"The EAAC will always be a smoke-and-mirrors darkroom of evil spirits because some people like to present it that way." -Anumia (Jun 9, 2014 12:38 AM)
Many things are better when they are transparent: windows, eyeglasses, clothing. In fact, this idea of transparency has now found itself directed at the EAAC. I assume that stands for: Everybody Always Argues, Capisce? That is because every time this subject is being talked about, it always leads to intense debate. Currently, a bill has made its way into the Senate, after approval from the Citizens' Assembly, that calls for, among other things, a list of all its members, and an update outlining the activities of the External Affairs Advisory Committee at the end of the President's term.
However, before we talk about this bill too much, I'd like to explain, in as much detail as I can, what the EAAC actually is. To quote our current President, Kraketopia, "It's an advisory group of foreign affairs professionals who consult and provide the President with advice on foreign affairs. It has no powers of any sort. It is made up of past Presidents, WAD's [World Assembly Delegates], MoFA's [Ministers of Foreign Affairs], and long term Europeians who have proven their loyalty to Europeia and a strong understanding of foreign affairs" This was said during the discussion of the aforementioned bill while it was being debated in the Citizen's Assembly. In layman's terms, that means the EAAC is just the President's advice panel. Whenever the President has an issue involving foreign affairs, this is the group he turns to for assistance. On the face of it, this does not sound so sinister, yet many citizens of Europeia would say otherwise. Because what goes on in the EAAC happens behind closed doors, many citizens are led to speculate as to what they discuss. With no actual information on what occurs, one can hardly blame them.
That is where this bill comes in. If this bill passes and eventually becomes law, then all the controversy will subside, right? Well, let me put it this way, the controversy will go away the same way that Taylor Swift will stop being surprised at award shows: it's not going to stop. As Senator PhDre pointed out in the CA discussion, "This act will have no discernable impact on the level of public knowledge on EAAC ongoings." And he may be right, because even North East Somerset, a supporter of the bill, states, "Nothing that we legislate can make a discernable impact on public knowledge of the actual details of EAAC discussions, otherwise it would clearly make the EAAC discussions no longer private, and thus the integrity of the Chamber would no longer be intact, and it would become defunct." The administrator goes on to say, however, "It's a simple case that some people want something they simply can never and will never have. This Bill gives them everything its practical to do, with regards to transparency on who is engaging in discussions and the broad topics being discussed." Whether or not this information will satisfy the public remains to be seen.
So, as the discussion continues and this bill moves on to its final destiny, whatever that might be, I encourage all of Europeia to voice their opinions on this issue, because the only thing worse than saying something wrong, is not saying anything at all... unless, of course, you're ugly, in which case you should just stay home. Nobody wants to see that.
Many things are better when they are transparent: windows, eyeglasses, clothing. In fact, this idea of transparency has now found itself directed at the EAAC. I assume that stands for: Everybody Always Argues, Capisce? That is because every time this subject is being talked about, it always leads to intense debate. Currently, a bill has made its way into the Senate, after approval from the Citizens' Assembly, that calls for, among other things, a list of all its members, and an update outlining the activities of the External Affairs Advisory Committee at the end of the President's term.
However, before we talk about this bill too much, I'd like to explain, in as much detail as I can, what the EAAC actually is. To quote our current President, Kraketopia, "It's an advisory group of foreign affairs professionals who consult and provide the President with advice on foreign affairs. It has no powers of any sort. It is made up of past Presidents, WAD's [World Assembly Delegates], MoFA's [Ministers of Foreign Affairs], and long term Europeians who have proven their loyalty to Europeia and a strong understanding of foreign affairs" This was said during the discussion of the aforementioned bill while it was being debated in the Citizen's Assembly. In layman's terms, that means the EAAC is just the President's advice panel. Whenever the President has an issue involving foreign affairs, this is the group he turns to for assistance. On the face of it, this does not sound so sinister, yet many citizens of Europeia would say otherwise. Because what goes on in the EAAC happens behind closed doors, many citizens are led to speculate as to what they discuss. With no actual information on what occurs, one can hardly blame them.
That is where this bill comes in. If this bill passes and eventually becomes law, then all the controversy will subside, right? Well, let me put it this way, the controversy will go away the same way that Taylor Swift will stop being surprised at award shows: it's not going to stop. As Senator PhDre pointed out in the CA discussion, "This act will have no discernable impact on the level of public knowledge on EAAC ongoings." And he may be right, because even North East Somerset, a supporter of the bill, states, "Nothing that we legislate can make a discernable impact on public knowledge of the actual details of EAAC discussions, otherwise it would clearly make the EAAC discussions no longer private, and thus the integrity of the Chamber would no longer be intact, and it would become defunct." The administrator goes on to say, however, "It's a simple case that some people want something they simply can never and will never have. This Bill gives them everything its practical to do, with regards to transparency on who is engaging in discussions and the broad topics being discussed." Whether or not this information will satisfy the public remains to be seen.
So, as the discussion continues and this bill moves on to its final destiny, whatever that might be, I encourage all of Europeia to voice their opinions on this issue, because the only thing worse than saying something wrong, is not saying anything at all... unless, of course, you're ugly, in which case you should just stay home. Nobody wants to see that.
