FT 11-05: Motion of No Confidence (Debating)

[YE]

A motion
A motion of no confidence

Section 1: Motion
1. A motion of expressing a want of confidence in First Minister Scott - whose has been an extremely good FM but a snap needs to happen for reasons beyond his control.

Sponsor: YE

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Uh, what? If this is a joke, you can do better. If this is serious, then I urge a NO vote as the motion does not outline any specific reasons to express this lack of confidence.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Uh, what? If this is a joke, you can do better. If this is serious, then I urge a NO vote as the motion does not outline any specific reasons to express this lack of confidence.

We need to consider this because half of Parliament has resigned a week into the term. And the FM cannot call a snap within 4 weeks of the election.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

As MP Truman stated in FremontCord, simply running the special election as scheduled is an option, however we would be in a situation where half of Parliament was elected with a completely different mandate.  The most sensible thing to do at this point would be to have Parliament order a snap election, and then have the next Parliament work out our electoral kinks.  Time-consuming as this might be, I believe it is necessary and therefore I urge our MPs to vote in favor of this motion.

[YE]

Here's the deal:

4/8 Fremont Seats have been vacated the past week
We're having a hard time finding candidates

As such, we need a snap. I'll let this be on the floor for 2 days, then motion for a final vote, which will last Tuesday-Thursday. That'd result in a special in in 2 weekends, or May 17-19, giving us time to find candidates.

[YE]

Uh, what? If this is a joke, you can do better. If this is serious, then I urge a NO vote as the motion does not outline any specific reasons to express this lack of confidence.

Do you pay attention at all?

[fhtagn]

Uh, what? If this is a joke, you can do better. If this is serious, then I urge a NO vote as the motion does not outline any specific reasons to express this lack of confidence.

Do you pay attention at all?

No. He does not.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Just hold the special. As far as Jimmy and Fhtagn go, people elected them with the knowledge that they were just running as an insurance policy in the event they did not make it into the house. The resignation of SBS and Big Abraham is regrettable, but does not mandate this drastic action.

Plus, per the constitution, Calling a SNAP dissolves the existing parliament. Based on YE's timeline above, this leaves Fremont without a Government from May 9th-May 22nd, a period of 13 days. This seems unwise.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Plus, per the constitution, Calling a SNAP dissolves the existing parliament. Based on YE's timeline above, this leaves Fremont without a Government from May 9th-May 22nd, a period of 13 days. This seems unwise.

This isn't Lincoln: the FM and parliament remain in office until the election is concluded.

[fhtagn]

Plus, per the constitution, Calling a SNAP dissolves the existing parliament. Based on YE's timeline above, this leaves Fremont without a Government from May 9th-May 22nd, a period of 13 days. This seems unwise.

This isn't Lincoln: the FM and parliament remain in office until the election is concluded.

More proof that Lincoln's system is bad and needs to be repealed tbh.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I am of the opinion that it is better for us to go ahead and have the special election this weekend, rather than postponing the election again just so it can be a snap election that will most likely end up with us having the same people elected anyway.

Meanwhile we've been talking reform about the way elections are conducted. If we do a snap election, some of these same problems, such as with determining the number of seats, get repeated again.  Lets fix these issues before we elect a whole Parliament.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

I am of the opinion that it is better for us to go ahead and have the special election this weekend, rather than postponing the election again just so it can be a snap election that will most likely end up with us having the same people elected anyway.

Meanwhile we've been talking reform about the way elections are conducted. If we do a snap election, some of these same problems, such as with determining the number of seats, get repeated again.  Lets fix these issues before we elect a whole Parliament.

Part of the reason we're pushing for a snap election is that it is hard enough to find candidates willing to run in the special.  If we were to hold the special election as planned, four vacancies would need to be filled.  We had three candidates who were running or slated to run before, until one of them cancelled his plans.

A snap election at least would give us a clean slate and possibly reduce the size of Parliament to make it more on par with what our population can support.  Afterwards we will have a full Parliament with a new mandate to pass needed election reforms (including possibly a cap on the number of seats needed to sustain a full Parliament as well as your proposal to schedule one weekend for referendums and special elections for each month).

And, since we already have an agenda set for the next session (election reform, absorption of state services, education standards, toll roads, and the budget), the candidates will actually have something to run on.  A snap election gives us abundant time to recruit active candidates and give those candidates the opportunity to run on their proposals.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

For a special election, there's no need to try to fill any more vacancies than we have willing candidates.

[Sestak]

Didn’t want to do this, but it may actually be necessary given where we are here.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

For a special election, there's no need to try to fill any more vacancies than we have willing candidates.

Yeah. If you guys held the special regardless and elected insert-random-write-in I'd be a bit worried, but since your laws postpone the special in part until a declared candidate exists, there's little reason for restarting everything.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

When is the soonest we can move to a final vote on this?

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

When is the soonest we can move to a final vote on this?

Tomorrow evening.

[YE]

When is the soonest we can move to a final vote on this?

Tomorrow evening.

Here's the deal:

4/8 Fremont Seats have been vacated the past week
We're having a hard time finding candidates

As such, we need a snap. I'll let this be on the floor for 2 days, then motion for a final vote, which will last Tuesday-Thursday. That'd result in a special in in 2 weekends, or May 17-19, giving us time to find candidates.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

New poll shows overwhelming support for snap election among Fremont citizens:

Q2. With 4/7 Parliament seats having become vacant in the last week, should Parliament order a snap election?

Yes - 11 (84.62%)
No - 0 (0%)
Neutral/Not sure - 2 (15.38%)

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

New poll shows overwhelming support for snap election among Fremont citizens:

Q2. With 4/7 Parliament seats having become vacant in the last week, should Parliament order a snap election?

Yes - 11 (84.62%)
No - 0 (0%)
Neutral/Not sure - 2 (15.38%)

Without the option of a special election included in the poll also, I don't think we can draw much conclusion from this as to which one people would prefer.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

New poll shows overwhelming support for snap election among Fremont citizens:

Q2. With 4/7 Parliament seats having become vacant in the last week, should Parliament order a snap election?

Yes - 11 (84.62%)
No - 0 (0%)
Neutral/Not sure - 2 (15.38%)

Without the option of a special election included in the poll also, I don't think we can draw much conclusion from this as to which one people would prefer.

I mean, personally if I wanted a special election instead, I would have voted no on this question.

Poll numbers do change when you alter the wording though...

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

I second the motion for a final vote.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

I second the motion for a final vote.

Thirded.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

I object to the motion for a final vote.
After long consideration I feel this course of action is an overreaction to the situation we have found ourselves in. I feel to go down this path, to call new elections only a weeks into a new term, is not needed. We can manage to hold a special election for these seats. We do not need hold brand new elections to form a brand new parliament.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

I object to the motion for a final vote.
After long consideration I feel this course of action is an overreaction to the situation we have found ourselves in. I feel to go down this path, to call new elections only a weeks into a new term, is not needed. We can manage to hold a special election for these seats. We do not need hold brand new elections to form a brand new parliament.

But an overwhelming number of citizens clearly prefer holding new elections to snap elections.  To that, I must ask, what is the Commonwealth to lose if we were to hold new elections with a a new campaign that was focused on the agenda we have before us?  Suffice to say, the April campaigns were, as President Barack Obama would have described it, "soulless."  We need comprehensive plans to address the myriad of issues facing our region today, and a snap election is the perfect opportunity.  That, and the question of democratic legitimacy, are why this snap election is necessary.

Let's give new candidates a chance to prove that they are in this for the long haul, and most importantly, let's listen to the citizens who almost unanimously believe that new elections are needed.