Amendment to the Constitution
-
Debate will be extended for 48 hours, until 02:00 GMT on November 14th, 2020.
If I'm honest, I'm not a fan of this. The European Council is meant for Councillors. If we want Representatives - who can debate, but not vote on legislation - then I believe we should have an entirely separate body for that.
Bigger picture, though, I believe this proposal would make the European Assembly even more redundant. The purpose of the European Assembly is explicitly for the highest representatives of member states government to meet and discuss. Sure, the European Assembly isn't exactly involved with any Council affairs as it is, but if there was to be any reform, then it ought to begin there, in my opinion. My concern is that we just keep adding layers of bureaucracy and new positions, and so many of them have become redundant, unnecessary, or totally undeserved.
Edward Firoux
Council Speaker and Councillor for Inquista -
As the United Duchies councillour I support this motion. This protects democracy while ensuring government views are heard in this chamber. It strikes the right balance. We will be voting for this ammendment.
Tobias Johnson Farage -
I will not support this legislation because I don't believe that councillors will work independently from representatives. I am concerned that this will limit councillors freedom and make representatives act like a watchdog for councillors. If we want more representation for the governments in the council, then we should've let member states to decide the way they chose their councillor, but that's another story. This amendment would have been more defined and less half-assed if representatives could vote and propose legislation, but the councillors having the power to veto the legislation if possible, but bicameralism is a garbage way of doing things and an unicameral system is more effective and superior in every way.
Aylin Gökçen
Councillor of Alkharya -
I also don't see the point of this. Councillors are already free to invite whoever they need to give input during debate. The European Constitution should only state what's absolutely necessary, without redundancy, as we already can't agree on what the existing words mean.
Wesley Greene
Councillor of the Duxburian Union -
I'd like to request for another debate extension so we can thoroughly examine this proposal.
Friedrich van Allen
Councilor, Kingdom of Reitzmag -
Sure. Debate will be extended for 48 hours from the previous extension, until 02:00 GMT on November 16th, 2020.
Edward Firoux
Council Speaker and Councillor for Inquista -
There is a real argument to be had about the structure and form of the European Council; a debate which, in fact, we have been having in this chamber for years on end. This, however, is not a viable solution in the eyes of the Imperial Government. As Cllr Greene rightly pointed out, Councillors in this body are already more than welcome to invite guests and speakers into the Council to speak on whatever issue. This Amendment does not solve the debate on elected vs appointed councillorships, it does not solve the debate on proportional vs equal representation. Inimicus will oppose it.
Hetty Tilki
Empire of Inimicus -
This idea could be great for those wishing to have their "Government Representative" on the Council, but that's not something I would be confortable here. I will give you a simple example to explain my choice: Imagine a Councillor stands against for a certain bill, which we will call "Bill A"; but the Government representative on this chamber is for it. Now, the Councillor votes against Bill A, which makes the Government and the Representative be mad at our Councillor. If his Government recalls their Councillor, and they don't allow him to run again. What do we get? A voice being silenced at this chamber because of the representative's idea.
With no representatives, at least no one can tell the Councillor what they want him to vote or do, and there is no excuse to recall him because he couldn't have met with the President, Prime Minister or whoever. But if we get a representative, the example could be true in a few days. That's why I will vote against it. Thank you.
Donald D. Tusk
Councillor for Spain -
Debate is now over. Final voting begins NOW and will last until 07:00 GMT on November 21st, 2020.
On behalf of the Most Blessed State of Inquista, I vote AGAINST this constitutional amendment.
Edward Firoux
Council Speaker and Councillor for Inquista -
On behalf of the Union of Duxburian Dominions, I vote AGAINST the amendment.
Wesley Greene
Councillor of the Duxburian Union -
On behalf of Alkharya, I vote AGAINST this constitutional amendment.
Aylin Gökçen
Councillor of Alkharya -
On behalf of the Republic of Nofoaga, I vote AGAINST this constitutional amendment.
Mrs. Paul-Gabrielle Muzhare,
EU Councillor for the Republic of Nofoaga -
On behalf of the Kingdom of Montenbourg, I vote AGAINST this constitutional amendment.
Emma Granger
Councillor for Montenbourg -
On behalf of the Kingdom of Spain, I vote AGAINST this constitutional amendment.
Donald D. Tusk
Councillor for Spain -
On behalf of United Duchies I vote FOR this constitutional amendment.
Tobias Johnson Farage , United Duchies
-
On behalf of the Commonwealth of Leagio, I vote AGAINST this amendment.
Francis Plessis
EU Councilor for Leagio -
On behalf of the Kingdom of Fremet, I hereby ABSTAIN from voting.
Charles Michel
Councilor for the Kingdom of Fremet -
The Empire of Inimicus votes AGAINST this Amendment.
Hetty Tilki
-
On behalf of the Kingdom of Reitzmag, I ABSTAIN from voting.
Friedrich van Allen
Councilor, Kingdom of Reitzmag
The Kingdom of Spain
