It Didn't Take Much Research, R&D Ministry Has Accomplished Nothing

[HEM]

​

"It Didn't Take Much Research, R&D Ministry Has Accomplished Nothing"
HEM
Managing Editor

When First Minister Maowi nominated GraVandius for the new Minister of Research & Development role, GraVandius testified to the Senate that, "The metric to judge the success of this new Ministry, will be [whether] we can produce useful metrics."

By the Minister's own barometer, his performance has missed the mark. In fact, it appears to have missed any kind of mark at all, seemingly producing nothing of substance that can be seen by the everyday citizen.

The Minister has only made three forum posts this month, including updating a cascading series of Leave of Absences (LOAs) that began on February 22nd, and still continue over two weeks later as of today. The public has been made aware of no meaningful progress on any of the major term goals, which included:

— Producing data on the Discord Buddies program
— Testing new and different recruitment telegrams
— Reaffirming presumptions about recruitment, including best times to recruit
— Keeping the public updated on all progress

Fortunately for the Minister and his new Ministry, nobody has seemed to care about this lack of...anything. A single question has been posted in the Senate's oversight thread for the R&D team, which the Minister failed to reply to despite it being asked prior to his LOA. However, ascendant First Minister Sopo reported at the time that the R&D Ministry was "discussing new telegrams," but there have been no further updates for any government official on the department since that February 23rd report nor any attempts by the lethargic Senate to inquire on the performance of the Department.

While real-life must always come first, it is confusing why neither the Minister nor the First Minister has taken action to address and rectify this floundering Ministry. When asked for comment, First Minister Sopo told ENN: "I don't know what people want. I don't know if people care. It used to be that inactive or underperforming officials would be called out, but that hasn't happened in the executive or in the Senate. I'm just not sure what is driving us forward at this point or where the region wants to go."

Either way, we've done the research, and it seems like this Ministry isn't up to par.

-30-​

 

[Lloenflys]

The criticism of Senate oversight is perfectly fair, but I would throw back the question -- what is the Senate supposed to do if this department doesn't work? Just ask more questions about what is happening? Scold the First Minister? Should we open impeachment proceedings for not taking a superfluous department that was experimental in nature (and not one that was implemented by this First MInister) and actually doing something with it?

Regarding oversight generally - although this isn't the purpose of this article, it was brought up so I'm going to address it - I have always been in favor of greater oversight. So much so, in fact, that I have sought to formalize it. I've always been told that's too much, the region doesn't want to, the executives won't allow it or like it, it's overreaching the proper role of the Senate. Ok, fine. I gave up on formalizing it. I admitted that without it being formalized I haven't carried it out as often as I'd like during my terms as a Senator, but I made some efforts during the last executive term, and during this term I made a concerted effort 2-3 weeks in to carry out some initial questioning with plans for further follow up. It's been almost exactly 2 weeks since that first round of questions - not enough time, in my opinion, to justify further poking and prodding from the Senate into the actions of the Executive.

I'd be thrilled if other members of the Senate would carry out oversight and ask some questions, but that's their prerogative, and I don't really blame them for not doing so because I come back to what I asked above. What exactly do you want the Senate to do in situations like this? After having been told that the Senate was overreaching in the past with interfering with executive appoints am I now being told that the Senate needs to start micro-managing the executive?

I'm not asking this to be defensive - I generally am at something of a loss for what people want. I'll happily reinstitute my plea for formal oversight procedures and for empowering the Senate to hold the executive to account, but I fear that if I do that I will once again be accused of a power grab on behalf of the Senate. So I really am asking the author of this article and anyone who reads it - what should happen when a new, experimental ministry is proposed? Should the Senate say no or should we acquiesce to the desire of the executive to order their cabinet as they wish? And if - as is the case here - a ministry appears to be failing, what exactly do we do about it?

 

[GraVandius]

I mean what do you want me to do? It's unfortunate that the string of events that have occurred that have kept me off Euro for the past few weeks have occurred but if it comes down to studying for an exam or spending an hour or two working on a new telegram draft, it's never going to come up telegram. If the only time I'm posting is when I have a fraction of a second to breath in between schoolwork extracurriculars and everything else. It's the week before spring break, and all of my professors have conspired to absolutely fuck me. So will anything substantive be getting done this week, probably not. As I told Sopo privately I can gaurentee that I will put out the discord buddy info that we have collected so far at the end of term but that's about it at the moment.

 

[HEM]

I mean what do you want me to do? It's unfortunate that the string of events that have occurred that have kept me off Euro for the past few weeks have occurred but if it comes down to studying for an exam or spending an hour or two working on a new telegram draft, it's never going to come up telegram. If the only time I'm posting is when I have a fraction of a second to breath in between schoolwork extracurriculars and everything else. It's the week before spring break, and all of my professors have conspired to absolutely fuck me. So will anything substantive be getting done this week, probably not. As I told Sopo privately I can gaurentee that I will put out the discord buddy info that we have collected so far at the end of term but that's about it at the moment.

• Delegate to staff that you've hired and have them cover for you or take on pieces of larger projects
• Communicate on what work has gotten done this term, or provide a roadmap of what is realistic given your current restraints rather than leaving everyone totally in the dark
• Ask the First Minister to reassign specific tasks, or take on some himself, so at least some forward momentum can be gained on projects
• And if you don't have the bandwidth to do ANY of that, be transparent about it and resign

 

[Hezekon]

I mean, didn't grav tell Sopo of his plans? Doesn't that mean he fulfilled bullet point 2 of your suggestions?

 

[HEM]

I mean, didn't grav tell Sopo of his plans? Doesn't that mean he fulfilled bullet point 2 of your suggestions?

Communicate with the region, otherwise, how do we hold officials accountable and have a functioning government?

 

[Hezekon]

And as for the "lethargic Senate," Lloenflys seemed to provide reasonable answers. Do you have a retort?

 

[HEM]

And as for the "lethargic Senate," Lloenflys seemed to provide reasonable answers. Do you have a retort?

I don't know how to fully retort because his problem seems to be gauging how much oversight people want. I can't represent "everyone" or "the region," I can only represent myself. Right now in the Senate we largely have a row of pinned, empty "oversight" threads. Questions were asked at the start of the term about the Research & Development Department, but there was no follow-up, follow-through, or further attempts to glean insight as the situation continued to stagnate. Whatever the philosophy is right now, it doesn't seem to be working, unless the philosophy is a completely hands-off approach which I think isn't what the current times call for.

The greater point here, one that I'm trying to hold myself back from screaming from the proverbial rooftop is that somebody, somewhere, at some point has to step up and choose to be the accountability mechanism for Ministries. And I guess I don't know how we continue as a functioning region when we can be 2/3rds the way through a term, nothing apparent has been accomplished in a Ministry, and pointing that out receives just as much scrutiny (if not more) than the fact itself.

 

[Lloenflys]

The greater point here, one that I'm trying to hold myself back from screaming from the proverbial rooftop is that somebody, somewhere, at some point has to step up and choose to be the accountability mechanism for Ministries. And I guess I don't know how we continue as a functioning region when we can be 2/3rds the way through a term, nothing apparent has been accomplished in a Ministry, and pointing that out receives just as much scrutiny (if not more) than the fact itself.

First - I think criticism for those occupying leadership positions (whether through private papers, Discord discussions, Grand Hall threads, whatever) is perfectly appropriate. Leaders should be held accountable and I have no issue with that. If such criticism is raised, whoever is being criticized can lay out their argument and people can decide whether they think there is blame there or not, and take that into account in the future. So I have no problem with criticism as a general idea, and I agree with you that holding people to account when there are mistakes is perfectly appropriate.

That said, I think there are a lot of reasons why this particular ministry doesn't necessarily require the level of scrutiny that would be appropriate for other ministries. This is a brand new Ministry. It is one that, if you read Maowi's comments in the original confirmation thread, looks like it was designed to take advantage of GraV's particular skill set and interests. There's no indication GraV was planning to serve in a different leadership role if he hadn't been in this one, so another ministry isn't losing out on resources due to this ministry not getting much, if anything done right now. The region isn't losing out on anything it wasn't getting before, either - it just isn't getting some new information that this ministry was designed to try to come up with. So in such a situation, I'm not sure what greater oversight here would do. Unlike most positions, GraV resigning would more than likely not result in someone else being named to this post - it would probably result in the shuttering of the ministry.

In any case, I am genuinely interested in knowing what people think the Senate should do as regards oversight (and that includes you HEM, should you be willing to provide your thoughts). It doesn't necessarily have to be here - we have a general election coming up, and I'm hoping that this issue is discussed heavily during that election. I am currently anticipating running again and I know that I will be expecting to address the issue in my platform thread, but I hope its something people comment on because if people want the Senate in that role, I think it should be explicitly clear in the mandate any given Senator gets upon election.

 

[Calvin Coolidge]

I'm very confused how this article is at all controversial. As of now, R&D has done nothing. GraV has had a series of unfortunate circumstances that have led ti multiple LoAs, but does that mean nothing can happen from a Ministry? If there's no other staff working, then the Minister isn't doing their job, and the Ministry is failing. Sopo is literally quoted here saying the Ministry is underperforming, and wishes people were criticizing that. Why are we making HEM the bad guy? This is reasonable to point out, and it should be reasonable that we are concerned.

 

[Deepest House]

I just wonder if a job is one person doing something, should that be a ministry?

Does it take offering a ministry to someone to get someone to actually work? is that why we have to have a bazillion ministries and ministers, because if they aren’t ministers they aren’t willing to work?

 

[Lethen]

I'm very confused how this article is at all controversial. As of now, R&D has done nothing. GraV has had a series of unfortunate circumstances that have led ti multiple LoAs, but does that mean nothing can happen from a Ministry? If there's no other staff working, then the Minister isn't doing their job, and the Ministry is failing. Sopo is literally quoted here saying the Ministry is underperforming, and wishes people were criticizing that. Why are we making HEM the bad guy? This is reasonable to point out, and it should be reasonable that we are concerned.

I don't get it either. This is fairly simple to me in terms of accountability: GraV hasn't been active and hasn't delegated work, and Sopo isn't satisfied with his performance or the ministry's results. GraV should have resigned instead of dragging his feet and assuming that telling Sopo would be enough; Sopo should have found a solution, even if it it meant firing GraV; and the Senate should have at least been asking more questions - even just a series of follow-up questions that at least drew attention to the issue.

We could dive into the semantics of what the Senate's oversight role is here, or whether the underwhelming performance from the Ministry of R&D matters less since it's basically a one-off ministry, but neither of those are as important in my opinion. Intentional or not, everyone is passing the buck while throwing up their hands and saying "What can we do? Its out of our control!"

 

[Hezekon]

I'm very confused how this article is at all controversial. As of now, R&D has done nothing. GraV has had a series of unfortunate circumstances that have led ti multiple LoAs, but does that mean nothing can happen from a Ministry? If there's no other staff working, then the Minister isn't doing their job, and the Ministry is failing. Sopo is literally quoted here saying the Ministry is underperforming, and wishes people were criticizing that. Why are we making HEM the bad guy? This is reasonable to point out, and it should be reasonable that we are concerned.

I mean, I guess if this was a ministry like Culture or Interior, I would understand the worry. As it is, it's a small ministry that's just doing it's own little thing. We aren't losing money on having it exist, and whether or not you believe executive bloat is a problem, it's literally one person doing the work no one else seems to care to do.

It just feels like this is being treated as if the Republic is burning when it's just an experimental ministry not working out as quickly as hoped.

 

[Lloenflys]

I'm very confused how this article is at all controversial. As of now, R&D has done nothing. GraV has had a series of unfortunate circumstances that have led ti multiple LoAs, but does that mean nothing can happen from a Ministry? If there's no other staff working, then the Minister isn't doing their job, and the Ministry is failing. Sopo is literally quoted here saying the Ministry is underperforming, and wishes people were criticizing that. Why are we making HEM the bad guy? This is reasonable to point out, and it should be reasonable that we are concerned.

I don't get it either. This is fairly simple to me in terms of accountability: GraV hasn't been active and hasn't delegated work, and Sopo isn't satisfied with his performance or the ministry's results. GraV should have resigned instead of dragging his feet and assuming that telling Sopo would be enough; Sopo should have found a solution, even if it it meant firing GraV; and the Senate should have at least been asking more questions - even just a series of follow-up questions that at least drew attention to the issue.

We could dive into the semantics of what the Senate's oversight role is here, or whether the underwhelming performance from the Ministry of R&D matters less since it's basically a one-off ministry, but neither of those are as important in my opinion. Intentional or not, everyone is passing the buck while throwing up their hands and saying "What can we do? Its out of our control!"

Institutionally, I will grant you the Senate could be conducting more oversight. I’ll take that criticism to heart personally and plan on once again proposing something in my upcoming Senate platform making it clear that I think oversight is a role we should be doing more of. And yes, my fellow Senators for whatever reason haven’t felt it necessary to do that for .... many terms. I can’t answer for why that is. So I will take the criticism that falls to the Senate here and learn from it that people appear to want more of that, although it feels as if much of the business of the Senate is ignored as a matter of routine (calling this Senate lethargic, for instance, doesn’t comport with the amount of legislation it has passed, although there has been a lot of space between activity for certain members of the body).

Ultimately though it feels like there are two people who have direct control over this. GraV could resign, but more than likely feels like he is capable of delivering at least some of what he was asked to do, and since this Ministry was tailored to him probably views that as desirable. In his shoes, with this Ministry, I’m not sure I’d resign either.

The other person who can ultimately have an effect here, of course, is Sopo. If he doesn’t feel like what he’s getting from GraV over the remainder of the term is enough, he can remove him. I’m not sure why that requires massive public outcry or oversight to do. It’s his prerogative. Given that there almost certainly isn’t an alternative, I don’t think I would remove GraV if I were him either. Given that people are clearly wondering what’s going on with this Ministry it would probably make sense for him to address it. I could ask for it in an Oversight thread (any Senator could), but I really didn’t want to be asking oversight questions every two weeks. Maybe I need to rethink that. For now I’m going to see if the First Minister chooses to address things outside of the Senate.

 

[HEM]

Ultimately though it feels like there are two people who have direct control over this. GraV could resign, but more than likely feels like he is capable of delivering at least some of what he was asked to do, and since this Ministry was tailored to him probably views that as desirable. In his shoes, with this Ministry, I’m not sure I’d resign either.

The other person who can ultimately have an effect here, of course, is Sopo. If he doesn’t feel like what he’s getting from GraV over the remainder of the term is enough, he can remove him. I’m not sure why that requires massive public outcry or oversight to do.

Okay, but here's the thing:

If it had been clearly communicated by GraV or Sopo in some manner similar to this... "Here's the issue. GraV is busy IRL, and the goals that were outlined in his confirmation thread (the goals that the Senate and general public have no just a right, but a duty to hold them account for) are no longer feasible. But we still think it's worth keeping GraV in office because something is better than nothing. We can't do "x" or "z" and are just going to focus on "y". GraV will be starting on "y" after his exams next week," then this would be a different issue. It would be a discussion of whether "y" is sufficient for a standalone Ministry, and etc. etc.

The problem here is that there has been no communication, and no effort to get that communication on what the actual plan is. In addition, this isn't like a "Chief of Staff" role where the only real duties might be "advice" and hence difficult to conduct oversight on. This nominee was confirmed on specific commitments, oversight actually should be quite doable. Of course, Hez is correct in saying that the future of Europeia doesn't hinge on this Ministry, but I do feel the future of the region is dependent on some kind of linkage between what is promised, and what is delivered.

This department was a huge tentpole of the Maowi / Sopo ticket which has a mandate to govern the region. GraV was confirmed on the promise of explicit tasks that he was going to complete. I don't care if it makes me the least popular person in the region, I don't think a total abandonment of those things should be inconsequential to the general public.

 

[Deepest House]

I’m not sure the answer for an executive that is stretched thin is to task them with additional duties related to responding to Senate oversight. The senate doesn’t need anything more formal than it already has. There are informal oversight threads that can be used. Ultimately, that’s where the Senate can get information to inform if it feels it should remove a minister. Or it could make the judgment from a lack of activity.

Codifying some additional and more formal won’t do anything to answer the question of “when should we boot a minister?” I think there is enough in place for the Senate to come to that conclusion. They just have to exercise the tools at hand a bit more.

 

[Lloenflys]

Ultimately though it feels like there are two people who have direct control over this. GraV could resign, but more than likely feels like he is capable of delivering at least some of what he was asked to do, and since this Ministry was tailored to him probably views that as desirable. In his shoes, with this Ministry, I’m not sure I’d resign either.

The other person who can ultimately have an effect here, of course, is Sopo. If he doesn’t feel like what he’s getting from GraV over the remainder of the term is enough, he can remove him. I’m not sure why that requires massive public outcry or oversight to do.

Okay, but here's the thing:

If it had been clearly communicated by GraV or Sopo in some manner similar to this... "Here's the issue. GraV is busy IRL, and the goals that were outlined in his confirmation thread (the goals that the Senate and general public have no just a right, but a duty to hold them account for) are no longer feasible. But we still think it's worth keeping GraV in office because something is better than nothing. We can't do "x" or "z" and are just going to focus on "y". GraV will be starting on "y" after his exams next week," then this would be a different issue. It would be a discussion of whether "y" is sufficient for a standalone Ministry, and etc. etc.

The problem here is that there has been no communication, and no effort to get that communication on what the actual plan is. In addition, this isn't like a "Chief of Staff" role where the only real duties might be "advice" and hence difficult to conduct oversight on. This nominee was confirmed on specific commitments, oversight actually should be quite doable. Of course, Hez is correct in saying that the future of Europeia doesn't hinge on this Ministry, but I do feel the future of the region is dependent on some kind of linkage between what is promised, and what is delivered.

This department was a huge tentpole of the Maowi / Sopo ticket which has a mandate to govern the region. GraV was confirmed on the promise of explicit tasks that he was going to complete. I don't care if it makes me the least popular person in the region, I don't think a total abandonment of those things should be inconsequential to the general public.

Fair enough, and as I’ve said above if people want more oversight from the Senate I’m more than happy to deliver it, at least speaking for myself personally. But I come back to a question I asked before, which is what is your preferred resolution here? Do you want the Senate to impeach GraV? Sopo? I have now stated I think Sopo should state his intentions, although I’ve done it here and not in the Senate formally. If his answer is insufficient would you want the Senate to proceed with impeachment? Or do you just want questions asked? I’m really not trying to be belligerent about this, but it feels demonstrably different than how reactions to executive situations have been in the past. It now feels like the there are people calling for the Senate to decide a Ministry isn’t justified (from DH’s post), or that the Senate should get much more in depth with ministry activities instead of having the executive police itself barring scandalous behavior (something that differs from how inactive ministries have been treated since I have been here, which is now over a year). So I’m all on board but I am experiencing cognitive dissonance about what exactly is wanted, and I look forward to seeing it clarified in the upcoming general election and the discussions that surround it.

 

[HEM]

Ultimately though it feels like there are two people who have direct control over this. GraV could resign, but more than likely feels like he is capable of delivering at least some of what he was asked to do, and since this Ministry was tailored to him probably views that as desirable. In his shoes, with this Ministry, I’m not sure I’d resign either.

The other person who can ultimately have an effect here, of course, is Sopo. If he doesn’t feel like what he’s getting from GraV over the remainder of the term is enough, he can remove him. I’m not sure why that requires massive public outcry or oversight to do.

Okay, but here's the thing:

If it had been clearly communicated by GraV or Sopo in some manner similar to this... "Here's the issue. GraV is busy IRL, and the goals that were outlined in his confirmation thread (the goals that the Senate and general public have no just a right, but a duty to hold them account for) are no longer feasible. But we still think it's worth keeping GraV in office because something is better than nothing. We can't do "x" or "z" and are just going to focus on "y". GraV will be starting on "y" after his exams next week," then this would be a different issue. It would be a discussion of whether "y" is sufficient for a standalone Ministry, and etc. etc.

The problem here is that there has been no communication, and no effort to get that communication on what the actual plan is. In addition, this isn't like a "Chief of Staff" role where the only real duties might be "advice" and hence difficult to conduct oversight on. This nominee was confirmed on specific commitments, oversight actually should be quite doable. Of course, Hez is correct in saying that the future of Europeia doesn't hinge on this Ministry, but I do feel the future of the region is dependent on some kind of linkage between what is promised, and what is delivered.

This department was a huge tentpole of the Maowi / Sopo ticket which has a mandate to govern the region. GraV was confirmed on the promise of explicit tasks that he was going to complete. I don't care if it makes me the least popular person in the region, I don't think a total abandonment of those things should be inconsequential to the general public.

Fair enough, and as I’ve said above if people want more oversight from the Senate I’m more than happy to deliver it, at least speaking for myself personally. But I come back to a question I asked before, which is what is your preferred resolution here? Do you want the Senate to impeach GraV? Sopo? I have now stated I think Sopo should state his intentions, although I’ve done it here and not in the Senate formally. If his answer is insufficient would you want the Senate to proceed with impeachment? Or do you just want questions asked? I’m really not trying to be belligerent about this, but it feels demonstrably different than how reactions to executive situations have been in the past. It now feels like the there are people calling for the Senate to decide a Ministry isn’t justified (from DH’s post), or that the Senate should get much more in depth with ministry activities instead of having the executive police itself barring scandalous behavior (something that differs from how inactive ministries have been treated since I have been here, which is now over a year). So I’m all on board but I am experiencing cognitive dissonance about what exactly is wanted, and I look forward to seeing it clarified in the upcoming general election and the discussions that surround it.

I mean, I think as a lover of the Senate you took all the "oversight" (lowercase "o") criticism to be directly aimed at the Senate. Perhaps if I had just cut the word "lethargic" this debate would've gone differently heh.

Oversight is the responsibility of everyone: the media, the Senate, the general population. The fact that it hasn't become natural reflex to have some scrutiny into what our leaders are doing is concerning to me. You're right in that, in the past, a lot of oversight wasn't always needed from the Senate because there were other oversight institutions in the media and general public. But at this point, aside from the EBC, it seems like the media is just me screaming into an empty bag of Cheetos and the general public has to be convinced that failing to drive any meaningful progress on a core campaign promise is a problem at all.

So yes, I do think the Senate will have to start stepping in a little bit more.

For this specific instance, I feel that as GraV is now aware of this article and the criticisms brought up, he deserves a moment to consider his next step in consultation with the First Minister. If he feels he can proceed with at least part of his promised work and layout what that will be, then great. If he feels he needs to resign, I understand. But I think what can't be an option is staying in office and continuing to not do anything for the rest of the term!

 

[Sopo]

Obviously, I have now resigned. But I think I've made my feelings about the general "state of things" pretty clear, and I also believe if we're going to see a revival, it can't be led by old hands like me or HEM. But I do think we, as citizens, need to hold our government to account when they don't live up to their promises. That includes mediocre ministers, grand admirals, and senators. But that requires citizens to care and for them to be brave. It's easy for me or for HEM to call people out because we've grown thick skin and we live for political gameplay. It's a lot harder for our younger members, both to give criticism and receive it. But it's an important part of our region, and your bravery will be rewarded.

 

[Prim]

calling this Senate lethargic, for instance, doesn’t comport with the amount of legislation it has passed

Do you feel that every Senator has been contributing sufficiently to those pieces of legislation? Have Senators been observing at all internally and policing inactivity? It has felt like the Senate is You, Drecq, and Malashaan at times this term and I think that might be informing the "lethargic" charge here, especially when looking at the oversight threads.