On Monday, the EBC sent out ten questions to all seven Senators, giving them until Friday to respond. In that time, we received responses from three Senators: Anumia, Drecq, and PhDre. All the other Senators declined to respond to our questions.
At this point, the EBC would like to thank all three Senators for the time and effort they put into answering our questions.
The Interviews said:1. What are your thoughts about the progress of the GAP?
Anumia: I think we have seen a clear need to adjust our methods on regional evaluation and so on, but for the comparatively minimal resources we have spent on it thus far, we have lost nothing and gained appreciation among the regions we have contacted and their small spheres of note.
Drecq: The GAP has always been likely to net less profits than the average Europeian feels should come from such a large undertaking. Progress has been slow, but I am not sure it has been much slower than it would have been under any Administration. Whether that means we should scrap it or not is a longer discussion.
PhDre: I think we've progressed in how we understand GAP and its shortcomings. These are valuable resources and energies being spent on the hopes that founders will be active and energetic enough to fight for their regions against all sorts of advertises, and there's a simple optimism in suggesting that Europeia will profit significantly even if the lottery pays off.
2. Why do you feel you got the rating you did (in the North Poll/Grand Hall Forward poll) and how do you think you can improve upon it?
A: I think the main reason my rating was somewhat lower than it usually is whenever my Senate performance is polled is mostly to do with recent arguments about a number of things, primarily, arguments surrounding political parties and their actions. Of course, there are always going to be things every Senator can do to improve their general performance, but the main thing I got out of the recent poll, and not just from the results for myself personally, were that investing in polarising issues will naturally harm your perception by members of the public who oppose your view.
D: I assume my rating was lowered somewhat by my "lively" discussion with Zenny, as well as my advocation of what at the time seemed like fringe opinions regarding parties. That a large part of my ideas seem to have been utilized in McEntire's proposal, which at the time of this interview looks like it has enough support to pass the CA and eventually the Senate, seems rather less important.
P: I think I've been relatively uninvolved in political party squabbles, which has probably helped my poll ratings. I would like to think that my interest in moving legislation and committee conversations forward and my contributions to legislation are noticed by the electorate, but I think it's due in some significant part to my 'IND' label.
3. Which Senator (other yourself) do you feel has done the best work/Which Senator has best fulfilled the duties of their office over the previous term. (and, of course, why)?
A: HEM has done a decent job as Speaker though I think his performance would have been better if he had had more time to spend (I know RL is busy for him), and PhDre has been pretty consistent this term as well.
D: I'd have to say PhDre or Anumia. Both have argued intelligently and capably on the number of issues facing the Senate.
P: I would say that I'm generally very impressed with the quality of the Senators this term. I think we've all done a good job of trying to contribute to discussion and bring original ideas when possible to what is a very tried and tested legislative body. If I had to pick names out of a hat, MS and Drecq have both been very attentive, Anumia as well.
4. Is there anyone not currently in the Senate that you'd like to see run for a seat next term?
A: We have a whole crop of excellent newcomers, including the interviewerwho could do well with a Senate run. I won't name names here, but there are a few who I would quite possibly vote for.
D: There are always a number of people I wouldn't mind seeing in the Senate, but no one specifically that I absolutely want to run.
P: I think there is room for a lot of 'new' faces in the Senate - at least since the last time I've been here. I can see many Europeians challenging for a seat, and while there's no one I'm -dying- to see in the Senate, I expect all my Senate Aides (Calvin, WL, Klaus) to run and look forward to seeing what they can potentially do in the Senate.
5. What has the Senate accomplished this term thus far of which you are most proud? (This need not be passage of legislation, but might include certain discussions or progress made on legislation.)
A: The Committees have been interesting, though it might take another term or two before they gain a more regular momentum. We've also patched up some good things, like the Ministerial Speech Amendment and the recent amendment to the Awards and Honours Act.
D: We've made good progress on the Criminal Code and I think once we are finally done with it we will be very proud of what we have accomplished there. I am also happy that we defeated the Unanimous Consent Amendment.
P: I think the CC legislation has moved on pretty well and I'm glad to see movement on the Intelligence Amendment and the 7th Amendment to the CC. These are some of my projects in particular so maybe I'm a bit biased in being proud of them!
6. What have you, personally, as a Senator accomplished this term of which you are most proud?
A: Well, the Ministerial Speech Amendment while not written by myself was something I pushed for. I have also led two out of our three Senate Committees and while as noted above I think they will gain more regular momentum and activity over time as they become established (if we are keeping them into future terms), I have been pleased nonetheless with the majority of how that has gone (more activity would be good but other than that...).
D: There is nothing specific that I am most proud of. I'm generally proud of my capable advocation of my principles and ideas. If I had to choose something specific I would point back to the Criminal Code Overhaul. We really did get a bunch done this term and I think we will finish it up next term at the latest.
P: Likewise, I am happiest with being able to kickstart some discussion on the DEIA and hopefully eliminate loopholes in the CC through the 7th Amendment to the CC. I am also very proud of having worked with my Senate Aides - it's a new idea for me and I think it has been tentatively a success. I really hope to expand on this program if I am given another term by the electorate, as I know there were some Senators who had no Aides and some leftover Europeians who wanted to be Aides. I would also like to spread the load because it has been difficult to juggle three aides and their ideas all coming at me from different sides.
7. What are you most looking forward to working during the remainder of your term?
A: Not entirely certain that that question is complete
D: The Criminal Code for one. I would like to see whether we can get it finished before the end of the term. For another I am absolutely looking forward to McEntire's Amendment to the Political Parties Act to enter the floor.
P: I look forward to passing some good legislation! That's always my goal - to get good stuff to the President for his signature, and raising legislative issues I think need addressing.
8. What goals did you have for your work in the Senate upon your election? How do you feel you've done at accomplishing those goals?
A: Matters like the Ministerial Speech Amendment and the Line of Succession Act amendment were things I wanted to work on, as well as being a good contributor to Senate Committees. While the latter of the two amendments failed without every Senator voting, I am pleased with the first and third of the listed things, and generally I think this Senate as a whole has done a good job in progressing forward with matters like the Criminal Code improvements.
D: I learned long ago that the Senate is not necessarily very conducive to personal goals. People that go in and say:"I am planning to accomplish this and that this term." learn very quickly that they are just one Senator out of several and that they have considerably less power than they assumed. So I usually keep my goals general, like working closer together with my fellow Senators and making sure every aspect of an amendment is argued and thought out before it goes to a vote.
P: I think I've reached some of my goals during my term - my biggest wish is that I had pushed more for the Aide program to be adopted by all my fellow Senators because then it would be easier to undertake a number of ambitious projects I have. Most of all, my goal as a Senator is to be an objective, fair thinker that has Europeia's best interests at heart. I think I've accomplished that to an extent this term.
9. How do you feel the committee system has worked this term? Do you think such a system should be retained for next term?
A: I think it would be helpful if members of the executive were more attentive to the Committees - though I understand why it may drop from their notice at times - and would be happy to see this continue into another term, before evaluating the idea.
D: I think it hasn't worked very well. It started out with some activity, but that activity quickly dropped off and I don't see it picking up again long term. We can keep the Committees but what does that actually mean if they aren't used?
P: The committee system has its pluses and minuses. I think the system could be retained but it is not always taken seriously by Ministers or by the President. I am sure some Senators dismiss it as well which hurts the format's potential as well.
10. Have you utilized the committee system to address your own concerns? Why or why not? How could the system be improved?
A: I do think that we should aim to avoid non-constructive criticism from Senators and overt defensiveness (often in response to the former) from Ministers called before the Committees. Ultimately I feel that the Committees should have a focus towards external constructive input - raising new ideas that may not have been considered within a particular Ministry, and generally supporting the work of Government to improve how they fulfil their duties. Ministers can express what works and what doesn't, Senators can suggest improvements, the whole thing can be beneficial.
D: I personally haven't because for most of the time the system was active I was on the inside. I was a Minister and a Justice and a Senator. I was a Member of the EAAC. And for the most part I still am all of that now. Why ask questions I already know the answer to or that I can at least find the answer to without a formal request in the Senate?
P: I have tried to use the committee system to address my concerns. I think it's fair to say that I am one of the most out of the loop Senators - I try to use the Senate committee system as a way to interact with the President and Ministers, but there's a lot that is lost in communica- I mean committee (bad joke!). I think I've been fairly frustrated with the committee system because I will for example ask about something in the Committee, hear about it from a Presidential speech, then maybe after that in the Ministry I work in. So it's a game of telephone and the Senate is not in the group call.
At this point, the EBC would like to thank all three Senators for the time and effort they put into answering our questions.
