[Congress] Speaker's Report #3
Day 2,311, 15:54
•
Published in United Kingdom 
•
by
•
by Addaway
Hey guys,
sorry it’s been quite a while since my last Speaker article- I think the day-to-day business of Congress has been somewhat overtaken by events this week, what with the PTO’s of two of our top six parties; and some serious preparation and co-ordination of a burgeoning ATO effort going on within the two affected parties and the community as a whole.
Anyways, on with an update on what’s being going on in Congress in the last week.
There have been two congress meetings on IRC since my last article, with another scheduled for tomorrow evening. With all that’s being going on (In my RL as well as on eRep) I haven’t had the chance to type up full summarys of the meetings, but I have still got the logs of last Thursday’s meeting, and I’ll stick it into a Gdoc should anyone want to peruse them. There’s nothing too exciting in them; there hasn’t been the same frenzy of activity around Congress this week that there was the previous week.
I announced in one of my previous articles the creation of four unique Congressional committees, and I am pleased to say that these are, after some delay, now up and running.
Three of these committees are Policy committees which are focusing on a unique area of Government, with the purpose to both scrutinise the acts of the CP’s ministers, and get involved with discussing and contributing to those areas of Government.
Each of these committees has selected a chairman to lead discussion within the committee and with the Govt minister on these issues, and act as Congress’s expert representative on that area.
They are:
Finance Committee – Chairman: mwcerberus - Deputy – jhon247
Home Affairs Committee – Chairman: Ayame Crocodile – Deputy: surferdude
Defence and Foreign Affairs Committee – Co-Chairmen: Rob the Bruce and Lonqu
The role of having a Chair is particularly important in the Defence and FA Committee, as it is these areas where decisions can need to be taken very quickly and there is no time to consult the whole of Congress. Having a dedicated representative for Defence and FA means the Govt can ‘talk to Congress’ when under time pressure by simply consulting one person, whether that be the chair of the committee or the Speaker.
As well as this, I have established (as announced in a previous article) a new Congressional Standards committee, with one representative from each top 5 party, with myself chairing.
The members are:
TUP- GregoryG
UKRP – KaptenJohnson
New Era – surferdude
UKPP – Sambo911
PCP – JiminyChristmas
What is the Congressional Standards Committee?
The fundamental basis by which it is going to operate is a code-of –conduct which will set out basic rules on how congressmen should act whilst in Congress. This will govern a wide range of things from proposing laws, to giving out citizenship to their behaviour whilst in Congress.
We will hopefully be able to get PPs of the main parties onboard with this, so that they will hopefully have acceptance of these rules as a requirement for running for Congress. Of course, none of this can really work without the agreement of PPs.
It will be the standards committee’s role to hold each Congressmen that is signed up to these standards, and holding to account the ones that flout them. The details of what penalty’s will be able to be imposed have not been discussed yet, focus is on figuring out what these guidelines will encompass.
As part of the Standards committee’s role on citizenship it will issue recommendations to Congress to either Accept or Ignore Citizenship Applications.
Just this evening the Standards committee has issued it’s first recommendation, recommending that Congressmen IGNORE the application by Colonel Landa, due to his stated allegiance to the ‘Shoe People’, a PTO group which is currently involved in attempting to PTO the eUK.
It’s obviously terrible that two of our top-six parties (UKPP and ESO) have been successfully PTOed this week, in what I think is a massive wake-up call to people in the eUK who were in doubt as to the existence of the threat from this Serbian-based group.
Over the past few days a great deal of organisation and co-ordination between Congress, the Government and the PPs of all the main parties has been on going, and an effective ATO plan is being implemented, hopefully we can deny the PTOers Congress places.
Finally just a quick note to say that with only 6 days of this Congress term left, I still have a lot of things I want to do; and I want to be able to see these committees implemented in the next Congress. So, should I be re-elected to Congress, I will be running for Speaker again.
Edit: Also you will have probably seen the national Citizenship conference that has been organised by New Era on Congress's public channel (#HoC.public) on Saturday. I will probably be unable to attend, but I do hope something productive comes of it and we can get a consensus from this.
Thanks for Reading,
Adrastos
Speaker
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
OOOOooooo gooogdie, Lots and LOTS of committees
Can we have one to look after street lighting or maybe one to collect the dog sh**
Meh, at the rate you talk about everything, the dog sh** committee will have a lot of things to collect.
I hope this will revive the congress a bit. o7
Good work Adastros, It's unlikely I'll run again next month however if I do you'll definitely be getting my vote!
o7
who chose the members of the Congressional Standards Committee?
"We will hopefully be able to get PPs of the main parties onboard with this, so that they will hopefully have acceptance of these rules as a requirement for running for Congress. " - Adrastos
Don't you think this should have been done BEFORE trying to impose this?
The PPs of the top 5 parties appointed their member of the committee, they were onboard right from the start 😛
Did they? : P
Yeah, it was SHA Thomas; I asked them before the PP election 🙂
With the exception of New Era; I didn't get a reply from Hollenboer to my PM, so I asked the three NE members that are still in sensitive discussion to choose one of them to represent NE on the committee
please can u explain to me in what way, shape or form could discussion on a Congressional Standards Committee be "sensitive"?
It's not so much about the 'sensitive' nature of what is discussed, it's that it's common sense not to allow Congressmen that have been excluded from sensitive discussion for maliciously giving CS passes out, then go and sit on the body which vets those requests. People on the Standards committee are supposed to be trusted Congressmen... people excluded from sensitive discussion due to their acts (by democratic vote) have no place in the committee.
what utter tripe. It completely undermines the role of the Committee. And by labelling some of the CS pass grants as "malicious" you have shown yourself to be bias. I have absolutely no confidence in the Committee, which has been stacked with bias, nor your objectivity.
Congress had a democratic vote to remove members of Congress who had deliberately given CS to citizens from a hostile nation. It passed (overwhelmingly) so that happened. How could the same Congressmen who have been excluded from sensitive congress discussion then sit on a committee which is supposed to hold Congressmen to standards that they themselves failed to uphold?
there were no standards to uphold. No guidelines, nothing. No-one broke any rules. And as your statement that congress chose "overwhelmingly" to exclude certain congressmen - that's just bs. Admittedly, TUP congressmen "overwhelming" voted in favour - 100% of them in fact. The vote itself was bias - restricted to 24hrs and called at a time of Kravenn's choosing. Indeed, what you claim to be "malicious", some would argue was in fact in the best interests of the eUK. Further, as you say, the discussion for the setting up of the Committee wasn't sensitive - but you excluded half of New Era congressmen due to "common sense"? utter bs.
Not talking bout Kravenn's vote, I mean ACroc's one the following day. And yes, there were no official standards to uphold, that is the whole point of this committee after all- to implement some. However, I believe you can judge the kind of standards that the rest of Congress and the wider eUK community expected. Congress clearly disapproved of what you had done, shown by their vote to exclude members of NE who had given CS deliberately to hostile citizens.
Think what you want about supposed 'bias'. And the discussion as to the setting up the committee wasn't 'sensitive' at all, it was made entirely public- I put my intentions in an article and asked all the top 5 PPs for their thoughts- including Hollenboer. Not my fault if he decides not to bother replying, leaving me having to think of a way to get an NE rep on the committee.
So, if Congress has democratically voted to not involve these NE congressmen; why on earth would I have them considered to sit on a senior committee of Congress, that is supposed to be a trusted group?
Jesus, Sven, surferdude isn't that bad, is he?
nah, Sven's just whinging cos they, NE, got busted and their actions have led to the current situation but they're not willing to accept it or say sorry for the outcome of their' protest' CS's
Yay Sambo mention
Appreciated, mate!