Formalizing the Regions

[Thud]

I wanted to throw this topic out there before the Constitutional conventions, so that there can be some as to what the public think before stumbling over it in commitee.

The question, obviously, is: Should there be individual administrative regions, and just how the heck should they be organized?

And just how formal shoud this be?

For example, we could have regional Councils of Governace, or even seperate ministers for each region?

Pro: More logical, accountability. I can' t think of any others, really.

Con: Electing, appointing, and generally keeping track of all these people. Simply put, Don't we already have enough people governing (for now, at least)?

Or, should Ministers appoint deputies to each region?

Pro: Recognizable hierarchy. The deputies report to the ministers, and the ministers report to the Prez. Effiecient.

Con: At a later stage, we might want to expand the role of regions in governace, which is probably harder to do under this system.


IMHO, the Second Example is far more attractive.

Any other systems anyone could think of, more to add to these, or arguements for and against formalized regions would be greatly appeciated!

[Inverse Icarus]

in my revolution i suggested govonors of provinces that act as PW ministers / City Planners for each region (i called them sectors)

[adaMada]

Oddly enough, I was thinking about this myself this morning.

Do we define what ministers there can be and what their roles are, and make all other minister-appointed positions (should there be any) "assistant to the ministers"? That ties the minister's hands in that they cannot organize their department to their liking. If we allow them to appoint whatever they want, however, then it could become confusing, with each minister having different appointments.

The Regions are good examples of this -- what if hte next city planner doesn't want them? Should we write them into the COL/Constitution, or should they just be deputies that have been granted an abnormally large amount of power by their minister?

These are all questions to consider, and I don't have answers right now... hopefully, this thread may provide one. Good idea, Thud.

-- adaMada

[Apocalypse]

The City Planner should have veto power over the governors, at least for the reason that some governor might take an unannouced leave of absence and some emergency might come up that needs immediate attention.

I also suggest that in an emergency where the City Planner may be no where to be found, a governor can be appointed by the pres or vp to the title of a temp city planner.

[adaMada]

Is that in any way different from the system of ministers we hae now, however?

Does that part of the COL even need changing?

Do we need to standardize the deputy minister positions, and (if so), how do we give the ministers the power to set up their department to their liking? Maybe create a second type of deputy minister, called a "Special Advisor", which delt with advisory stuff that there wasn't an official deputy minister job for?

Just a few thoughts... Again, just trying to help jump-start ideas, I haven't made my own decisions yet, and if you can tell which way I'm leaning from these questions then you know more than I do .

-- adaMada

[Apocalypse]

Well I just feel there should be some standard. Also, when punkbass was missing, the ministers basically voted for who would be city planner for the day. Heck, I gave a few times more orders as a fill-in city planner than I did as Minister of Science last term. I just believe that by promoting a governor we could fix that problem so it doesn't happen again.

[Duddha]

We could also have the governors of each province act together in a legislative boby. A council of governors to act as the third branch of power in our system of government.

[disorganizer]

The governors could
a) be self organized and propose things for their province directly to the prez
b) a veto right for the national minister could override a proposal by a governor, and he could also fill in missing instructions during chat
c) the governors could act like a senate for ratification of constitutional changes

you could bring this to a further extend:
d) if you implement "regions" in addition to provinces, the regions could be self-governing with a veto right for the governor. the governor will then collect regional information and propose them to the president directly. the governors would also fill in missing information.

[GodKing]

Well, I see you all jumped the gun on me....

I was going to revive this topic next week, to see if we wanted to formalize the system I am testing, etc etc etc.

[Sheik]

I think ministers should be able to appoint deputies in any way that they like. The deputies wouldn't have any official powers but could assist the minister in any way needed.

[GhengisFarbâ„¢]

Honestly, I have no problem either way, but keeping the system open allows greater flexibility to the Ministers as what works for one Minister may not work for the next one.

[civman2000]

I agree with Sheik. The amendment (which I believe passed) to allow the executive branch to appoint aides is all that is necessary. The City Planner can appoint governors to relieve the workload and manage individual regions.