Omnibus Repeal Motion

[Inquista]

Omnibus Repeal Motion

Authored by Cllr. Edward Firoux (Inquista)

---

Preamble
A motion to repeal several acts from the Acquis Communautaire of the European Union.

---

SECTION I. REPEALS
I. This motion shall repeal the European Common Culture and Education Act of 2018 in its entirety from the Acquis Communautaire.
II. This motion shall repeal the Refugee Protection Act of 2018 in its entirety from the Acquis Communautaire.
III. This motion shall repeal the European Finance Agency Act of 2014 in its entirety from the Acquis Communautaire.
IV. This motion shall repeal the Committee Reform Act of 2013 in its entirety from the Acquis Communautaire.

[Inquista]

Debate starts NOW and will last until 03:30 GMT on July 7th, 2020.

You can find the contents of the pieces of legislation in question here:
I. European Common Culture and Education Act 2018
II. Refugee Protection Act 2018
III. European Finance Agency Act 2014
IV. Committee Reform Act 2013

I will now lay out my reasoning for each of the repeals.

The European Common Culture and Education Act was principally created to establish a "European Basic Teachings Program" across the EU, where students could study for a "European Baccalauréat". In of itself, I am actually fine with this concept, but the actual curriculum of the European Baccalauréat is terrible and would make for a very poor education, and virtually no school in Inquista - or anywhere in Europe, I believe - provides this education. If this was to work, then it ought to be amended completely from top to down, and the entire curriculum needs to be revamped. More egregiously, however, this act also creates the "European Institute of Culture and Education", which is an unnecessarily complex and intrusive institution, which took over control of the European Heritage Site program, among others. This act was also passed through a stealthy 2-0 vote, which was supported only by Derecta and Montenbourg.

The Refugee Protection Act is the epitome of a bill with good intentions, but a terrible execution. Let's begin with the fact that this is easily the most ignored pieces of legislation ever, and very few countries around current refugee hotspots, such as Dromund Kaas, have implemented this act. This act was meant to help Kaasian refugees, but it's actually hindered them even more, as both Pravoslaviya and Angleter have since taken a more hardline stance on Kaasian refugees since this act was passed. There is only one part of this act that I do like, which is subclause A of Clause 2 of Section I, which prevents refugees from being sent back to a place where they are likely to be persecuted. I do like this subclause, and I believe we should codify it in the UDoHR separably from this act. Subclause B of Clause 2 of Section I is the particular headache which has pretty much resulted in Angleter and Pravoslaviya shunning refugees entirely, because it requires member states to facilitate the transport of refugees - as far as possible - to a a place that will grant them asylum, and a state may not obstruct that person's efforts to seek asylum. As in, border security is literally not allowed to stop refugees, at all, ever, in an effort for asylum, and it's actually their job to facilitate the refugee's ability to gain asylum anywhere. If we want to genuinely protect refugees, Kaasian or otherwise, then we probably need to create an act that protects them without most of the EU flagrantly ignoring it.

The European Finance Agency Act should be repealed because it's basically redundant. The European Central Bank already does what most of what the Finance Agency does, and the Agency itself is a bureaucratic mess which never successfully operated in the first place.

The Committee Reform Act is entirely useless, since we stopped having Council committees a very long time ago. I am actually not opposed to having Council committees, but I think the committees will be better off anyway as informal groups which can organize themselves rather than having them be rigid structures subjugated to these laws.

Edward Firoux
Council Speaker and Councillor for Inquista

[Spain]

Before I start analyzing every single legislation piece that you have proposed to repeal, I would like to say something: I'm totally pro for removing every single piece of legislation that has been brought into this Omnibus Repeal Motion, so, Mr. Firoux, you can expect an affirmative vote from me and the Kingdom of Spain.

The European Common Culture and Education Act 2018 it's just a bunch of words that have done nothing but making the European Union a more difficult place with complex acts. I also support the "European Baccalauréat" concept, because our students should have that opportunity to study abroad and just not get to know their culture, but many others in the whole of the European Union. The curriculum needs to be updated to the 21st Century, and also privates other Acts, for example, the European Heritage Site Program Act which I'm trying to ammend and you have named on here. And about the voting result, if we all realise properly, this act was passed by 2 nations that have not given any sign of life for a year in Derecta's case, more than a year in Montenbourg's case.

The Refugee Protection Act 2018 it's another act which was passed with only a vote of difference and by a nation that is not in the European Union anymore and hasn't given any sign of life for years. As you have said, Mr. Firoux, this pretended to help Kaasian refugees but made their situation even worse. So it's another act we are going to remove.

And about the 2 last acts that have been proposed for this Omnibus Repeal, also I'm for removing them. The European Central Bank does what the European Finance Agency Act 2014 pretended to create, so we are spending money in something that doesn't work anymore. And about the Committee Reform Act 2013 it's completely stupid to me, with no proposal to offend the creator of that act.

Donald D. Tusk
Councillor for Spain

[Inimicus]

"I would like to start by thanking Cllr Firoux for the proposal he has laid before us today - it is indeed great to see Inimicus is not alone in desiring to end unncessary red tape and conflicting legislation eminating from this estimable body.

I think the least controversial parts of Cllr Firoux' proposal are Acts III and IV of his repeal bill, the European Finance Agency and Committee Reform Acts, respectively. I doubt there will be anyone in this room who would not support the repeal of these Acts as they have no functional significance in the present day and age and have, wisely, been replaced by more effective institutions in recent times.

I will leave the debate on the Common Culture and Educaton Act to those Cllrs more familiar with the text of the legislation, although I am convinced by Cllr Firoux' reasoning on this bill, too. Instead, I want to focus on the Refugee Protection Act. Inimicus, as a nation bordering the war-struck nation of Dromund Kaas, is directly involved in the hosting and transfer of thousands of destitute refugees resulting from this dreadful conflict, and I can with all honesty admit that the introduction of this Act has not changed our approach to these refugees one bit. I would particularly draw your attention to Section I (2e) of this act, which stipulates:

Nothing in this resolution shall place any restrictions on the right of member nations to grant asylum to any person they so wish; member nations are encouraged to apply greater and more liberal protections for refugees than mandated in this resolution, and neither shall this resolution be interpreted to compel any nation to grant asylum to any person.

Then what purpose does this Act serve? The Inimician government, for one, is confident about its approach to refugees, and never felt compelled by this Act to change its approach - because the Act does not legislate for such changes. I therefore fully support its repeal and Cllr Firoux can be confident the Inimician government will vote for this proposal.

Cllr Sir Augustus Barrington
Empire of Inimicus

[Inquista]

Voting on this motion begins NOW and will last until 07:15 GMT on July 11th.

On behalf of the Most Blessed State of Inquista, I vote FOR this motion.

Edward Firoux
Council Speaker and Councillor for Inquista

[Malborya]

On behalf of The Malboryan Republic, I vote FOR this motion.

Kent Evergreen
European Councillor of The Malboryan Republic

[Icholasen]

On behalf of the United Dominions of Icholasen, I vote FOR this motion.

---

• Councillor Duchess Poppy Carlton-Romanov

[Spain]

On behalf of the Kingdom of Spain, I vote FOR this motion.

Donald D. Tusk
Councillor for Spain

[Inimicus]

On behalf of the Imperial government of the Empire of Inimicus, I, Sir Augustus Barrington, wholeheartedly vote FOR this motion.

[Duxburian Union]

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

Wesley Greene
Councillor of the Duxburian Union

[Vayinaod]

On behalf of the Archrepublic of Vayinaod, I vote FOR this motion.

Carita Falk
Archrepublic of Vayinaod

[Leagio]

On behalf of the Commonwealth of Leagio, I vote FOR this motion.

Francis Plessis
EU Councilor of Leagio

[Pravoslaviya]

On behalf of the Kingdom of Pravoslaviya, I vote FOR this motion

Cllr Tupac Shakur

[Inquista]

With 9 votes for, this motion has PASSED.

Edward Firoux
Council Speaker and Councillor for Inquista