Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009

BrumBrum

I would honestly be opposed to anyone in Telum or ECON getting an additional seat or seat on the ENAA. I believe this would threaten the neutrality of the organisation by giving all the power to one alliance by giving them 3 out of 5 seats. I believe it should be a nation like Fremet or some other nation that is neutral yet has experience of nuclear weapons.

James Mizrachi-Roscoe , Councillor for United Duchies

Duxburian Union

The seat should not be politicized. To restate a point I raised in an earlier debate, Triumvirate nations held most of the seats for something like 13 years, but not once in all that time did anyone object to that or even express concerns about neutrality. And Triumvirate nations held far more military power than current alliances in the EU. If that arrangement was not concerning, why would a Telum nation be? And why is it being politicized in the first place? Inimicus is clearly senior to Fremet. Taking a junior nuclear power over a senior one needs serious, non-political justifications.

Wesley Greene
Councillor of the Duxburian Union

Czech Slavia

There exists no reason to remove Icholasen from the ENAA, although the Democratic Republic of Czech Slavia sees rewording of the act, as proposed by Councillor Tilkanas, as necessary. The Democratic Republic of Czech Slavia is ready to consider expanding the permanent membership status in the ENAA to Inimicus, but only if permanent membership status is not removed from any state. That has been our position previously and it will remain our position.

Václav Kohout
Councillor for Czech Slavia

Inimicus

Cllr Mizrachi-Roscoe's statement is a display of his partisanship and narrow-minded politics-based thinking rather than the Inimician government's. He will know, as much as everyone in this Council knows, that the Inimician government is not Reitzmag or the Duchies. The Inimician government and the individuals it has sent to the European stage have a proven track record of fair and decent evaluation of legal and political matters -- simply look at Inimician Chief Justice Benjamin Steyn's term at the head of the ECoJ, or the various important contributions my predecessors and I have made in this Council. I stated it before, and will state it again: Inimicus would not, in any way, selectively block ENAA applications based on alliance structures. Doing such would not only be petty, childish, and stupid, but would also damage the credibility a body like the ENAA needs.

Cllr Kahout raises an interesting point, although I suspect simply adding another nation to the ENAA membership was not the purpose of this Amendment, or indeed the Amendment raised by Cllr Yahontov earlier. Nevertheless, should more Councillors voice support for this strategy, I shall propose an amendment accordingly.

Nicholas Benfield
Deputy Speaker

Istkalen

Debate has ended. There is one amendment for vote.

AMENDMENT I

SECTION II. THE MAKEUP OF THE ENAA

The ENAA shall consist of five members, four of which will be permanent members and one of which will be selected by the European Council every 12 months. This single elected member must be a non-nuclear state and will vacate their seat if they obtain nuclear weapons.
The four ~~permanent members of~~ nations with representation on the ENAA are as follows:
a. ~~The Aelir of the Kendro-Laatzenian Dominions of~~ the Duxburian Union
b. ~~The Prime Minister of the Apostolic Kingdom of~~ Angleter
c. ~~The Archbishop of the Most Blessed State of~~ Inquista
d. ~~The Korojaunu of the United Dominions of Icholasen~~ ~~The Emperor of Inimicus~~ Icholasen
The nations that will have representation on the ENAA should assign their most powerful political figure to the role.
To ratify a vote within the ENAA, a majority of 51% or greater of the present voting members is required. For there to be a valid vote, a minimum quorum of three members must be obtained.

5. For six months after this clause comes into effect, the representation of Icholasen shall be suspended and replaced, on a temporary basis, by Inimicus. After the end of this six months, the Council will hold a regular vote on whether to further extend this suspension for any period of time.

Voting on amendments starts NOW and will continue until 23:59 GMT on 20 April 2022.

Iras Tilkanas
Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen

Inimicus

The Empire of Inimicus votes AGAINST the Amendment.

Nicholas Benfield
Deputy Speaker

Elthize

The State of Elthize votes AGAINST this amendment.

Liam Zachary, Councillor for Elthize

Spain

I vote AGAINST this amendment.

Donald Tusk
Councillor for Spain

Nofoaga

The Republic of Nofoaga votes AGAINST this amendment.

Mrs. Paul-Gabrielle Muzhare
EU-Councillor for the Republic of Nofoaga

Inimicus

Madam Speaker, with your permission, I suggest we move to the next stage of proceedings with this proposal. With four votes AGAINST and no votes FOR, the only amendment has been defeated and the motion is as it stands.

Final voting begins NOW and ends 29th APRIL 2022 AT 14:30 BST.

The Empire of Inimicus votes FOR this Amendment.

Nicholas Benfield
Deputy Speaker

Spain

On behalf of the Kingdom of Spain, I vote FOR the Amendment.

Donald Tusk
Councillor for Spain

Nofoaga

On behalf of the Republic of Nofoaga, I vote AGAINST this amendment.

Mrs. Paul-Gabrielle Muzhare
EU-Councillor for the Republic of Nofoaga

Elthize

The State of Elthize ABSTAINS from voting.

Liam Zachary, Councillor for Elthize

Leagio

On behalf of the Commonwealth of Leagio, I ABSTAIN in this vote.

Linoel Morel
EU Councilor for Leagio

BrumBrum

On behalf of United Duchies I vote AGAINST this ammendment
James Mizrachi Roscoe, Councillor for United Duchies

Fayrrendel

On behalf of the Realm of Great Ruthund, I vote AGAINST this amendment.

Tony Odhinazen
EU Councilor for Ruthund

Kingdom of Reitzmag

The Kingdom of Reitzmag's Assembly for the European Council has decided through a vote with the presence of all members as follows:

Question: Support the 2022 Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act of 2009?

Ayes - 2
Noes - 9
Abtentions - 0

The Noes have it. The Noes have it.

Therefore, the Kingdom of Reitzmag votes AGAINST this amendment.

Dame Yuridiana Yahontov GCC
Councilor, Kingdom of Reitzmag

Duxburian Union

On behalf of the Union of Duxburian Dominions, I vote FOR the amendment.

Wesley Greene
Councillor of the Duxburian Union

California

On behalf of the United Kingdom, I ABSTAIN

Inquista

On behalf of the Most Blessed State of Inquista, I vote AGAINST this amendment.

Bp. Karinn Lallana
Councillor for Inquista