[eBe] April/May Congress Report - 3
Day 1,641, 07:10
•
Published in Belgium 
•
by
•
by eBelgian Foreign Affairs
[eBe] April/May Congress Report - 3
Dear Friends of eBelgium,
A lot of things happened in Belgium, so that means there is enough material for a congress report.
Furthermore, have fun and remember that you can activily participate in the debates, by going to http://www.erepbelgium.com
Yours truly and CoC of the month,
NLSP
In-game laws
What happened in-game?
Tax changes
WRM import tax went up to 20% http://www.erepublik.com/en/main/law/Belgium/106324
FRM import tax went up to 20% http://www.erepublik.com/en/main/law/Belgium/106323
debate: http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6419-debate-thread-import-taxes
Also a non authorized NE-proposal was started and voted down: http://www.erepublik.com/en/main/law/Belgium/106317
TW, more TW and mpp's
Due the TW with Hungary, eBelgium lost most of their mpp's. eNL also couldn't laugh with our TW, after Hungary used the opportunity to visit South-NL.
In order to have enough battles, a TW with france was proposed (by france), but eBelgian congress voted against this. Also there was an NE vote coming from Canada, that was blocked.
The remark came that we need to have some TEDEN-mpp's, but after being invaded by eNL in the past, the TEDEN-HQ's continously blocked mpp's with belgium.
This is all very complicated due eBelgian's wish for neutrality.
Maybe there is a solution in the make or maybe not, there is nobody who knows what the future will bring, but you can read it all in a multitude of debates. Be aware that the tone in these debates can not always be classified as 'friendly' or 'respectful'.
Debates:
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6405-end-of-the-tw-we-need-mpps
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6434-canada-has-an-ne-out-on-us
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6421-a-new-tw-or-sort-of-with-france
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6393-ebelgium-is-proone
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6368-starting-a-tw
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6333-neutrality-and-orders
Voting: http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6440-tw-that-is-looking-after-frances-interest-rejected
Para's
After some debates, wrongly started votes and failed votes, the para-law is altered. The para's get less training funding, receive state support for their supplies and will be a part of the eBelgian Military.
Voting topics:
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6390-changing-funding-for-the-paras-rejected
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6408-funding-belgium-paras-not-valid
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6403-amend-para-s-law-accepted
Debates:
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6322-stop-state-funding-the-private-mu-the-belgian-paras
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6409-renaming-the-ebe-para-s
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6383-new-funding-for-the-paras
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6391-the-possible-end-of-the-ongoing-paras-debate
Honorary Citizenship and Friends of Congress
Like mentioned before, both the Honorary Citizenship list and the Friends of Congress list got updated.
NLSP, Xironn and Fhaemita got removed as Honorary Citizen, what started the petition from xironn and fhaemita to be reinstated immediately. Also a vote was started to do so, that didn't follow the correct procedure.
There were also multiple changes done for the Friends of Congress list.
Currently Antiko and Fhaemita have the great honor to be a Friend of the eBelgian congress.
Votes:
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6392-removal-of-hc-masks-accepted
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6433-honorary-citizen-mask-for-xironn-invalid
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6400-remove-foc
Debates:
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6319-housekeeping-honorary-citizen-masks
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6435-requesting-hc-mask
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6320-more-housekeeping-friends-of-congress-masks
SC and forum-admin
A vote started to give new terms for the Supreme Court to Boklevski and Sammy Tanghe and a vote was started to remove NLSP as admin on the eBelgian forum.
For the SC, they were the only candidates and got without problem a new term, but some suggestions were made that cases should be handled a bit faster if possible.
For removing NLSP as admin, was there no reason given, however the debate suggested that this was due his actions as CoC, where he had to intervene when procedure was not followed. The proposal did not get the required majority and NLSP stays in his position.
Voting:
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6431-removing-nlsp-as-admin-rejected
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6437-supreme-court-justices
Debate:
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6399-another-term-ending
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6416-removing-nlsp-as-admin
Furthermore
* There is now a small change to the SeCo-law, making it possible for each elected party to have a member, even if their Party President does not nominate anyone.
* A program is up for voting, that would increase the tax income of eBelgium, with the state buying and selling goods, in order to have more tax income.
Voting:
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6448-boost-tax-program
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6338-vote-thread-security-council-default-provisions-accepted
Debate:
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6424-selling-to-the-bot
http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6244-debate-thread-security-council-default-provisions
Current Forum Debates
The following debates from this week, were not covered in the rest of the report
*Loaning of Gold from the state: http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6385-gold-loans
*Change the funding of the BTA: http://www.erepbelgium.com/t6425-bta-funding
That is it for this week, I hope you enjoy it!
Please remind that every eBe citizen is allowed to post and make remarks, suggestions, etc. in the Congress Public Debate forum.
Like always, feel free to give feedback and suggestions on this report or on congress.
Yours truly and CoC of the month,
NLSP
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Two little children without family.
noob
o7
Thanks NLSP
\o/.
Thank you, as always very informative.
a small correction: We did not propose TW but France did.
eBelgium is in a difficult situation due to a number of facts:
- neutrality
- positioning
- past history
and no I don't have any answers for you yet but working on possibilities.
our steamship is on track!
"our steamship is on track!'
It's more like the titanic 😛
Nice to have a report, thanks NLSP.
(as long as the important debates are not brought into the game Newspapers as it should be, I'll have to be happy with this)
About neutrality and MPP's :
Our neutrality depends on our own actions, not on what's out of our decision range.
To me, it's quite simple : we are neutral by proposing MPP to the same number of countries from each alliance. These propositions reflects our neutral path, and reflects that we truly don't favor any side.
Afterwards, the acceptance or not of our proposals do not depend on us and have nothing to do with our own will to be neutral, we do not have any power on that.
In short :
Neutrality isn't = number of MPPs on each side (does not depend on our will)
Neutrality = number of MPP proposals on each side (does depend on our will)
So to me, our neutrality is simple : having a fair balance between our MPP proposals. Then, no matter how many are accepted or not. The alliance concerned will have to deal with its own refusals... not our problem : things we canno't control don't have anything to do with our neutrality.
Voted ! Take part to the debates ! o/
Jeiry, I agree, however our "perceived" orientation is based on the actual amount of MPP's we DO have. If we have only ONE MPPs, we will still be seen as a proONE or ONE country. The majority do not care (or know about) our attempts to obtain both EDEN and ONE MPP's.
We can try to be neutral all we want, if we aren't seen or recognised as such, it won't matter.
A load of debates... It's a shame more don't participate. 😛
o/
It's mainly a communication problem. Every time it's necessary (at least once a month), the govnmt should make a clear and transparent paper showing the countries approached (alliance, reaction), showing we proposed to the same number, with an explanation why this is neutral to us. A matter of transparency and publicity. Afterwards, there'll only be left the dishonest people to claim the opposite (and there's always some).
Not as simple as it seems, but your actual focus isn't simple either.
Thanks for another comprehensive report. Jeiry, I can understand your position about bringing the debates in game, but as you can see, there are a lot of them ongoing. How would you propose to decide which ones should be brought to the official newspapers?
Note : I'm not against a forum, I know it brings many positive things. But it should remain a "plus" and shouldn't be mandatory to fully play all the aspects of the game.
So, as I defend the idea of a game that isn't dependent on an external forum, I would say "any subject in which citizen can have a voice". That means most of them, but not all.
Obviously, internal subjects about the forum do not need to be brought in here (Honorary CS, Friends of Congress, Forum-admin, ...).
Else, I don't know if it is necessary to make precise and technical debates with citizens (about "20% tax rise", "1 gold more for the paras", "MPP with Brazil", ...), but larger debate ("do we have to rise taxes", "do we have to fund the paras", "how to deal with our MPP", ...).
And finally, I would make a peculiar debate if it's really an important matter. Due to many factors, I would have liked a debate about the TW with Hungary. And I applause Mitte for the referendum about Neutrality.
I do understand Jeiry, but I'm afraid that the CM and gov-members willing to help out actively, have to much work on their plate.
I for one have already enough to do, that I have no time, to start actively pushing debates in newspapers, a format that is imho technical not ideal for debates.
On the other hand, I do have some contact with people who don't go on the forum (anymore) and when they give me a certain concern or idea, I share it in Congress. It's maybe not enough, but it 's a start
I understand. And I respect those who work yet a lot. I don't want to criticize anybody, I'm just "hoping out loud".
Good report!