Aum. Gov withholds new citizen funds
•
by Ward De Bever
On day 1370, the last BTA budget was paid out by the Critically government. The BTA law specifies that one month later (on day 1401 at the latest), the budget is paid out again.
This has not happened yet. Why?
Not only because of precedent, or political reasons (BCP evidently favouring its own projects - Comintern, communes, private MU's, ...), or because maybe they forgot...
The government now also invokes obscure procedural reasons to escape their executive responsibility: the Minister of Finance hides behind the country president because of alleged fear that he would be doing something illegal (while following the Congress-approved law would simply consist in having funded the BTA two days ago). The president himself, as has become his habit, does nothing and hides in silence. He's still 'temporarily' stepped down and a flurry of full and partial resignations made it unclear who is in charge for what.
During his campaign, Monsieur Guillontine provided lip service to our country's policy for new citizens, but we now see exactly the opposite. It's unacceptable that the government fights out its struggles at the expense of the weaker Belgian citizens and Belgium's laws. As determined by law, we demand that the budget of 8000 BEF be paid out immediately in the form of food to new citizens.
Is the next episode, already announced, withholding the BAF funds due on day 1407?
This article on our forum.
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
good job with twisting facts.
Congratulations on officially being promoted to a troll
That's calle😛 waging democratic opposition. Now the government's facts, please...
strange
complaining about laws being illegal in one place and in an other place and here blaiming the government for trying to work out the legality of laws before executing them. Good job
Interesting...though predictable.
(oh, btw, the title was a bit misleading - I thought you guys had managed a coup - and that YOUR government were withholding funds....forgive me, only had one coffee so far 😛!)
We demand explanations
@Jonathan: the problem is that the BTA law was and is in full effect. Its eventual questioning (which didn't happen formally, and I don't question it) doesn't suspend it. I don't complain of laws being illegal anywhere... what clarification was needed, was provided by the SC long ago in the only case i ever brought to justice: http://www.erepbelgium.com/t3973-case-2011-002-voting-topic-procedure
@Tecuvo & Graine: strange but predictable indeed...
@Government: we demand explanations.
@Government: you do realise that the (international) audience knows all the stock T.O. moves you are blunderingly trying to execute, and that your bleating explanations aren't fooling anyone, right?
Right.
Hey look, It's ward, eBelgium's greatest troll, giving misleading/false facts again, thinking that there are idiots like him who believe it.
What else to expect than personal attacks from this government? *sigh*
Besides, I cannot be a troll since I'm already a beaver in the proposed government zoo.
Can we reply to facts with facts please?
when a government is only in a forum, that's the problem.
Always the same debates, but no actions, that's all.
I guess they feel like they are facing a problem : do they give the 8k to Jofroi, leader of the BTA, or do they organize themselves the food donations to our new citizens ? For the second solution they need to start working from nothing and to build a new "sytem". For the first solution, they need to forgot, in my opinion, a "misplaced pride" about the fact the BTA is not run directly by the Government and the MoE. I hope it will be solve very soon, our newbies can't be the victims of this situation... ; - )
wow i like how the goverment has done nothing wrong and even worse is you accuse all gov ministers ask jofroi i have donated him suppies in the past and told him if he needs more to come to me
jamster : you asked me to resign from the BTA, you wanted the minister of education. But now, you don't really want to give the money, be honest... i was right before elections, when i said i'm worry about not MG but his team, they will destroy armies.
^_*
You want free donates ? you are laughting or what? it's not a joke the BTA, it's the best project since a long time in our country.
Maybe you need a generous mentor... like elynea in the past ?
Typical behavior from Ward and the opposition. Is this whole thing staged? First the set the precedence in the court that we do not view the the constitution base on the spirit of the law but the letter of the law. Then Kylero, not part of the Gov demonstrated that the BTA and BAF acts are unconstitutional. Now you are crying for bloody murder for something that the gov did not cause. The real problem is you and NLSP who set the BS precedence that the law should be viewed by the letter and not the spirit. To cash in this event as the gov is bad is irresponsible.
Ward and NLSP are the cause of this problem. If you are to blame anyone, blame Ward and NLSP in regards to SC 2011/009. You cook the food and you yourself must eat it regardless of how bad it taste. Stop blaming others for your own incompetence and mistakes.
konrad : you are very bad, worst Shadow, i didn't think i would see that one day.
If ebelgium has problems now, it's because you are here. I'm sure, if you return in your former country (where you was president x3, congressmen x..) your best "curriculum vitae", ebelgium will be nice again.
You are a person who puts troubles in a country ! You are the problem of the country.
If some think that some laws are unconstitutional, they are still in effect until the Supreme Court deems them unconstitutional and eventually voids them. Saying that the constitutionality of the BTA and BAF laws is disputed is not a reason to suspend the policies related to these laws. The BTA law says that the payment of 8000 BEF must be effected. The law itself is in effect until ruled differently by Court or until voted differently by Congress. Government cannot decide itself if a law is valid or not and suspend it wantonly.
This bending laws to their own taste is a police state tactics by the government, and constant personal attacks are used to silence the few opponents left.
@ Elynea, do not shot the messenger if you do not like the message. Still ♥ ya...
@ Ward.
The laws in questioned are in a state in which they never have existed. The SC is technically non-existent at all.
@Konrad,
You're twisting the facts as well. I didn't say anything about the BTA and BAF acts. That was goopypants. I merely reminded everyone of what the constitution says about law proposals, that they must say how they can be overturned in the future. Its a stupid clause in the Constitution! I did not write it, I did not vote for it.
You say that the blame belongs to NLSP and Ward. This is not entirely true. The blame lies squarely on those who voted for this clause in the Constitution. NLSP and Ward did, but so did many others.
'The laws in questioned are in a state in which they never have existed. The SC is technically non-existent at all.'
Konra😛 you introduce a concept of 'default inconstitutionality' that is completely foreign to me. I think some of you urgently need a reality check. The above is among the most blatant nonsense I have ever heard in this game.
We could simply agree that the majority which was needed to accept the law is also the majority needed to modify it. And the majority by default is the simple majority, unless stated differently. No need to further complicate matters. I'd say, there's not even a SC ruling needed on this, only simple semantic agreement. And then continue governing please...
Kylero: True, but what you argue base on the constitution is that the BTA and BAF funding etc are therefore by default not legal and it is unconstitutional since they did not follow legal precedence and procedure.
If this article managed bringing some sense of urgency, that's the most important. Let's work it out quickly so that new citizens get their budget again.
jamster : you asked me to resign from the BTA, you wanted the minister of education. But now, you don't really want to give the money, be honest... i was right before elections, when i said i'm worry about not MG but his team, they will destroy armies.
^_*
You want free donates ? you are laughting or what? it's not a joke the BTA, it's the best project since a long time in our country.
Maybe you need a generous mentor... like elynea in the past ?
You have finaly lost it i want there to be money but i also want more players to donate. Did i say it was a joke no it was a serious comment you are just not in touch with reality and as for the mentor i glad i never had you or i would be a pushover
let me first dig a bit deeper into the constitutionality of the BTA Law:
- http://www.erepbelgium.com/t3299-food-for-new-citizens-program-passed dated May 16th, includes the words "This proposal needs a simple majority in Congress to be adopted, amended or suppressed." - so it is procedurally valid in the stated context of http://www.erepbelgium.com/t4366-review-request-acts-without-change-provisons - for the amount of 2000 BEF. It mentions the majority needed for its modification.
- http://www.erepbelgium.com/t3699-food-for-new-citizens-program-3-6-2011-passed dated July 3rd, includes the words "Normal majority rules" - whereas http://www.erepbelgium.com/t3856-voting-math-law-vote-thread-accepted later defined "simple majority" as 'more yes than no votes' - with a bit of goodwill, 'simple' and 'normal' majority can be perceived as the same - for the amount of 4000 BEF. We don't need a SC ruling to understand the meaning of the legislator from the letter here: the same rules apply as in the proposal this one intended to replace (it was also not an issue in the proposal's debates). This was so evident at the time of voting, that it would apply to "adoption, amendment and suppression by simple majority", that it was simply replaced by 'Normal majority rules'. This law was voted at a time when there was more appreciation for simple and straightforward laws - simplicity was preferred over what was often considered unneeded ballast. In these times, people still made an effort to enter in each other's mindsets. 'Normal majority rules' were then interpreted as complying with the Constitution, otherwise someone would have made a fuss about it. Rarely since mittekemuis' presidency have we seen such a consensual debate: http://www.erepbelgium.com/t3689-bta-and-ffncp
- http://www.erepbelgium.com/t4107-bta-law-amendment-passed dated August 31rd is clearly marked as an amendment to the previous law (does not replace it) and only modifies the amount of 4000 BEF ot 8000 BEF. The same conclusions apply as to the previous law, since it's the same law but only with one number changed.
So if we can agree that 'simple majority' and 'normal majority' are both the same as '50% + 1 vote' and 'more yes than no votes', and that the 'majority rules' applied to all aspects of accepting/modifying/suppressing the law (with some common sense, this is only evident), then the problem of legal cover for payment of the budget is solved.
@Jamster: your display here
"You have finaly lost it i want there to be money but i also want more players to donate. Did i say it was a joke no it was a serious comment you are just not in touch with reality and as for the mentor i glad i never had you or i would be a pushover "
is not very presidential.
Ward elynea clearly doesnt listen or understand anything i say i said BTA should recive the same funding of 8000 BEF and we should also add a donation system but she didnt understand it and i am sick of her not getting it and insulting what i sya
@Jamster: Maybe blame it on a language problem. I appreciate your compromising tone and also the pledge you make to respect the law and fund the 8000 BEF. If new players and a strong Belgium are indeed our common priorities, then comprehension is possible.
@Jamster (pour Elynea): Peut-être est-ce dû à un problème linguistique. J'apprécie ton ton du compromis et aussi la promesse que tu fais de respecter la loi et de verser les 8000 BEF. Si les nouveaux joueurs et une Belgique forte sont en effet nos priorités communes, alors la compréhension est possible.
Constructive opposition stays constructive: http://www.erepbelgium.com/t4375-proposed-amendment-to-constitution-default-change-provisions-2nd-vote-thread
Why do government members vote against this?