesn't automatically override a Councillor's personality, goals, mission, etc. like some kind of robotic programming. Every previous Speaker has been partisan, yet the position continues to be reliably fair and apolitical.
A Councillor who also is Speaker wears two different hats, so to say. While wearing the "Councillor hat", they represent their nation, or at least...used to...and while wearing the "Speaker hat" they have an entirely different set of responsibilities. A good Speaker can seamlessly switch between their roles. They aren't acting as a member of said group while performing Speaker duties.
Requiring them to leave their Eurogroup, if any, accomplishes nothing except depriving their home nation of representation.We'll oppose the amendment.
Wesley Greene
Councillor of the Duxburian Union -
Coun. Greene, it wouldn't deprive their nation of representation if he/she leaves his/her eurogroup. The key word here is eurogroup, not nation. Therefore, nothing I see is bad for the speaker's country of origin in this amendment.
Friedrich van Allen
Councilor, Kingdom of Reitzmag -
Of course your amendment is explicitly to the detriment of Inquistans. As I laid out in my original statement, Inquistans not only expect to be represented by the councillor that they voted for on the ballot, which includes their eurogroup, but they expect their councillor to be able to advocate on their behalf fully without limitations. I was elected in part because I am a member of a certain eurogroup, and as such, some Inquistans have certain expectation that I support that eurgroup's agenda on behalf of Inquista. Furthermore, being part of a eurogroup has certain perks, which you cannot deny, because otherwise no one would be in a eurgroup if it didn't grant them certain benefits. At least, being part of the EPA certainly does have some benefits, besides our usual Wine Wednesdays. Inquistans both hope and expect that I have access to these benefits, because it ultimately allows me to succeed in the Council, which allows for Inquista to succeed within Europe.
I am the Councillor for Inquista, a position in which I have served for seven years, and have been elected to multiple times. I am also a bishop within the Inquistan College of Bishops, a member of the Secretariat, and the Chief Bishop Secretary of the Inquistan Orthodox Church. Please don't try and tell me or anyone what is best for Inquista, or what hurts Inquistans. I'm pretty sure I'm more of an authority on that.
You have consistently dodged and been unable to answer why the Speaker cannot be a member of a europarty. As it has now already been mentioned ad nauseam, the Speaker's duties are merely administrative. As stated in our Constitution: "The Speaker is a Councillor responsible for presiding over sessions of the European Council and moderating the legislative process. The Speaker is the official record-keeper of the European Council and is responsible for managing its statistical productions." This is a role that could be carried out by the most partisan and extreme of councillors.
Moreover, I feel that I have been a fair and neutral Speaker, and I don't partake in partisan conflict within the confines of the Council. You are the first and only councillor to ever make such a claim, and it seems apparent to me you've lodged it for purely personal reasons. I am a very lenient and laid-back Speaker, who has unfortunately been at the receiving end of your messy machinations, and I feel that you have taken full advantage of my Speakership, without any sort of partisan reprisals. As the Duxburian Councillor spoke just now, I remembered back to a time when Acwellan Devoy was the Speaker of the European Council. Speaker Devoy would have had a no-nonsense attitude to your sort of antics, and was far more strict with Council proceedings. I cannot imagine the amount of complaints and impeachments you would have lodged against him, and how you would have interpreted every slap of the wrist as some sort of personal and partisan attack on yourself. This annoys me greatly, because I am pretty proud of how I conduct myself as Speaker.
Gosh, even as my job as a councillor, and as a chairman of a eurogroup, I consistently work across the aisle and give everything a fair shake. I recently co-wrote legislation with an unaffiliated councillor, that being Councilor Evergreen of Malborya. I am also contributing to legislation which is currently being written that features a councillor from a different eurogoup, and I have voted for multiple Commission candidates who are not affiliated with the EPA. In fact, I am literally married to one of them. Most consequentially, I recently even sponsored an amendment put forth by a Nicoleizian communist which allows for eurogroups to exist with only two members instead of three. I fought tooth and nail in that debate for that amendment to pass, which essentially makes it much easier for other eurogroups to form and come together, and it's currently what is allowing the PEL to exist.
Anyway, I have nothing further to say to this current debate. I shall patiently wait to vote, and I shall vote against.
Edward Firoux
Council Speaker and Councillor for Inquista -
Mr. Speaker, I am sorry if this looked as if I am targeting you. But as I said, I had been planning to put this motion forward since last month. And now is my only time to put all motions I have planned into this Council.
I have always supported you Mr. Speaker. When you were recalled, I was one of those people who went to the streets and protest. I was one of those who tweeted and called for more people to join the protests. But then, your attitude towards me was very unappreciated. I had not been given the chance to stress out that I was democratically elected to my position as deputy councilor before I became councilor after Coun. Hufton's death. You have immediately deprived my nation of representation in the European Council and we had to conduct an elections very quickly. And it resulted in extension of sanctions from the Kingdom of Spain as they accused us of being undemocratic. You may have been fair as a speaker, but I have not seen any of your support towards me.
Friedrich van Allen
Councilor, Kingdom of Reitzmag -
Cllr. van Allen, let me see if I understood well. Is Cllr. Firoux fault that Spain has extended their sanctions? Do you really believe Spain looks at what Cllr. Firoux says about a country or a democratical process? The Spanish President, Jesús Aguilar, is old enough to have his own criteria, there's absolutely no need for him to call Cllr Firoux and say: "Hey Edward, should I saction Reitzmag? Were their elections undemocratic? Cause I'm not able to know if they were or not". That statement, with lots of respect, is completely stupid. You can't charge the Council Speaker with your own country mistakes or yours. Because that's quite disrespectful.
The Kingdom of Spain extended the sanctions because no one, absolutely no one, holds elections in just 4 days with no campaign, no debate. The Reitzmic Government choices and yours have not been the best for your foreign status. I would advice you to work on it, because if we go from mistake to mistake and meanwhile we make campaigns because "that position is not filled by an ELDR" and blablabla, it's not going to be better. Is going to be worse than it actually is.
Donald D. Tusk
Councillor for Spain -
Mr. Tusk, do you really support the idea of depriving my country of representation? And now this forces me to think that if we did not help elections in such duration, you would propose things that would be against the interests of my nation and then pass it without our opinions and votes. That wouldn't have happened it Coun. Firoux did not do that. He did not let me explain myself. So, which is not democratic there?
This is the main reason why I supported to keep the European Assembly and to Reform the European Council in a voluntary poll in one of our discussions. Because it would not deprive any nation with a representative in the European Union's legislative body.
Friedrich van Allen
Councilor, Kingdom of Reitzmag -
Oh wait, now going against Reitzmag and its Councillor is depriving your country of representation? C'mon Cllr. van Allen, you are much better than this. Elections need to have a debate, need to have a campaign. If you don't allow candidates to campaign and tell their ideas in public media, I can't guarantee that those elections were democratic. And again, this kind of victimhood because "oh you go against my country everyday", "EPA is really bad, they don't let Reitzmic Councillor explain himself" and "you would propose things that would be against the interests of my nation and then pass it without our opinions and votes"; believe me I've never seen as much crying as you have done in my whole political career.
And again, reforming the Council just because of your constant victimhood is an horrible idea, and in the discussion, we all have said the same. Abolish the European Assembly, Keep the European Council as it is.
Donald D. Tusk
Councillor for Spain -
Before we get too far down the garden path, it is best we steer this debate to the proposal of the Councillor from Reitzmag.
Mr Van Allen, I find it highly concerning that you did not even consider the possible ramifications and timing of such an amendment being proposed to this Council, and, as such, I am forced to conclude that your motives are somewhat ulterior.
I have served on this council for over four years through several Speakers, and, in that time, I have never felt as though the partisan interests of that Speaker or the nation they represent influenced their duties as Speaker. Speaker Firoux is no exception. He has served this Council with distinction, and his efforts deserve to be commended.
This Council is largely regulated by its members. The Speaker simply does not have enough power to necessitate the requirement that they be nonpartisan. Not only that, but in requiring the Speaker to remain non-partisan, you are hampering that Councillor's ability to represent their nation as they should. If this Amendment were to pass, we would very likely be hard-pressed to find viable candidates for the Speakership, as who would want to sacrifice their nation's voice on the Council simply for the sake of maintaining decorum on the Council floor?
It is possible, after all, to serve in multiple capacities and balance the interests and duties of each, especially when the duties of Speaker are largely constant and really do not conflict with those of the Councillor. In addition to that, we have a framework to lodge complaints against a Speaker and act accordingly, should the need arise. We have yet to see such a need.
You compare with the European Council to that of national legislative bodies. This comparison is a moot point that ignores the immense differences and implications of those differences between two such bodies. Not only that, but I'd go so far as to argue that essentially taking a duly elected representative and confiscating their ability to represent their constituents in the interest of finding an enforcer of sorts is undemocratic. The High Commissioner of the Fremetian Staatsrat, what you might call a Speaker, is appointed by the Staatsrat from a list of present and former judges that have served with the Ministry of Justice and cannot be a sitting member of the Staatsrat. I am not saying that every country should change their national policy, or that a policy change in the Council is necessary. I am saying that denying a constituency their vote in a representative body (regional or otherwise), is wholly undemocratic.
Don't even get me started on the term limits.
How can you talk about European integration and remain so combative with duly elected representatives of Europeans? This is a clear and premeditated move against your perceived political rivals.
I am strongly opposed to this Amendment.
-
Dear Mr. Van Allen. Despite the fact that we are part of the ELDR together, I urge you to have some sense of reality. This amendment coincides with the many recoveries of amendments tabled which are already in the voting procedure. If it don't get your way, you withdraw.
When someone tells you the truth, you bite back hard, without any deliberate arguments or style. I am against this amendment to be clear.
Mrs. Azaya Dubecq
EU Councilor for the Republic of Nofoaga
The Kingdom of Spain
