Northeast Assembly Thread

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Good to be here, looks like we got some work ahead of us.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I don't think making it an elected position will somehow make people interested in undertaking it.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Official Ballot of the Northeast

Speaker of the Assembly:
[X] Dallasfan65
[  ] Write-in: __________

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I'll pretty much echo Verily here, I support this.

The Lt Governorship is really unnecessary, remove the position, and amend the line of succession to make the Speaker the next in line, but in the event of the Speaker having to act for the Governor in a temporary capacity have a Deputy Speaker who's already a member of the assembly to act in their stead.

 

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Just an odd thought - what about trying a single legislator and a plural executive?  Would be interesting to see how that plays out in practice.

It's certainly an intellectually interesting concept, but I'd be dubious, honestly, about it's ability to be really effective.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Aye

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I should stress that my support of this, as indicated by my vote, is somewhat qualified.

I'm not 100% sure this will arrest a lack of activity or a perceived lack of competitiveness.

You get more competition with a higher participation rate.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Mr Speaker,

I consider this to be among the most significant powers bestowed upon this Assembly, Fezzyfestoon was elected virtually unanimously as Lt Governor of this region.

I wish to point this out as we know the step we are currently taking is going against what was the will of the people.

However, the Lt Governor has displayed a lack in interest in fulfilling that role to which he was elected, and has shown an equal lack of interest in defending himself in the face of his impeachment. I was fully prepared to have an open mind should the Lt Governor had appeared before us.

We are granted this power, to use it only in those times when we have exhausted all reasonable avenues, I believe that point has been reached. The vote I cast has been done so with considerable introspection and with the greatest seriousness.

Therefore, in the interest of active and effective government, I vote,


AYE.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Thank you Mr Speaker,

Hepatitis B is a terrible disease, it also, incredibly common.

This is disease that is carried in bodily fluids, and unlike many of the more feared infectious diseases, including saliva.

The condition leads to painful inflammation of the liver, and has been linked a key cause in primary liver cancer, with the effects similar to that of chronic alcoholism.

The disease is currently in epidemic proportions in many parts of the world, with 400m people world-wide currently infected with chronic hepatitis B, which is treatable, but not curable.

It is highly infectious, and this adolescent age group has been specifically targeted for vaccination programs around the world. When you are infected as an adult, assuming medical attention is quickly gained, most will recover fully. This age group, however, has little immunity to battle the virus, so a significant proportion of those infected under the age of 21, will carry the disease with them for the rest of their lives. With the massive increased risk of liver cirrhosis and cancer.

The traditional method of vaccination is 3 injections over 3 months, this is to slowly increase immunity. So this is what is meant in the Bill as a 'course'.

This is an age at which children are more social and learning about their sexuality. While it is primarily an STI, it is one of the most easily gained and spread infectious diseases.

It should also be noted that it is recommended by Doctors also for children at a younger age who play contact sports.

There is also a public health element, Hepatitis B can develop into a pandemic very quickly if measures are not taken to control it. While developing countries are most at risk, there have been many localised outbreaks in areas of the developed world too.

This is a program with limited cost impacts, but considerable social and health benefits. The contribution from parents will reduce the impact on the bottom line by roughly a third of what it would cost if it were fully government funded.

This disease exists, it's effects are horrific, and our young people are the most at risk. It seems common sense in the face of a preventable disease, to do what we can to prevent it.

Thank you Mr Speaker.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

If I can respond.

Yes, there is a large proportion of children who are already vaccinated, and that's a good thing.

The honourable gentleman has forgotten those may not have been vaccinated as a child, were not, due to financial circumstances.

This is not compulsory, I never have and never will consider such an approach, parents have the right to not vaccinate their children, as do the students up to the point that their rights become more autonomous from their parents.

There is no desire to ostracise unvaccinated children, and the Gentleman knows this full well, and this is a highly melodramatic attempt. 

Let me repeat, this is not a mandatory action, parents and older students will still have that fundamental right to go ahead or refuse.

The key element that the Gentleman misses is that for parents who want their children to be immunised but were unable to do it due to financial restraints, no longer have that concern.

I also agree that mass TB vaccinations in the third world would be a great program.

But let me just do it this way

1. this is not compulsory
2. this fills in gaps where parents were unable to have their child immunised or for older students to do so
3. this is not an expensive program taking into account the proportions already immunised and
4. the rights of parents to object remains in place.

While I expect most Bills requiring spending to be opposed by the Gentleman, this is low-cost opportunity for immunity against a dangerous disease, with no rights being impinged on. 

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Aye

I would like to stress that this is about back-filling gaps that do exist, there are many children who were not vaccinated, and many parents who would take advantage of such a program. While I note the gentleman's concern for the vilification of children, this is hyperbole in the face of an affordable program that has international evidence to attest to its effectiveness.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Therefore it'll go down, lol

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

...ok, thirded.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

This is a reasonable procedural device, I'll probably support it.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Aye.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I apologise, needed to butt in here, I wanted to get my concerns on the record.

I commend the gentleman for this Bill, I feel it addresses some important issues.

I fully support lowering the drinking age to 18, however, there are some other elements of this Bill, that I feel do not reflect those key issues when it comes to drinking. In its current form, I cannot vote for this in its entirety.

I will be offering up amendments to this Bill.

Northeast Regional Drinking Policy

1. In accordance The Regional Legal Age Act, the Northeast hereby sets the drinking age to 18.

2. Any bar, liquor store, or other legitimate distributor unknowingly accepting a false ID will not be penalized.

3. Any bar, liquor store, or other legitimate distributor knowingly accepting a false ID shall be fined no less than $5,000, and no greater than $10,000 for a first offence. Each repeat offense will increase the fine by a multiplier of two, with the distributor's liquor licence being revoked after four instances.

4. Any minor having been found using a false ID shall face destruction of the ID in question and twenty-four hours of community service for a first offense. Each subsequent act will incur an additional twenty-four hours of community service, as well as a $1000 fine, which will go towards alcohol rehabilitation programs.

5. With permission of a parent or legal guardian, a minor has permission to consume, but not purchase, alcohol, including but not limited to: wine, champagne, beer, whiskey, liquor, etc.


You will note that I have amended this Bill to remove clause 5, I have done this as I feel this Bill should be focused on the purchase of alcohol, rather than the consumption. I also think this would be a very difficult clause to monitor, under this clause it would be fine for a 10-year old to have a beer.

Thank you,

I yield the floor.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Aye

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I support this motion.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I don't believe this is a perfect Bill, but it does do something positive, so...

Aye.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I would like to ask the Gentlemen, what's the point of a Federated state if we don't trust the Federal government to do anything?

Obviously, if a Federal Act, whether by Executive Order or legislation is deemed unconstitutional, then obviously we would not be bound to it. So I take from this you are asking the Assembly, to make a call on the constitutionality of such an Act, which may leave this region vulnerable to abuse from ideological thugs, of any political persuasion?

While I know the Gentleman clearly has strong feelings on the role of Government, I must know what did Government do to you to have so little faith in your fellow Atlasians?

I believe if a Region considers an Act of the Federal Government to be unconstitutional they have every opportunity to have that judgement made, unless you don't trust the judiciary either.

I would support a Bill which allows the region to not enforce a national law whose constitutionality is being challenged, but this Bill strikes me as completely unnecessary and respectfully, verging on the paranoid. We have a Federation for a reason, be vigilant, sure, but this view is nonconstructive and potentially dangerous.

I have few problems with your second issue, but I would need to have some clearer picture of what the actual impact would be on the country's military position overall.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I would prefer extension, so thirded.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I understand the ideological concern about this, I would be happy to consider a middle-ground Bill here.

For example

In the event that a Federal Law's constitutionality is being challenged, the Northeast Region will not be obliged to enact said law until its status has been determined by a Constitutionally recognised judicial authority.

Any deployment of Regional Military forces must be approved by first, the Governor, as Commander-in-Chief of those forces, followed by a majority vote in the Assembly

This Bill could be the beginning of the end of an independent Judiciary, it is not our job, as legislators to make calls on matters of Constitutionality, not the least of which I have grave concerns of the viability of any law, which could be challenged by ANY majority within the Assembly who simply disagree and interpret the Constitution in a form of group-think.

I'm fully prepared to discuss where there is common-ground, but if the Representative is not prepared even discuss those elements, then, Mr Speaker, unanimity on this Bill will be impossible.  

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

As for Polnut's changes, I would be happy to pass those in addition to this resolution, but not instead of.

(I might point out that what he's proposing is technically stronger than what I am, since he is proposing a binding law whereas I am only proposing a resolution).

Actually, the wording of my alternative includes "not obliged" - there is no automatic enactment, only in the event that the Assembly decides it is - in that circumstance that a constitutionally provided judicial authority is determining the Law's constitutionality.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

If the Gentleman feels there is no more room to move on this, then I'll second his motion.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Nay