March referendum

[windjammer]

It's a shame there hasn't been public debate on a serious constitutional change, thank you Poirot for your posts.

I would like to redouble these sentiments.

To give more details about it. This version of the proposed amendment was introduced very late in the last senate session with no debate at all. The vote on this was basically being rushed so this could pass in the lameduck session.

[windjammer]

It's a shame there hasn't been public debate on a serious constitutional change, thank you Poirot for your posts.

I would like to redouble these sentiments.

To give more details about it. This version of the proposed amendment was introduced very late in the last senate session with no debate at all. The vote on this was basically being rushed so this could pass in the lameduck session.

There were 24 hrs for objections to the amendment and no one did. Any Laborite Senator could have if they were active enough to do so. The vote passed 13-3 on cross-partisan lines.

Well, nothing that I said was false. There was no debate at all and this was basically rushed in a lameduck session.

[windjammer]

It's a shame there hasn't been public debate on a serious constitutional change, thank you Poirot for your posts.

I would like to redouble these sentiments.

To give more details about it. This version of the proposed amendment was introduced very late in the last senate session with no debate at all. The vote on this was basically being rushed so this could pass in the lameduck session.

There were 24 hrs for objections to the amendment and no one did. Any Laborite Senator could have if they were active enough to do so. The vote passed 13-3 on cross-partisan lines.

Well, nothing that I said was false. There was no debate at all and this was basically rushed in a lameduck session.

What an utter lie. The thread was 8 pages. It was debated at length.

Not the final version of the bill. Blackraisin proposed an amendment that completely reshaped what was previously written. And then there was no discussion about it and just a final vote just before the end of the session.

[windjammer]

It's a shame there hasn't been public debate on a serious constitutional change, thank you Poirot for your posts.

I would like to redouble these sentiments.

To give more details about it. This version of the proposed amendment was introduced very late in the last senate session with no debate at all. The vote on this was basically being rushed so this could pass in the lameduck session.

There were 24 hrs for objections to the amendment and no one did. Any Laborite Senator could have if they were active enough to do so. The vote passed 13-3 on cross-partisan lines.

Well, nothing that I said was false. There was no debate at all and this was basically rushed in a lameduck session.

What an utter lie. The thread was 8 pages. It was debated at length.

Not the final version of the bill. Blackraisin proposed an amendment that completely reshaped what was previously written. And then there was no discussion about it and just a final vote just before the end of the session.

No objection to an amendment often means that the majority of the Senate is in favor and it did receive a 13-3 vote in favor. Unless you believe I should object to every single Laborite amendment even if it's something popular across the board because it needs to be debated to death even if there's a big consensus?

If the amendment was so bad why did so many vote for the final bill? Why did no Laborite Senator object?

Also, without an objection, the amendment would take effect in 24 hours. The Senate isn't always drowning in debate every single 24 hours.

My point is it was intentionnally rushed so this could pass in the previous session. It's easy to have unanimous consent when most senators (INCLUDING MY OWN PARTY) aren't being active.

[windjammer]

It's a shame there hasn't been public debate on a serious constitutional change, thank you Poirot for your posts.

I would like to redouble these sentiments.

To give more details about it. This version of the proposed amendment was introduced very late in the last senate session with no debate at all. The vote on this was basically being rushed so this could pass in the lameduck session.

There were 24 hrs for objections to the amendment and no one did. Any Laborite Senator could have if they were active enough to do so. The vote passed 13-3 on cross-partisan lines.

Well, nothing that I said was false. There was no debate at all and this was basically rushed in a lameduck session.

What an utter lie. The thread was 8 pages. It was debated at length.

Not the final version of the bill. Blackraisin proposed an amendment that completely reshaped what was previously written. And then there was no discussion about it and just a final vote just before the end of the session.

No objection to an amendment often means that the majority of the Senate is in favor and it did receive a 13-3 vote in favor. Unless you believe I should object to every single Laborite amendment even if it's something popular across the board because it needs to be debated to death even if there's a big consensus?

If the amendment was so bad why did so many vote for the final bill? Why did no Laborite Senator object?

Also, without an objection, the amendment would take effect in 24 hours. The Senate isn't always drowning in debate every single 24 hours.

My point is it was intentionnally rushed so this could pass in the previous session. It's easy to have unanimous consent when most senators (INCLUDING MY OWN PARTY) aren't being active.

Why did Labor run such inactive would-be Senators in the December election then?

To be fully honest with you:

No one was running labor anymore so this is why the labor bench ended up being so inactive. Now with the return of pericles in control of the party, the new senator bench of the party is being active.  Whether pyro, pericles or nerd, they all participate now in the discussions.

[windjammer]

Also, with 16/18 Senators (89% of Senators) voting on the final bill the claim of an inactive Senate as a whole, across party lines, is pretty inaccurate.

Well it is. You can vote because someone told you to vote that way without having to read the bill at all.

How do you explain the difference between the vote in the senate and the amendment going down in flames in the two regions then?

[windjammer]

Also, with 16/18 Senators (89% of Senators) voting on the final bill the claim of an inactive Senate as a whole, across party lines, is pretty inaccurate.

Well it is. You can vote because someone told you to vote that way without having to read the bill at all.

How do you explain the difference between the vote in the senate and the amendment going down in flames in the two regions then?

Labor is GOTVing against the amendment and telling voters how to vote (against it), which is something you supposedly don't like. Or are you really going to try to claim that isn't the case?

Well in the end there are a ton of center/rightwing voters people who never voted for Labor who are voting against it as well.

Lincoln isn't a 3/4 labor stronghold at all for example

[windjammer]

THANK YOU ATLASIA!!!