First Cabinet Meeting

[afleitch]

Cabinet Session

Sorry folks I got swept up this weekend in other things.

I hereby call the first cabinet meeting of this administration. I invite all cabinet members, the Vice President, Game Moderator and the PPT to attend. I will keep this one brief (they are intended to run for a week or so or however long discussion lasts) to test the format and review policy. I hope to hold a full meeting at least once a month.

Agenda

1. Roll Call and apologies

2. Emergency briefing on: GTO Monetary Fund

3. Setting out the general policy aims of the administration.

4. General review of the effects of the stimulus package.

5. Open Floor (for anything that Cabinet individually or collectively wishes to raise)

6. Any Other Business.

[afleitch]

Reporting.

I advise immediate discussion of the GTOMF (someone think of a funny way to ruin this acronym) considering it will be discussed at the GTO General Assembly meeting tomorrow. Though it is too late to display Atlasian leadership on the proposal, it will be useful to have a clear and constructed opinion for the meeting.

Noted.

[afleitch]

Thank you all for attending. I hope to host these fairly regularly and will do my best to give each cabinet member something to work on.

First off the 'emergency' statement.

I will be speaking at the leaders meeting on Wednesday to adress some of the outstanding issues as well as the war on drugs in Mexico and the Israeli settlement issue. As noted on the White House thread I believe it would be best for us to retrain and redirect border police on this side of the border. This is politically sensitive as it may mean closer checks at official cross border crossings but also the interception of illegal immigrants or people without papers who make the crossing. On Israel, she has our utmost support. However it is clear that continued settlement is, lets be honest agressive even if the response to this is often disproportionate and can lead to an escalation in conflict. All we can do is offer sharp words to Israel at present and monitor the situation.

Action Point 1: SoEA to keep an eye on the situation in Israel (with help of GM) and formulate a reponse is appropriate to any actions taken by settlers on retaliation to settlements. This issue may be a slow boiler.

General policy.

Figures released by the GM indicate that private enterprise and investment are both boosting our economic growth. This does not mean of course that the stimulus package is surplus to our economic requirement. Quite the contrary but I would be keen for us to revisit the programmes that are funded to see where savings could be made. I was never fully convinced that everything outlined within the stimulus package was either necessary or beneficial but it was important that the package was passed and it certainly seems to have helped.

From the start I would like to emphasise that I will not sign any bill that cuts health spending. I will also protect and hope to have a consensus to increase spending on social housing. The Senate has the right and the duty to legislate as it sees fit and I don't see myself as someone who will stand in their way on other matters. How willing the Senate is to re-visit past legislation is another matter.

Action Point 2. I would be grateful if the SoIA could investigate and give recomendations on the state of social housing, the need for improvement and what should be allocated to upgrade existing housing and extend the scheme.

[afleitch]

I can assure the President that efforts are currently being made to assess the state of social housing in Atlasia and to issue a series of recommendations. However... I must make it clear to the Cabinet that the situation is severe in the extreme. It will not be possible to solve the various housing crises during a single term; the scale of the problem in many cities is beyond description. It is probably fair to say, from even a cursory analysis of the situation, that the state of public housing in much of the former Soviet Union is better than in some Atlasian cities.

I must also make clear that, in many cases, improvements are not the solution and that federal money spent on these would, in many cases, not be worthwhile. It would be better, and this is the position of the Department of the Interior, to demolish much of the existing stock of public housing in Atlasia and to replace this with public housing built to a decent standard. This would be expensive, but makes the most sense in the long run. Had decent housing been built in the first place then we would not be sitting here discussing what to do about public housing...

Does the Secretary have the opinion that we could be looking at not just a housing problem but problem with infrastructure? I would be willing to support moves to rebuild homes in problematic areas but I am intersted in his position on infrastructure; parks, schools, shops etc.

[afleitch]

Mr. President,

I don't mean to diverge from our current point of discussion, but I do have a proposal to raise.

I believe that it is in the best interest of the Justice Department for you to create the position of Deputy Attorney General.  There will be times when I may not be able to carry out my duties (family vacations, etc.)  This position would temporarily take over my responsibilities and would only serve as a temporary appointment.  I believe you could create this position via Executive Order, however, if you feel it is necessary, legislation in the Senate would be possible.

Just an important note for the President and AG: The Wiki is in dire disrepair at the moment.

It may be helpful to create such a post then, as keeping the Wiki up to date can be time consuming and a bit technical at times (I gave up trying to edit it myself some time ago!)

[afleitch]

My opinion is, and has been for a long time, that building new neighbourhoods without community facilities, and by that I mean everything from shops to churches, schools and purpose-built community centres, is a mistake. I would not support giving financial backing to any new housing project of any kind that does not address this issue; in fact, I will, if given permission, make it federal policy after this meeting.

Agreed. However to ensure some form of standard perhaps this condition only kicks in with the construction of 75 or 100 or more dwellings.