Mideast Assembly Thread

[Peter]

The act will be treated wholely as a Law, as oppoesd to resolution. Whilst small, I think my watch and pony do constitute an expenditure, so need to be a Law, as does the capital thing.
Assuming no objection, I open the vote on the whole bill.

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

  Aye

[Badger]

AYE

[Peter]

The Ayes have it. The Ayes have it.

The bill is transmitted to the Governor for his signature or veto.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

The bill has been signed.  What all is still on the docket?  Let's see if we can't get some stuff passed before this Assembly adjourns.

[Peter]

I wish to thank the many people who have made my time on here as enjoyable as it has been. My particular warm regards to Al, who has been a good friend throughout my years on this forum. His counsel and his support have been exemplary, and I must say that he has contributed so much that I think Atlasia would be much the worse if we had not had him.

In my time here, I've seen a lot of history and whilst it is important we see new blood, I do think it is important that we do not lose sight of the past. The machine voting of the AFDNC/AFRNC has returned in another guise, and whilst in some way they may be sustaining Atlasia's "activity", that is but a false dawn. You must take this nation beyond machine voting, and seek a truly energised electorate, and a level of debate and non-partisanship that sees every vote genuinely in contention and voters going outside their parties. That, ladies and gentlemen, is exciting, not a race to see who can turn out their core, inactive vote out the best.

Another man who I wish to honour who is active, but no longer in office, is an Irishman, Jas. His commitment to this nation has been stalwart - he helped run the federal government with efficiency and humour at the same time. In so many ways he combined these two key attributes, and again, I think we would be much the worse without him.

I wish to thank the Assembly for the great honour it has done me. I suppose now the future generations won’t forget my existence as the capital of our Region bears my name. To the future Assembly, good luck. To you all, good luck.

That leaves one last thing.

*Order, Order*
This Assembly is adjourned Sine Die.
Omnis Tuus Castra Sunt Inesse Nos

*Peter climbs on to pony back and gallops into the sunset*

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

*Hugs Peter before he takes off on his pony*

You'll be missed a great deal.

So I gues there's no reason to wait before we get back to work.

* * * * * *

Order, please.

The 8th Mideast Assembly is now in session.

As Dean of the Assembly, it is my duty to arrange the election of a new Speaker. I urge my fellow assemblymen to swear in as soon as possible, and submit your nominations for Speaker.

[Purple State]

A new age for the Mideast Assembly. Well, I am confident that you all have learned from the example of Peter and the others that have preceded you. I believe I speak for the region when I say we are hopeful that you will use that knowledge to keep this body active, as well as to engage and teach newer members in the same way you have been taught.

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

*cough*

[big bad fab]

As he may now be considered as an experienced assemblyman, as I am newly elected in this assembly and doesn't wish to become Speaker and as he coughs in a dignified way,

I hereby nominate Sweedish Cheese to Speaker of this Assembly.

Does my colleague Badger second this nomination ?

[Barnes]

As he may now be considered as an experienced assemblyman, as I am newly elected in this assembly and doesn't wish to become Speaker and as he coughs in a dignified way,

I hereby nominate Sweedish Cheese to Speaker of this Assembly.

Does my colleague Badger second this nomination ?

I know I'm not a Mideast Citizen, and I promise not to clog up your Assembly, but, I endorse my great friend, Swedish Cheese, as Speaker of this august body.

[big bad fab]

While my colleagues are thinking about the best name for Speaker,

may I ask my honourable colleagues and our Governor if this is the most up-to-date text of our Constitution, so that I can work on the real current words ?

https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Mideast_Third_Constitution

And may I ask if this is the most up-to-date collection of our laws ?
If this is the case, the most recent statutes aren't readable easily, in the absence of any valid link.
And is this list really complete ?

https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Mideast_Statute

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

While my colleagues are thinking about the best name for Speaker,

may I ask my honourable colleagues and our Governor if this is the most up-to-date text of our Constitution, so that I can work on the real current words ?

https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Mideast_Third_Constitution

And may I ask if this is the most up-to-date collection of our laws ?
If this is the case, the most recent statutes aren't readable easily, in the absence of any valid link.
And is this list really complete ?

https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Mideast_Statute

The Statutes are out of date.  I was working on that, but got swamped with other stuff.  My goal is to start working on that again.  The Constitution is up to date though.

[Badger]

As he may now be considered as an experienced assemblyman, as I am newly elected in this assembly and doesn't wish to become Speaker and as he coughs in a dignified way,

I hereby nominate Sweedish Cheese to Speaker of this Assembly.

Does my colleague Badger second this nomination ?

Sorry, for the delay. Went away for the weekend.

My only objection to Fab's nomination of SC as Speaker is that he beat me to it. :-)

I second.

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

As he may now be considered as an experienced assemblyman, as I am newly elected in this assembly and doesn't wish to become Speaker and as he coughs in a dignified way,

I hereby nominate Sweedish Cheese to Speaker of this Assembly.

Does my colleague Badger second this nomination ?

Sorry, for the delay. Went away for the weekend.

My only objection to Fab's nomination of SC as Speaker is that he beat me to it. :-)

I second.

Thank you both! It's a great honour to have your trust.

I of course accept the Speakership. I'll make sure this will be one of the most active and productive assemblies in our history, and with such great collegues, how could it not.

 

[Badger]

bump

OK Gov, we get the hint. I was waiting for the Senate's expected passage of a national DUI bill requiring changes to minimum fines to introduce a DUI reform bill I've been planning. It seems that the federal bill's passage has slowed though. So until it does pass, to get a nice bi-partisan bill to start off the new session I present something primarily authored by Gov. Inks.

I've thought about the Freedom to Roam act since it was vetoed (Lordy, do I need a life), and Governor Inks compromise proposal was actually not bad. A good balance between landowners rights and opening up spaces for hiking and camping on land where the owner consents. So with that in mind I proudly present:

The Mideast Freedom to Roam Where Inks Tells You Bill
1. Anyone shall have the right to access, use, and pass through privately owned land in the Mideast Region except for land that falls under subsections 5, 6, 7, 8, or 9. Such as beaches, forests, and fields, as long as they do not damage or disturb the area in any way.   
2. It shall be legal to camp on private land for a maximum of 48 hours, as long as campers do not in any form damage or disturb the area, and leave the place in the same condition as they found it.
3. Activities that require usage of the area's resources, such as hunting, fishing, berry and mushroom picking, may not be practiced without the landowner's clear consent.   
4. The direct radiuses of 250 m around residential buildings are considered gardens and yards, and are therefore excluded from this bill.
5. Privately owned land that does not exceed the size of 400 acres is excluded from this bill. 
6. Nature reserves and other areas with delicate and sensitive ecosystems are excluded from this bill.
7. Fields where crops are being grown are excluded from this bill.
8. Areas where young animals are reared are excluded from this bill.
9. Any land owner can choose to exclude his land from being made accessible to the public by notifying the Mideast Department of Natural Resources. In order for a land owner to close his land to the public, some form of clear and legible signage must be posted on said property.
 10. During hunts, landowners have the right to dismiss visitors from the hunting ground.
11. If a person, who is practicing their Freedom to Roam, damages or disturbs the area by polluting, vandalising, or ruining the surroundings, they may be subject to a fine of up to $500 as well as paying additional damages to the landowner.   
12. If a person, who is practicing their Freedom to Roam, chooses to illegally engage in activities such as hunting, fishing, berry and mushroom picking may be subject for a fine of up to $500 as well as paying additional damages to the landowner.
13. (a) If a landowner, without reason, tries to dismiss or chase away people from his or her land, he or she may be subject for a fine of up to $250.
(b) If a landowner who wrongfully posts signs or other warnings against trespass without having first filed an opt out notice pursuant to Section 9 above is subject to up to a $250 fine on a first offense. For any repeat violation within five years of a prior conviction  is punishable by up to a $500 fine and/or 30 days incarceration.
14. (a) Owners of private property covered by this law may close their land from Freedom to Roam; however, written notice of the beginning and end dates of any closure period must be received in writing by the local police authority at least 24 hours before any signage or other notice of closure is posted on the property.
(b) Posting public notice. All public posting, notice or signage of property closure must include the beginning and end dates of said closure legibly written.
(c) Violation of these provisions is punishable by up to a $250 fine on a first offense. For any repeat violation within five years of a prior conviction  is punishable by up to a $500 fine and/or 30 days incarceration.
15. (a) Any transfer of ownership or title of a qualifying property will cause any opt out notice previously filed with the Mideast Department of Natural Resources pursuant to Section 9 of this statute to be canceled 30 days after the day of transfer of title or ownership.
(b) Paragraph 15 (a) will not be construed to prohibit the new property owner from filing a new opt out notice for the property with the Department at any time during or after said 30 day period.

Identical to Inks proposal except I added 13 (b) to cover posting no trespassing signs without opting out. Essentially aimed at the militia kooks who would rather flout the law than simply opt out. Also added section 15 governing transfer of property giving purchasers/transferees of property 30 days "coverage" from the former owner's previously filed opt out so new owners aren't forced to do so immediately as part of a real estate closing.

I understand Swedish Cheese, this falls short of what you aimed for originally, but it certainly does open up more lands for hiking and camping by consent and at least encompasses the spirit of your proposal. Accordingly I hope you'll support it. I think it's really cool they have such a thing in Scandanavia, but American cultural and political norms are strongly entwined with property rights, so such a plan wouldn't be widely accepted here.

Since Governor Inks designed this plan so it is truly voluntary for landowners, I believe this bill should satisfy those of us who had concerns about unduly impinging on private property rights.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Now that I'll sign. 

[Purple State]

That is as good as you could hope to get. I'm not even that big of a fan of F2R, so that seems an acceptable compromise.

[big bad fab]

My fellow Assemblymen, dear Governor,

I'm sorry to be contrarian as soon as we begin our session, but I can't approve the Freedom to Roam Bill and my reasons are mostly principled ones.

- First, the right to private property and to peacefully use it is sacred, of course in Atlasia, but even in old European Bills of Rights. This right should not be infringed in any way, even by Law.

Our Mideast citizens want to be quiet in their own properties and to use peacefully their private lands.

That's a principle but it's also a matter of being realistic, as I've said in August.
When you allow someone, even within strict limits, to stay on other's private property, there's always a risk of squatting beyond those limits (of time, of land, etc) and, AFTERWARDS, it's very hard to put the squatters off, because you need a decision from a judge and you need the police, etc.
So, don't take the risk... Only voluntary landowners should be allowed to greet roamers, campers or whoever they want.

- The radiuses around houses are entirely theoretical and wouldn't prevent roamers AT ALL from infringing the Clause 14 of our Bill of Rights: All persons shall have the right to privacy in resepct of their personal and family lives.
How would a roamer be aware he is inside or outside this radius ?

- Another problem with this proposal is that, when roamers or campers wound themselves on someone else's land (e.g. because there are wounding wastes or because this land isn't maintained and a dead tree falls on the campers), some of them may try to make the landowner responsible.
And I cannot agree on a Law which force a private owner to open his property and then, he is the one who is sued for other people's behaviour.

- The 11th clause is of course an unrealistic illusion. It's not at all a protection for a private owner who, again, hasn't asked for anything.
Someone who wants to camp freely doesn't go the owner's house to declare his identity and give his card number in case he should be fined at the end becaue of problems...
It wouldn't be possible to legally prove who is responsible for "disturbances".

Another point is that the relative amounts of fines (500-250) for a roamer who is responsible for "disturbances" that may be really serious and for a private owner who is just putting signs in his property (maybe because he wouldn't be aware that he has to declare that his property is closed) are quite... surprising. All the more that the private owner may finish in jail...
Here, I think that, here, an atomic bomb is used to kill a fly.

- What is more, some damages can't be compensated for,
as they may be massive (an entire forest burnt after just a small barbecue, for example)
or with consequences on the long term (a chemical pollution with products that "live" for decades or just one multi-centennial tree that is cut)
or just because money can't make it for nature, for natural diversity, for small ecological equilibrium.

- The problem with all these points is that the BURDEN OF PROOF is on the side of the private owner, not on the side of the roamer or the camper, whereas it's the owner's right who is infringed.
Again, on principle, I cannot agree with this.

BTW, the closing after written notice to the local police is a technocratic procedure that will clutter our police, whose mission isn't a purely administrative and archiving one.

- All those procedures, all those controls, all those clauses trying to put limits were introduced with a kind and fine spirit of compromise and we must thank the authors for that.
But, in some cases, compromise may lead to excessively complicated and technocratic clauses: Law must remain simple.

- The only way I can agree on such a proposal is when it's changed to be about PUBLIC lands only, which may be more open to camping if you want, for example,
and about PRIVATE lands that their owners VOLUNTARILY and EXPLICITLY declare open to free roaming.
You may even ease roaming where it's possible by gathering and spreading information in official websites, leaflets, etc. about private lands voluntarily open and public lands.

I thank you for your attention.

[Alexander Hamilton]

Go Big Bad FAb! Yeah!

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

I'm still of the oppinion that it's not a Freedom to Roam law unless you actually give people the freedom to roam where they please. As I see it this bill is just a fancy way to keep the statues quo. Landowners already have the right to open their lands to the public if they want to, just as they can close them. This bill will technically change nothing.

I think we should either do a proper Freedom to Roam bill, or if that's not what people want, then no Freedom to Roam at all.

 

     

[Purple State]

Message from the Office of the GM

Honorable Members of the Mideast Assembly,

The office of the GM has just reported that the Mideast region has the highest unemployment in Atlasia, as well as the fastest-growing regional unemployment. I would recommend economic legislation along the lines of previous GM analyses in order to save the region from economic collapse.

~PS

[Badger]

Message from the Office of the GM

Honorable Members of the Mideast Assembly,

The office of the GM has just reported that the Mideast region has the highest unemployment in Atlasia, as well as the fastest-growing regional unemployment. I would recommend economic legislation along the lines of previous GM analyses in order to save the region from economic collapse.

~PS

I haven't forgotten, Mr. GM. On my short to-do list I promise. ;-)

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

The Mideast Freedom to Roam Where Inks Tells You Bill
1. Anyone shall have the right to access, use, and pass through privately owned land in the Mideast Region except for land that falls under subsections 5, 6, 7, 8, or 9. Such as beaches, forests, and fields, as long as they do not damage or disturb the area in any way.   
2. It shall be legal to camp on private land for a maximum of 48 hours, as long as campers do not in any form damage or disturb the area, and leave the place in the same condition as they found it.
3. Activities that require usage of the area's resources, such as hunting, fishing, berry and mushroom picking, may not be practiced without the landowner's clear consent.   
4. The direct radiuses of 250 m around residential buildings are considered gardens and yards, and are therefore excluded from this bill.
5. Privately owned land that does not exceed the size of 400 acres is excluded from this bill. 
6. Nature reserves and other areas with delicate and sensitive ecosystems are excluded from this bill.
7. Fields where crops are being grown are excluded from this bill.
8. Areas where young animals are reared are excluded from this bill.
9. Any land owner can choose to exclude his land from being made accessible to the public by notifying the Mideast Department of Natural Resources. In order for a land owner to close his land to the public, some form of clear and legible signage must be posted on said property.
 10. During hunts, landowners have the right to dismiss visitors from the hunting ground.
11. If a person, who is practicing their Freedom to Roam, damages or disturbs the area by polluting, vandalising, or ruining the surroundings, they may be subject to a fine of up to $500 as well as paying additional damages to the landowner.   
12. If a person, who is practicing their Freedom to Roam, chooses to illegally engage in activities such as hunting, fishing, berry and mushroom picking may be subject for a fine of up to $500 as well as paying additional damages to the landowner.
13. (a) If a landowner, without reason, tries to dismiss or chase away people from his or her land, he or she may be subject for a fine of up to $250.
(b) If a landowner who wrongfully posts signs or other warnings against trespass without having first filed an opt out notice pursuant to Section 9 above is subject to up to a $250 fine on a first offense. For any repeat violation within five years of a prior conviction  is punishable by up to a $500 fine and/or 30 days incarceration.
14. (a) Owners of private property covered by this law may close their land from Freedom to Roam; however, written notice of the beginning and end dates of any closure period must be received in writing by the local police authority at least 24 hours before any signage or other notice of closure is posted on the property.
(b) Posting public notice. All public posting, notice or signage of property closure must include the beginning and end dates of said closure legibly written.
(c) Violation of these provisions is punishable by up to a $250 fine on a first offense. For any repeat violation within five years of a prior conviction  is punishable by up to a $500 fine and/or 30 days incarceration.
15. (a) Any transfer of ownership or title of a qualifying property will cause any opt out notice previously filed with the Mideast Department of Natural Resources pursuant to Section 9 of this statute to be canceled 30 days after the day of transfer of title or ownership.
(b) Paragraph 15 (a) will not be construed to prohibit the new property owner from filing a new opt out notice for the property with the Department at any time during or after said 30 day period.

Since there has been no further debate on this bill. I herby open the vote.

[big bad fab]

The Mideast Freedom to Roam Where Inks Tells You Bill

NO.