PJK for Congress II
•
by Paul J Keating
I have spent a productive and interesting month in congress learning the ropes and wish to continue this education by once again seeking endorsement to represent the interests of the people of New South Wales in congress.
I was only a few weeks old when I stood for congress in the last term, and made the following commitments:
1. Activity and dedication - I delivered on this commitment. I have been actively involved in many discussions before the congress, have proposed amendments to existing legislation, and participated in every vote. While there is always room for improvement I believe I have served the people well.
2. A vote for the future - I promised that I would always take a long-term view as a priority over short-term expediency, and have done so. In all matters before the congress I have carefully considered the short and long term repercussions and done my best to understand all possible outcomes before forming an opinion.
3.Common sense - I believe I have exercised common sense in all discussions and decisions. Whether I have been successful in this is a subjective judgement and I won’t patronise you by telling you what to think about me.
4. Ambition - I have lost none of the ambition for myself and for Australia that I brought into this world. I have heard a lot of pessimism and resignation posing as realism, and while that’s understandable I maintain a heathy balance of realism and optimism for the future.
So what’s in store for the coming term?
Should I receive your vote I’ll continue to demonstrate the same attributes, but with another month and a full term in senate under my belt will be more effective in representing you.
I have spent the last month learning about different parts of the game, ranking up, levelling up and researching how taxation works (see article on import tax), and how our economy is running (see articles outlining some economic statistics and relative assessment of our economic performance).
It appears that there will be some changes coming soon in the business and economic modules of the game, and I’d like to be a part of formulating a policy response to these changes.
Thanks again for the opportunity to represent NSW in the last term, and I do hope that you’ll place your trust in me to represent you for another term.
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
voted just for the ballsy move it took to use that username.
Ugh I hated Paul Keating IRL, so I can't help but feel minor resentment - besides you should be in the GnG 😉
It was either that or Placido Domingo 😛
PJK for congress!
You've been good to work with PJK. It's almost like you're not one of the APP. Good luck with the election.
So you have a reactionary platform? You are going to wait for issues to arise, then take action...
Do you have any concrete plans for what you hope to achieve in the senate? Are you going to push an actual agenda?
Zarabos - From the constitution "The Senate shall have the power to allocate and create monies, set tax rates, pass the citizen fee, declare war on another nation, pass a proposed alliance, shall impeach the Prime Minister when it is called for, and provide citizenship when the Executive Branch approves."
Creating money is uneconomic, I believe current tax rates are appropriate, I proposed an increase in the citizen fee this term but it was not needed when the new citizen awards scheme was implemented and in practice foreign policy (alliances and war declarations) are the domain of the MoFA subject only to congress review. I also have no plans to impeach the PM.
The main issue facing congress this/next term will be the review of legislation pre-dating the constitution which has been determined to be invalid and will need review to determine whether there is any merit to keeping it around. I don't have a predetermined position on each/every item of legislation at this stage so I won't preempt a position without doing the hard yards.
So yes, you could call that a reactionary platform this term if you have to use a single word with negative connotations to describe a month of work.
TBH PJK I think Senate is being reactionary with regard to the legal issues. I was in the Senate the last two times this reared its head and it's clear that whoever likes to pass these laws has no appreciation for relationship and subservience to principal acts in force. Logic says if they did, there wouldn't be an issue. On the other hand, this could be a ploy to seek ratification for unpopular bills.
Say Senator A has a favourite they want permanently codified that's hanging in the balance as a result of Bob's recent determination and they want to find a way of getting a quick fix, shining a spotty onto the individual bill on the floor will get more questions and answers and find too many Senators questioning their motive. So what's the solution? Hand them on enmasse in one foul swoop with a line-item ratification. Pure genius ;-o)
"Hand them on enmasse in one foul swoop with a line-item ratification. Pure genius ;-o) "
That's exactly what we've been fighting against. community.auserepublik.com/index.php?topic=17633.0
Your comment was vague, Phoenix. On one hand you said examine but immediate after you said, "Should it wait until next Senate Term or should we confirm the more essential legislation ASAP?" I have to ask what you mean by 'essential' because some could argue every bill is 'essential' in some way, shape or form.
Binda's blank cheque request is downright slimy:
"What I'd like to do is for Senate to make a blanket statement saying that we recognise all the current unrevoked Laws. After that we can look at each individual Act for revision. (otherwise things will become too complicated for one thread)".
Oh, we see now. The whole act first, ask questions (probably won't bother now we got the vote) later tricks Senate frequently employs when they're in a tough spot. But don't be silly a position could be taken otherwise - that would equate to accountability!
No dice!