Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Colonies Act 2015 (Yukon)
Topic Started: Apr 20 2015, 06:35 PM (231 Views)
Arcadia
Member Avatar
Administrator
Quote:
 
Preamble: The intention of this Act is to expand the scope and depth of RP on Yukon by allowing nations of sufficient size to establish overseas colonies.

Article 1 - Establishment of Colonies
1.1) Any nation with a population over 1 billion may establish one colony.

1.2) Any nation with a population over 2.5 billion may establish a second colony.

1.3) Any nation with a population over 5 billion may establish a third colony.

1.4) Any nation with a population over 10 billion may establish a fourth colony.

1.5) Any nation with a population over 15 billion may establish a fifth colony.

1.6) All nations wishing to establish a colony must justify this wish in in character terms; approval of Colony requests come at the discretion of the Role Play Moderation Team, on the advice of the Minister for Cartography.

1.7) The Minister for Cartography shall have the right to veto any colony claim. Reason for a veto may include but are not limited; attempts at boxing a nation, attempts to claim strategically valuable territory, attempts to unrealistically expand the territory of the home nation.

Article 2 - Rules
2.1) Colonies must start out as a colonial or semi-autonomous entity under the control of the parent nation.

2.2) Colonies may have a maximum population of 200 million, which is subtracted from that of the parent nation, and their land area shall be calculated accordingly based on the map claim rules.
  • 1) Colonies are assumed to have a GDP per Capita of no more than 50% of the parent nation.
  • 2) Colonies may field a military force following the rules of a nation of equivalent size under the Military Regulation Act 2015.

2.3) Colonies may after a period of time declare independence, if they do so however their population remains fixed at the level it was at the point it gained independence and the normal rules for a colony still apply in terms of its national statistics.

2.4) Colonies may be abandoned by the parent nation at any time, the population returns to the parent nation.

2.5) Nations maintaining one or more colonies must provide a factbook for each colony including at minimum population, GDP per Capita, and Government details.

2.6) Colonies cannot have their territory absorbed into that of the parent nation EVER.

2.7) Colonies may not territorially expand.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tyvenia

Well, I think I might have several questions, but let's start with an obvious one: Is this accomplished via creation of a new NS nation to stand in as a colony, or just accomplished via RP to declare there is a colony being created of X million people?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Herargon
Member Avatar

I have a question regarding the colonial establishment: should a colony be made from the nation's land or not? And why may colonies not have a larger population than the parent nation? My guess is that on Yukon there is no indigenious population and therefore there can not be more people in the colony than in the mother nation. Is that a correct guess? Furthermore, what are the proposals for dominions, protectorates, vassal states, etc.? Those all essentially fall under a category that could be called a puppet. I do disapprove of this idea for the moment.
Edited by Herargon, Apr 20 2015, 08:04 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Unibearia

But what if you just annex a small island? Would that be considered a colony or just an island that you annexed? Because for me, a colony is where I would go into tropical zones to get resources like fruits and bamboo instead on relying on trade. So I would have to go and colonize near the equator. But I have my eyes set on an island not far from my nation and I was wondering if just a small island is considered a colony.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Unibearia

Unibearia
Apr 21 2015, 03:21 AM
But what if you just annex a small island? Would that be considered a colony or just an island that you annexed? Because for me, a colony is where I would go into tropical zones to get resources like fruits and bamboo instead on relying on trade. So I would have to go and colonize near the equator. But I have my eyes set on an island not far from my nation and I was wondering if just a small island is considered a colony.
NVM, I read it wrong.


But would I have a choice on whether I want to just annex a nice piece of clay on the equator or if I would be obligated to create a colony?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Arcadia
Member Avatar
Administrator
@Tyvenia: The answer to your question is found in the Act, in 2.2 to be precise.
Ref#2.2
 
Colonies may have a maximum population of 200 million, which is subtracted from that of the parent nation, and their land area shall be calculated accordingly based on the map claim rules.

To expand on this no, no new NS nation will be created or accepted, since the population of each colony is subtracted from that of the parent nation. Even if said colony gains independence the rule on population and economy remain the same.

@Herargon: This act refers purely to overseas colonies. The land claimed for a colony will be small in size and shall be claimed in addition to the parent nation's territory, not subtracted from it. This Act does not include any legitimisation of dominions, protectorates or vassals, however it does facilitate the creation of independent micronations. These micronations however are not puppets in the traditional sense because they will be totally independent of the parent.

@Unibearia: The creation of a colony is entirely optional. So if you want to claim a single island or distant equatorial land you can do so without making it a colony; of course such expansion claims would have to be carefully considered on a case by case basis by the Minister for Cartography. So to answer your question briefly, no you are never under any obligation to create a colony.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tyvenia

I realize that the language within the legislation already implies this, but I would like it to see explicitly reinforced that, especially for the first colony, the RPMT can't/won't reject colonies without cause.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Arcadia
Member Avatar
Administrator
Actually the text of the Act is intentionally phrased so as to establish a presumption against allowing colonies. Unlike my other Acts relating to RP rules this one is meant to be quite prohibitive in nature, this is because of its close similarity to the contentious issue of Puppet Nations and because of the broad potential for abuse colonies present. Thus my intention was that it is for the player to provide proof and good reason why they should be allowed to create a colony, rather than for the RPMT to provide a reason why they cannot.

I understand the view that the RPMT should generally provide clear reasons for any ruling, however, as is law there are occasions when the role is reversed. The presumption against colonies is intended to prevent the willful abuse of the system to create puppet nations; you will of course remember my previous Puppet Control Act which was resoundingly defeated because it failed to sufficiently limit the ability of nations to create such puppets. While a colony is not, under this Act, automatically a puppet state they do inherently have the potential to become such.

Additionally in an IC context we are role playing in a period where society and politics have gone beyond the ideologies of imperialism and colonialism. In place of vast multinational empires we have federalised states, even those nations referring to themselves and empires are in truth hardly that (myself included), therefore it cannot automatically be assumed that the establishment of colonies on Yukon is the 'done thing' so to speak.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tyvenia

Well, that changes things a bit then. I'm not convinced that this is the best way to have a prohibitive statute against colonies. I think, most importantly, that it subjects the players to two burdens, the RPMT and the Minister of Cartography is overly burdensome, and will create potentially cause unnecessary hard feelings if someone has an good thought process and put a lot of time into a proposal that gets through the hurdle of the RPMT only to be shot down by the MoC. If we're going to be restrictive about a certain sector of RP then we should at least be plain about it from the start.

If this is something the Assembly wants to undertake, I'd favor an outright ban with a sunset limitation this summer sometime.

Also, is the legislation meant to include mining colonies on asteroids and moons and such, or only those on Yukon itself?

**Edited for content prior to any reply on the original post.
Edited by Tyvenia, Apr 22 2015, 01:46 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Saratoga
Member Avatar

One thing I don't like about this is how it give the Cartographer power that too me seem like they should belong to the Minister of RP.

"1.6) All nations wishing to establish a colony must justify this wish in in character terms; approval of Colony requests come at the discretion of the Role Play Moderation Team, on the advice of the Minister for Cartography."

In this a player is Rping creating a colony. So the colony RP should be approved by the Role Play Moderation Team which i'm ok with, and the Minister for Cartography. Why is the Cartographer involved in this decision but not the Minister of Role Play?

1.7) The Minister for Cartography shall have the right to veto any colony claim. Reason for a veto may include but are not limited; attempts at boxing a nation, attempts to claim strategically valuable territory, attempts to unrealistically expand the territory of the home nation.

Ok, I have one big problem with this which raises a ton of red flags (in my opinion).
This proposed legislation is giving the Cartographer some power that could be taking advantage of within the RP.

1.7) "attempts to claim strategically valuable territory"

This gives the Cartographer power to deny a player what he deems "strategically valuable territories". This to me is a flat out attempt to give any Minister of Cartography a small amount"god modding"(i try not to throw the term around a lot) powers. The responsibility of creating colony should be a shared tasking because of the ability to abuse it's power.

I propose that responsibility should be left to the Role Play Moderation Team or it should be struck from the legislation.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Arcadia
Member Avatar
Administrator
@Tyvenia - The wording states that the MoC advises the RPMT on any colonisaton decision, therefore the MoC would be able to make plain that they are vetoing the claim during this process, thus preventing the two hurdle process you quite rightly fear. The veto on the part of the MoC is purely based upon the territorial claim and is included to protect their powers under the Cartography Act; of course I can only speak for myself as the present MoC but I would not veto any claim the RPMT approved except on the most extraordinary of grounds.

To address your other question about extra-terrestrial colonies the answer is no. The (Yukon) suffix at the end of the Act means that this Act only applies to terrestrial colonies.

@Saratoga - I'll address your concerns one at a time for ease:

  • 1) Your argument about giving the MoC too much power which should belong in the hands of the MoRP does not take into account that the MoRP already has a position on the RPMT automatically, therefore the MoRP is involved in the process. Specifically empowering the MoRP in this process would be equivalent to giving them a 'double vote' which is something I'd rather avoid. The reason why the MoC's advice is sought on any colony claim is that the MoC has final authority with relation to the map itself, including resource distribution; therefore it makes sense for the RPMT (which already has the MoRP in it) to consult them.
  • 2) You concern over MoC IC power is unfounded I assure you. This Act pertains to the creation of colonies only and not the initial land claims or expansion claims of existing nations' core territory, therefore if a person wishes to claim 'strategically valuable territory' they can do so through the normal process of expansion claiming. The reason for this contingency is to prevent people using the colonisation rules to claim random bits of territory all over the planet for purely strategic gain rather than for quality RP.
  • 3) Your argument that the matter of colonies be left purely in the hands of the RPMT is again unfounded since the MoC ultimately has final authority over what does and does not go on the map under the law. Even if the veto and advice requirement were removed the MoC would still technically hold a veto due to the Cartography Act.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Saratoga
Member Avatar

^^

This does calm some of my fears. I just wanted to make sure that there is the least amount of loophole as there can be.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Herargon
Member Avatar

Even if that act sounds attractive and gives the opportunity to establish colonies, Promethius, you still do not give any arguments against this act. Plus, puppets are bad and therefore they should remain banished from Yukon. We've seen what happened with Enkon and Ath's banject. Even if you may be reliable - more than Ath -, even then, I still stand against this act. Why? Colonies are territories that are strongly dependant on their masters, economically, militarily and politically even. Therefore they still are puppets - puppets are nations that are dependant on their liege nation for decisions.

Thus this disapproval remains UNCHANGED.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tyvenia

Herargon,

Well for starters, I think Prime's in favor of the legislation, so he's not likely to complain about it.

Also, there's a world of difference between the absolute power in the hands of a single person in Enkon that led to its downfall, than a the constitutional protections we have here. I think Prime also suitably addressed the concerns about the puppet issue. What specifically concerns you in regards to the puppet issue that Prime didn't address, or didn't address sufficiently?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Arcadia
Member Avatar
Administrator
The mandatory 5 day debate period is over, please declare your votes, Aye or Nay.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
46566
Member Avatar

I vote Aye.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Herargon
Member Avatar

Tyvenia
Apr 22 2015, 06:59 PM
Herargon,

Well for starters, I think Prime's in favor of the legislation, so he's not likely to complain about it.

Also, there's a world of difference between the absolute power in the hands of a single person in Enkon that led to its downfall, than a the constitutional protections we have here. I think Prime also suitably addressed the concerns about the puppet issue. What specifically concerns you in regards to the puppet issue that Prime didn't address, or didn't address sufficiently?
Well, colonies are part of the mother land and are made out of additional land, thus this is a law which if passed, contradicts the Cartography Act. That is, it contradicts the Cartography Act because that act said how often we were allowed to expand -and also essentially how much. Since colonies can undo this by having a large (more than 2 billion) population according to this proposal, or by adding your colony AND an expansion at the same time, it would violate law currently in use.

Which is unlawful and therefore either the Cartography Act needs to be changed through Senate before proposing this act, or this act would not be in use, or this act needs to be changed to adhere to previously passed legislation, in accordance with the Constitution.

And not only those are the reasons (but they are spoken through orating - speaking, - on the law), but they are important in analysing this proposal, that is for sure.

The other reasons I have are based on what Athretvari did due to wanting too much power through his puppets. Though I know the people here are not like him, we shall need to take no risk, if we want to prevent another drama.

That is why I would lean towards a strong 'Nay', instead, but for now, I will abstain and think for a moment whether my vote would make a difference.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Unibearia

Aye
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Arcadia
Member Avatar
Administrator
POINT OF ORDER: Herargon, please keep debate to the allotted debating period. Once voting has commenced you should not post lengthy debating posts and simply declare your vote. If you wish to motion for an increased debating period you may do so, however this would require a second. You have been warned about this before; if you do this again I will have to issue a Strike in accordance with the three strike law.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tyvenia

Abstaining.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
New Wolfeinstein
Member Avatar

Aye
Edited by New Wolfeinstein, Apr 27 2015, 02:36 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Herargon
Member Avatar

Nay.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Arcadia
Member Avatar
Administrator
Voting closes the result is:

3-1-1

The Act passes and shall be sent to the Senate once elections are concluded.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Legislative Archives · Next Topic »
Add Reply


Theme created by vcd of the ZetaBoards Theme ZoneStyle District