MRA vs. MSA

[centre]
A Policy Debate
From the Europeian Broadcasting Corporation, one of Europeia’s premier Media groups.
Keeping Europeians and the world informed since 2009.

---

---

MRA vs. MSA vs. Something Else?
Have Your Say


JGlenn Spreads The Message of Europeian Love[/centre]

Now, as we all now know, the recruitment scripts will be coming to an end... at some point. What should be the policy Europeia takes up afterwards?

For a bit of backstory, prior to the script, it was felt that members of the Executive and Legislative Governments should complete a mandatory activity in order to maintain their position within Europeia and that activity was recruiting. Enforced by the Mandatory Recruitment Act [MRA] and typically the Interior Minister. When the the script was introduced, attentions moved elsewhere and into general forum activity or the completion of tasks in order to gain points. This being the Mandatory Service Act [MSA]. However, now that the script has been scrapped, so has the MSA.

So, a brief run down of some their pros and cons:

Mandatory Recruitment Act

Pros:

• Easy, basic & relatively simple
• Awards - Recruitment Culture
• Long history within the region
• Directly aids regional population

Cons:

• Requires active and clear-spoken Minister responsible
• Interior Minister can easily become over-worked
• Doesn't promote much direct forum activity
• Not everyone can easily recruit

Mandatory Services Act

Pros:

• Increases basic forum activity
• Different - some excitement surrounds it
• Relatively simple to pick up the points
• Connection between those under the MSA and the citizenry

Cons:

• Sometimes confusing. Not as basic
• Doesn't directly increase regional population
• Difficult for some Ministers/Senators to collect points
• Unfinished

So, Europeia, what do you feel the future policy direction on this matter should be? Should the MRA return? Should Recruitment return to being a centrepiece of our regional activities?

Or should the MSA be revised and time reinvested into it? Should Recruitment become a part of the MSA?

Or, well, what?

Article By Vinage

 

[Skizzy Grey]

Mandatory recruitment has never been the backbone of a strong recruitment program. The MRA didn't save us from having times where recruitment was weak. Likewise, when recruitment was strong, that strength invariably came from a small core of committed recruiters; mandatory recruitment may have added to that success, but it was never a material contributor to it.

When scripts are banned, we will be building our recruitment efforts from scratch. In the early weeks of that effort, Rachel needs to be 100% focused on building the core team that's going to allow us to succeed. I don't want her dividing her efforts during that time between building a team and policing mandatory recruitment. I also don't want to create the illusion among ordinary citizens that mandatory recruitment will solve this problem for us -- history has shown again and again that it will not.

Once we have a strong manual recruitment program again, I would welcome a debate on mandatory recruitment. In the past, I have said that it's important for the region's leaders to set an example by doing their fair share of the "grunt work" that sustains our community. At the right time, I expect I'll support a law similar to the MRA -- but not when it threatens to distract us from the need to build an effective recruiting program, which is almost wholly related to the question of mandatory service.

 

[Common-Sense Politics]

I think your pros and cons are hogwash.

 

[Vinage Vinage]

I think your pros and cons are hogwash.

Feel free to add your own ^_^

 

[Swakistek]

The MSA was a terrible idea, in my opinion; its underlying concept was flawed and its execution left much to be desired. It was basically filling the gap that was there when we didn't need the MRA, but the gap didn't need to be filled.

I instead support higher expectations of activity from our Cabinet Ministers and Senators in the areas to which they were elected/appointed, and instead of a points-based system to encourage participation, I would instead encourage Cabinet Ministers to take up either a place in the City Council or a Junior Ministry, and for Senators to each join a Junior Ministry as well.

They would, of course, be expected to be active in these roles, but firstly not to the extent that it affects their primary job performance, and secondly, they'd focus on building skills and experience in one area at a time rather than dipping their hands in every pie, as the MSA would encourage.

Of course, if this were to be the path that the Government goes down, there will obviously more Junior Ministers with a high level of activity and qualification to help with work in each of the Ministries, including recruitment, and more City Councillors to prop up activity there.

 

[Common-Sense Politics]

The MSA was a terrible idea, in my opinion; its underlying concept was flawed and its execution left much to be desired. It was basically filling the gap that was there when we didn't need the MRA, but the gap didn't need to be filled.

I instead support higher expectations of activity from our Cabinet Ministers and Senators in the areas to which they were elected/appointed, and instead of a points-based system to encourage participation, I would instead encourage Cabinet Ministers to take up either a place in the City Council or a Junior Ministry, and for Senators to each join a Junior Ministry as well.

They would, of course, be expected to be active in these roles, but firstly not to the extent that it affects their primary job performance, and secondly, they'd focus on building skills and experience in one area at a time rather than dipping their hands in every pie, as the MSA would encourage.

Of course, if this were to be the path that the Government goes down, there will obviously more Junior Ministers with a high level of activity and qualification to help with work in each of the Ministries, including recruitment, and more City Councillors to prop up activity there.

I don't see how "expecting" people to do things is a plan, Swak.

 

[Swakistek]

The MSA was a terrible idea, in my opinion; its underlying concept was flawed and its execution left much to be desired. It was basically filling the gap that was there when we didn't need the MRA, but the gap didn't need to be filled.

I instead support higher expectations of activity from our Cabinet Ministers and Senators in the areas to which they were elected/appointed, and instead of a points-based system to encourage participation, I would instead encourage Cabinet Ministers to take up either a place in the City Council or a Junior Ministry, and for Senators to each join a Junior Ministry as well.

They would, of course, be expected to be active in these roles, but firstly not to the extent that it affects their primary job performance, and secondly, they'd focus on building skills and experience in one area at a time rather than dipping their hands in every pie, as the MSA would encourage.

Of course, if this were to be the path that the Government goes down, there will obviously more Junior Ministers with a high level of activity and qualification to help with work in each of the Ministries, including recruitment, and more City Councillors to prop up activity there.

I don't see how "expecting" people to do things is a plan, Swak.

i.e. sack people more readily for being lazy/useless.

 

[Common-Sense Politics]

The MSA was a terrible idea, in my opinion; its underlying concept was flawed and its execution left much to be desired. It was basically filling the gap that was there when we didn't need the MRA, but the gap didn't need to be filled.

I instead support higher expectations of activity from our Cabinet Ministers and Senators in the areas to which they were elected/appointed, and instead of a points-based system to encourage participation, I would instead encourage Cabinet Ministers to take up either a place in the City Council or a Junior Ministry, and for Senators to each join a Junior Ministry as well.

They would, of course, be expected to be active in these roles, but firstly not to the extent that it affects their primary job performance, and secondly, they'd focus on building skills and experience in one area at a time rather than dipping their hands in every pie, as the MSA would encourage.

Of course, if this were to be the path that the Government goes down, there will obviously more Junior Ministers with a high level of activity and qualification to help with work in each of the Ministries, including recruitment, and more City Councillors to prop up activity there.

I don't see how "expecting" people to do things is a plan, Swak.

i.e. sack people more readily for being lazy/useless.

As someone who is fairly familiar with the dynamics of managing a cabinet, I just don't think that's a strategy that works out for anyone.

 

[Swakistek]

The MSA was a terrible idea, in my opinion; its underlying concept was flawed and its execution left much to be desired. It was basically filling the gap that was there when we didn't need the MRA, but the gap didn't need to be filled.

I instead support higher expectations of activity from our Cabinet Ministers and Senators in the areas to which they were elected/appointed, and instead of a points-based system to encourage participation, I would instead encourage Cabinet Ministers to take up either a place in the City Council or a Junior Ministry, and for Senators to each join a Junior Ministry as well.

They would, of course, be expected to be active in these roles, but firstly not to the extent that it affects their primary job performance, and secondly, they'd focus on building skills and experience in one area at a time rather than dipping their hands in every pie, as the MSA would encourage.

Of course, if this were to be the path that the Government goes down, there will obviously more Junior Ministers with a high level of activity and qualification to help with work in each of the Ministries, including recruitment, and more City Councillors to prop up activity there.

I don't see how "expecting" people to do things is a plan, Swak.

i.e. sack people more readily for being lazy/useless.

As someone who is fairly familiar with the dynamics of managing a cabinet, I just don't think that's a strategy that works out for anyone.

Possibly. You know more about it than I do.

 

[Sopo]

I agree with Skizzy. This idea that "either/or" is necessary is falsely painting the situation.

 

[Vinage Vinage]

This idea that "either/or" is necessary is falsely painting the situation.

Oh I agree as well so, then, should Recruiting become a part of a future 'MSA'?

And, if so, to what value does recruiting count? Especially since it would be a lot easier to recruit 50 nations for 50 points than write 2 EBC articles

 

[Sopo]

This idea that "either/or" is necessary is falsely painting the situation.

Oh I agree as well so, then, should Recruiting become a part of a future 'MSA'?

And, if so, to what value does recruiting count? Especially since it would be a lot easier to recruit 50 nations for 50 points than write 2 EBC articles

That's not exactly what I meant- I don't think either will be necessary. I'm open to being proven wrong by time, but as it stands, I don't support either.

 

[Rach]

The MSA was a terrible idea, in my opinion; its underlying concept was flawed and its execution left much to be desired. It was basically filling the gap that was there when we didn't need the MRA, but the gap didn't need to be filled.

I instead support higher expectations of activity from our Cabinet Ministers and Senators in the areas to which they were elected/appointed, and instead of a points-based system to encourage participation, I would instead encourage Cabinet Ministers to take up either a place in the City Council or a Junior Ministry, and for Senators to each join a Junior Ministry as well.

They would, of course, be expected to be active in these roles, but firstly not to the extent that it affects their primary job performance, and secondly, they'd focus on building skills and experience in one area at a time rather than dipping their hands in every pie, as the MSA would encourage.

Of course, if this were to be the path that the Government goes down, there will obviously more Junior Ministers with a high level of activity and qualification to help with work in each of the Ministries, including recruitment, and more City Councillors to prop up activity there.

I'd like to point out that TNI uses a similar system, at least with its military which has led it to be one of the most successful in the world by recently deploying 22 troops to a battle.

 

[Indycar Racing]

The MSA was a terrible idea, in my opinion; its underlying concept was flawed and its execution left much to be desired. It was basically filling the gap that was there when we didn't need the MRA, but the gap didn't need to be filled.

I instead support higher expectations of activity from our Cabinet Ministers and Senators in the areas to which they were elected/appointed, and instead of a points-based system to encourage participation, I would instead encourage Cabinet Ministers to take up either a place in the City Council or a Junior Ministry, and for Senators to each join a Junior Ministry as well.

They would, of course, be expected to be active in these roles, but firstly not to the extent that it affects their primary job performance, and secondly, they'd focus on building skills and experience in one area at a time rather than dipping their hands in every pie, as the MSA would encourage.

Of course, if this were to be the path that the Government goes down, there will obviously more Junior Ministers with a high level of activity and qualification to help with work in each of the Ministries, including recruitment, and more City Councillors to prop up activity there.

I'd like to point out that TNI uses a similar system, at least with its military which has led it to be one of the most successful in the world by recently deploying 22 troops to a battle.

Obviously as an ERN sailor I would like to see something like that. But Europeia has always supported neutrality and by forcing senators and cabinet members into the ERN we risk losing a substantial potential talent source.

 

[HEM]

Military or recruitment?

 

[Indycar Racing]

I was speaking about the military aspect of the law that TNI has.

 

[Rach]

The MSA was a terrible idea, in my opinion; its underlying concept was flawed and its execution left much to be desired. It was basically filling the gap that was there when we didn't need the MRA, but the gap didn't need to be filled.

I instead support higher expectations of activity from our Cabinet Ministers and Senators in the areas to which they were elected/appointed, and instead of a points-based system to encourage participation, I would instead encourage Cabinet Ministers to take up either a place in the City Council or a Junior Ministry, and for Senators to each join a Junior Ministry as well.

They would, of course, be expected to be active in these roles, but firstly not to the extent that it affects their primary job performance, and secondly, they'd focus on building skills and experience in one area at a time rather than dipping their hands in every pie, as the MSA would encourage.

Of course, if this were to be the path that the Government goes down, there will obviously more Junior Ministers with a high level of activity and qualification to help with work in each of the Ministries, including recruitment, and more City Councillors to prop up activity there.

I'd like to point out that TNI uses a similar system, at least with its military which has led it to be one of the most successful in the world by recently deploying 22 troops to a battle.

Obviously as an ERN sailor I would like to see something like that. But Europeia has always supported neutrality and by forcing senators and cabinet members into the ERN we risk losing a substantial potential talent source.

Oh not forcing those people. More of an inside the army thing. It doesn't deal with politicians there I believe.