User:Brendan

= TODO =


 * Formal responsibilities definition for election periods, and processes
 * Add something to preamble about principle of evidence based policy development

= Constitutional Amendments =

Motion

 * Replace "meeting- however" with "meeting. However, " in Article 6(3).
 * Replace "unaffiliate" with "disaffiliate" in Article 6.1(4).
 * Replace "competing in" with "contesting", and replace "Such branches would" with "These branches", in Article 2.1(2).

Motion

 * Replace Article 2(1) with:


 * Replace Article 2(5) with:

Justification
Clarifies that the NC has the power to create committees, working groups and branches, as it already has. It also clarifies that a branch is considered a subordinate organisation that can be overridden by the Federal Party.

Article 2(5) was a grammatical nightmare, so simplified it without changing its effect whatsoever.

Justification
I think I'm going to motion that the voting system can only be changed by a majority vote of the National Congress in line with how the people are elected, and will not take effect until the next National Congress. It's not feasible to change the voting system model at the National Congress.

Motion

 * Delete Art 4.1(2).
 * Replace Article 4.1(1)(d) with:


 * Add:

Justification
Relax the requirements regarding previous party membership, as this clause has never been enforced beyond requiring the knowledge of which party the new member has come from.

Motion

 * Replace Article 6(6) with:

Justification
It was a mess. Clean it up!

Motion

 * Delete Article 6(9).
 * Insert a subsection under Article 6.1 as 6.1.x as follows:

Justification
More shine.

Motion

 * Remove Article 11(1)(a) due to weasel words
 * Amend Article 11(1) to:

Justification
Consistency.

Motion

 * Add an item to Article 9.1:

Justification
We have required that nominations for preselection require seconding, and I believe that this requirement should be extended to all elections for consistency.

Motion

 * Art 3.1.1 becomes Art 4.5
 * Section "Powers" removed from NC

Justification
I don't know why I proposed this in the first place. It makes no sense in the context of the larger document.

Motion

 * Remove Article 3.3.7.1(3)

Justification
It does not make sense that this position is elected differently to the other candidates.

Motion

 * Italicise and correctly format all references to legislation in the Party Constitution

Section for Definitions

 * Define majorities, refer to the majorities in this section.

= Procedural Motions =

Motion
The National Congress directs the National Council to resign from Pirate Parties International as soon as possible.

Explanation
Pirate Parties International (PPI) started with the goal of being the political international of the Pirate movement. It has however entirely failed to live up to this expectation, becoming a very Eurocentric organisation, making contributes from outside Europe very difficult. The organisation itself makes it difficult to know when meetings occur, where minutes are located and other content one would expect to be able to find such as how many members are in the organisation or what the proposed amendments are for each annual conference.

The idea of PPI was rushed into drafted statutes being formed, and then registered as a formal organisation. For the last 3-4 years, much time has been spent attempting to rectify some of the deficiencies of the statutes, but fundamentally, they seem to be insufficient for the organisation as it needs to be.

There are major issues with how the organisation was formed, and how it has now panned out to be:


 * Pirate Party Australia has been unable to effectively represent its members at any PPI conference ever hosted for reasons including:
 * (insert a million reasons here)
 * The most recent PPI conference was not announced in the way required by the statutes, nor within the time period required by the statutes.
 * Of the two motions put, one to ensure there was a jury to determine results of CoA complaints, and one to ensure parties had representation on the organisation's board, both failed.
 * However, the motion to introduce fees claimed to have been passed in the minutes, even though according to the statutes a 2/3 majority is required for the motion to pass.

The statutes for the formation of this organisation are inconsistent, incongruent and generally unworkable. The organisation itself follows a failed paradigm of electing very few people to represent many, and ensures that only those who are geographically close to the location of where the PPI conference is held have a chance of being elected to any relevant positions whatsoever.

PPI struggles with one of the things that is meant to make our movement amazing: our ability to innovate and make the seemingly impossible possible, yet PPI struggles with something as simple as remote delegate attendance, something Pirate Party Australia has successfully implemented for the last several years at each of our Congresses.

Quite simply, PPI is a let down to the larger Pirate movement, which is itself beyond the confines of a failed bureaucracy, and will continue to grow strongly as it always has. The path to Hell was paved with good intentions, and this one has been quite a long path, but it is time we stepped off it and forged our own, together with the actual Pirate movement, not its bureaucratic Titanic.

We hope that in time PPI grows into an inclusive international organisation, that spends more time on the issues than it does debating what a majority consists of or whether or not a meeting was convened within the confines of the statutes.

= Policy Proposals =

Motion

 * In the preamble, replace all references to Civil Unions Act with Vicious Governmental Relationship Invasion Disestablishment Act
 * Replace the policy text with the following:

If Vicious Governmental Relationship Invasion Disestablishment Act is not considered an appropriate name, here are a few alternative proposals:


 * Relationships Act
 * Relationship Registration Act
 * Bedroom Privacy Act
 * Free Agency Act
 * Vicious Inter-Agency Governmental Relationship Abolition Act

Justification
There is some controversy with the use of the term civil union, and having looked at European immigration websites, almost all of them refer to registered relationships in order to cover all types of registered unions recognised internationally. It is also worth noting that NSW uses a relationship register for registering relationships in lieu of civil unions.