Greetings to the Assembly.
I am appointing @Erstavik as Director of the Office of World Assembly Legislation. They will post their agenda shortly.
6 Likes
Distinguished Members of the Assembly:
I am deeply honored to have been appointed by the Prime Minister to serve as the next Director of the Office of World Assembly Legislation and I wish to express my profound gratitude for this opportunity. I would also like to express my sincere gratitude to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Lordnwahs, for his generous mentorship over the past few months, during which he provided invaluable insight into both the operational workings of OWL and the broader landscape of WA politics. Lordnwahs has done a tremendous job as OWL Director and I am well aware that I have very big shoes to fill.
OWL AGENDA
The past few months have been eventful in the WA, particularly in the GA, with the recent departure of the entire GenSec and the Sovereign Seven actively advancing their agenda. As one of the largest GCRs with a highly endorsed Delegate, we hold significant influence in the WA. I want us to use that influence not only to help shape the future of the WA and legislation in a way that reflects the values and interests of our region, but also to ensure the contributions of South Pacificans to NS are recognized.
I intend to continue the excellent work Lordnwahs has done in leading OWL. Additionally, I want to focus on increasing participation in our OWL voting and discussions, as well as encouraging more nations to get involved in drafting and passing their own GA and SC resolutions with the support of a think tank.
Increasing the number of nations actively involved in OWL
Participation in OWL voting and discussions has increased slightly over the past few months. However, only about 10 to 15 nations regularly take part in OWL votes, and discussions around proposals are often limited. For context, over 150 TSP nations voted in the last General Assembly resolution. This means that a relatively small number of voices are having a significant impact on how we instruct our Delegate to vote. Our method of organizing the Delegateâs vote in the WA is fundamentally democratic. Unless the Prime Minister issues specific instructions for security or diplomatic reasons, the Delegate follows the outcome of OWL votes, open to all South Pacificans with a nation in the WA. That is why it is essential to broaden participation in OWL, to give greater legitimacy and representative weight to the recommendations we give our Delegate.
I believe our current OWL setup on Discord is strong, but I am concerned that it is somewhat hidden. Many nations may not fully understand how our WA voting recommendations are made, I myself was not aware for quite some time. To help address this I plan to lead outreach efforts to nations gameside both through the RMB and by telegram, in order to raise awareness of OWL and hopefully bring in more nations to actively participate. I also plan to use dispatches to give nations the option to sign up for pings when new resolutions are open for discussion and voting.
A middle ground GA policy
Recently, we have witnessed the rise of the national sovereigntist movement within the GA, with the announced treaty between the Sovereign Six (Seven) earlier this year. Initially, I found myself in broad agreement with many of their concerns. In recent times, a number of GA resolutions have been both overly niche and arguably frivolous, addressing matters better left to individual member states through national legislation. I am generally a proponent of the principle of subsidiarity, meaning in this context, that decisions should be made at the national or regional level whenever possible. International or supranational bodies such as the GA should intervene only when the objectives in question cannot be effectively achieved by individual nations or regions alone, and always with due respect for national sovereignty, individuals, and the pursuit of the common good.
At the same time, however, the GA has entered what could fairly be described as a repeal frenzy. Numerous important resolutions where the GA was indeed the appropriate legislative authority have been repealed. While I believe TSP should remain vigilant against the excesses of international federalism, we must also resist the blanket dismantling of the GA driven by the sovereigntists. As OWL Director, I will advocate for TSP to support replacements for some of these recent repeals and to back resolutions appropriate for the GA, while continuing to oppose those better left to member states to decide.
Pushing for GenSec to be reinstated
Following the recent debacle with Separatist Peoples and the departure of the entire GenSec, the situation in the GA has been chaotic to say the least. Currently, resolutions are being reviewed by moderators with far less experience than the former GenSec members. These moderators have also taken it upon themselves to dismantle some of the precedents and rules established by the GenSec. I am deeply concerned about the implications this could have not only for the GA but for NS as a whole. This game is community driven and moderators undoing the work of dedicated users is, in my opinion, highly detrimental. My hope is that TSP will adopt a policy supporting the reinstatement of a community driven GenSec preferably allowing its former members to return, but even new nations would be preferable to moderators running the GA.
Pursuing commendations for deserving South Pacificans
I am a little saddened by the fact that it has been quite some time since a South Pacifican was commended by the SC. In contrast, in recent months, we have seen several commendations of prominent members of other GCRs. That is why one of my main goals as OWL Director will be to work together with other nations on drafting commendation resolutions for deserving South Pacificans. Our community includes several nations whose contributions, both within TSP and across the wider game, are significant and who are more than worthy of recognition. My first priority will be to seek commendations for Amerion, and subsequently for Concrete Slab and Professor Henn. I plan to begin this project soon, ideally with the support of the think tank, bringing me to my next point:
Announcing The Lampshade Foundation
Drafting and passing GA and SC resolutions is, unfortunately, an area where TSP has been largely absent in recent times. Currently, a small number of nations from other regions are responsible for the majority of passed resolutions, and the GA, with its complex rules, can present a high barrier to entry. To help more South Pacificans engage in WA affairs and succeed in getting their own resolutions passed, I am establishing a TSP think tank, which I have named The Lampshade Foundation. Based here on the forum, I envision the think tank as a collaborative space where we can develop ideas together and support one another in authoring both GA and SC resolutions. By creating an encouraging and welcoming environment, I hope to empower more South Pacificans to take the leap into resolution writing, and to produce strong and well written proposals to submit to the WA.
Those are the main priorities of my OWL agenda so far. I am always open to suggestions and new ideas on how we can continue to improve and strengthen OWL. As always, making TSP the best it can be is a team effort, and I am truly excited to work with all of you as we shape OWLâs future together.
With unwavering loyalty and admiration to all and everyone in the South Pacific,
EMPEROR LUKE (ERSTAVIK)
8 Likes
Under what authority would the OWL director implement an agenda involving setting âGA policyâ?
(OOC: I personally am not inclined to play in-character politics over the current situation and to me that includes âofficialâ policies of the Coalition, an in-character government.)
1 Like
Thank you for your questions!
To the extent that I have a role in setting GA policy, I can only advocate for us to move in a certain direction. As you know, OWL recommendations are determined by a democratic vote, unless the Prime Minister issues specific instructions for security or diplomatic reasons. I will, of course, honor and support the will of our citizens/WA residents, whichever direction they choose to take. As a matter of law, I am appointed by and serve at the Prime Ministerâs pleasure, and they have asked me to include a GA policy.
I understand your position, but GenSec is an area where OOC and IC matters intersect. While the decision to have a GenSec is certainly an OOC admin issue, the GenSecâs rules and the recent changes made by moderators, have a direct impact on the IC dynamics of the GA. For that reason, I believe it is reasonable for us to advocate for the reinstatement of GenSec.
Thatâs interesting.
Could the Prime Minister share if they intend on setting GA policy through OWL? If so, I have two questions that immediately come to mind:
- To what extent is the Minister of Foreign Affairs involved in these discussions?
- Why avoid Assembly confirmation for an official who will be involved in policymaking?
(OOC: I donât see how this is different from any other part of the game, where changes to the rules can affect changes to gameplay. That seems par for the course with any game. It doesnât change the fact that I personally have no interest in litigating serious OOC administration issues through the lens of IC politics.)
1 Like
Congrats bro
1 Like
This was an unintentional error on my part as I did not review the law in depth before this appointment. Many things have taken my attention recently outside of NS.
Consider this my formal appointment of Erstavik to Cabinet, as OWL Director. I will be adding them to the Foreign Affairs Council as an advisor in the meanwhile.
For what itâs worth, I fully agree with Pronoun about being involved in any way with what is going on with GenSec and GA rules. But also â what does a âpolicy supporting the reinstatemnet of a community driven GenSecâ look like for a region to take?
I think you personally are welcome to advocate for that, including while potentially Director of OWL, but I really donât understand what a regional position on this would look like or be pursued.
Why is this our GA policy? What input did you take (or do you plan to take) in setting that as our GA policy?
I think a lot of our SC policy is based in value-statements and military policy that is reflected in the Charter, so itâs understandable and clear when the government pursues it. I am not inherently opposed to the government pursuing a âGA policyâ â however, I donât think we should pursue a policy for the sake of pursuing a policy alone, and I think what that policy is should be decided democratically and with discussion and input. How, if you are confirmed, would you go about doing that?
And, last and most important question: success in NS positions is almost entirely about follow through. Convince me you intend to follow through on your agenda.
Thank you for your questions!
I am aware that there are numerous OOC issues at play here, and we must tread carefully to avoid conflating those with the IC role of the government. A policy supporting the reinstatement of a community driven GenSec could involve publishing a statement or advocating in favor of it, should it ever become an active topic of discussion with NS administration.
To be perfectly clear, what I stated in my agenda was that âmy hope is that TSP will adopt a policy supporting the reinstatement of a community driven GenSecâ (emphasis added), not that I would unilaterally implement such a policy. Nonetheless, I believe it is prudent to make the Assembly aware of my position, as any stance I take on the matter, even in a personal capacity, could easily be construed as speaking on behalf of TSP.
With the changing landscape in the GA and the emergence of voting blocs such as the Sovereign Seven and the Sunrise Pact, I believe it is reasonable for TSP to adopt a GA policy. Over the past couple of months, I have discussed my views on GA politics with several other South Pacificans, and I also informed the Prime Minister of my position prior to my appointment. I would be more than happy to hold a public consultation with our citizens and residents regarding the GA policy, as well as engage in discussion with the Assembly. I remain open to considering alternative policies if that reflects the will of South Pacificans.
The GA policy represents a direction I will be advocating for, not a binding directive. I view this as largely consistent with what we have done previously, such as when OWL published analyses of GA proposals. OWLâs recommendations will still be determined by a democratic vote, which may or may not align with the GA policy.
I have not previously held an official position in our regional government, so there are not many past accomplishments I can point to in that regard. However, I have been a member of the Assembly since January, and over the past few months I have been assisting Lordnwahs as a volunteer in OWL. I am also quite active on our RMB, and I genuinely want to do the best I can for this region, which I care about deeply. I would never seek a government position simply for the sake of holding office, I am seeking it because I want to contribute and serve the South Pacific. As is often the case with newcomers, a bit of a leap of faith is required, and I hope the Assembly will be willing to give me that chance.
1 Like
Thank you for clarifying. Even outside of Pronounâs skepticism about the role of an IC government in an on-site administration matter, is this something the NS community is actually looking for or needs right now? Are other regions doing this or going to do this? Would we have support if we took such a position? And, frankly, why does site moderation care about our governmentâs position?
I am concerned this âpolicyâ is a lot of idealized grandstanding around an extremely important issue, but that it lacks a certain degree of practicality.
Sure, you wonât personally decide that. But the PM gets to set this kind of policy and the PM appointed you and you mentioned it in your nomination thread. See why people are then going to criticize your nomination on the grounds of that policy?
I like this answer and hope that there is an extensive drafting process to decide on the specifics of the policy statement we release. I also hope that we would take any such action in unison with other regions instead of going it alone.
Reiterating or perhaps expanding upon Pronounâs questionâdoes the Prime Minister contemplate implementing the governmentâs GA policy via voting instructions to the Delegate? Erstavikâs quoted statement sounds like the answer is no, that the GA policy will merely be a view for which the government will advocate, not a position that it will enforce via voting instructions. But that statement wasnât directly in response to Pronounâs question, so, for the avoidance of doubt, could the PM / OWL Director nominee confirm that understanding is accurate? And if the PM does intend to enforce GA policy via voting instruction, could the PM explain how the governmentâs GA policy implicates âlegitimate security or diplomatic reasonsâ within the meaning of the WA Act?
At this time, no, we do not intend to enforce GA policy via voting instructions to the Delegate.
I donât believe the current situation, where unqualified moderators have assumed the role of GenSec and are making changes to the ruleset, is healthy for the future of the GA. A simple solution would be to either reinstate the previous GenSec members or find a new group of qualified users.
I am not aware of any other major region that has issued a statement to that effect. There were serious discussions among other GCRs about boycotting the GA and clearing the proposal queue in protest of the DoS of Separatist Peoples.
I believe we would.
As one of the largest regions in the game, I would hope that NS M/A takes our opinion into consideration.
I motion this appointment to a vote.
I second the motion
We are now at vote!
I ended up voting against this nomination. I appreciate your candor, youth, and energy and have little doubt you will do the bare minimum required to fulfill your job functions, which is more than most appointees do.
However, I find your âpolicyâ approach to the Gen Sec controversy concerning. It would be a shame to see the region try to wade into an OOC matter as part of its IC policy. Additionally, I am concerned this is a poorly conceived venture with little concept of how to actualize this kind of pressure campaign in practice â meaning it has more potential to embarrass us than effectuate any change. As a result, I think your nomination risks doing more harm than good, and voted against.
I hope the Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs choose to reign in this misguided platform plank, especially considering the nomination is set to pass overwhelmingly.