Discussion: On the selection of Lord Protector

I propose that we change the current method of selecting the Lord Protector so that the decision is made solely by the Duke/Duchess, and not through an election by council. And to avoid any suggestion that I am proposing this because I want the job, I will not accept the job for the remainder of this council's term. I just believe it makes more sense for a leader to choose their own deputy, as is the custom in most other organisations and governments that I ever heard of.

Formally, I propose that article 1.2.3 would become
Art. 1.2.3.: The Lord Protector is the second highest authority of the duchy. In case the Duke is ill and incapacitated from performing his duties, the Lord Protector will assume the Ducal authority and duty until such time as the Duke is once again able to resume the position.

The Lord Protector is to be appointed publicly by the Duke, at the commencement of each term, or at any other time chosen by the Duke. The Lord Protector may only be selected from among the elected non-resigned county councillors.

This method allows for cronyism to be practiced so that the party who holds majority in the council has the ability to assure that their party can place whomever they desire in the place.

Duke/Duchess position is the leader of the council not a Dictator.

The council as a representative of ALL of the citizens of the Duchy should always have as much voice in such decisions as possible to assure that ALL people of the Duchy are represented and not just the party of the elected Duke/Duchess represents.


The very fact that that you, Counselor, who did not receive the votes in the election helf this week for this position are the person bringing forward this motion is troublesome at best.

You bring forward a motion that would basically have assured you got the position if it had been in place at the time.

Why are we continually fielding requests to increase Ducal powers? This is an elected council. We have democratic rights that some here claim to support yet continually try to undercut. There is nothing wrong with the way this procedure has been set up. We don't need to change it. We need to follow the rules we have in place.

I am not sure how I feel about this proposal. I see many pros and cons. For example, yes, it could lead to "cronyism", but it could also lead to a more effective Duke/Duchess. I would like to hear continued constructive discussion on this topic.

I think it is an interesting proposal, and to cast Vana's intentions as a veiled attempt to gain power (or as a protest for not getting elected) is, once again, unfair, especially considering she explicitly stated that she " I will not accept the job for the remainder of this council's term".

For Somerset!
Rebo


(ooc. Right, so it is becoming unfortunately evident that some people are trying to cast a divisive light on the council by using the word dictatorship. I object to this greatly, and perhaps it is merely a different understanding of the meaning and implications of the word dictator(ship). In response to only the use of dictator in this thread, having the Duke/Duchess appoint a second in command does not make the Duke/Duchess a dictator. Ellsbeth, I really have no idea why you are making this claims. I think you are an American; do you think every president is a dictator because he (and maybe she) has the authority to choose a vice president to run on the ticket? I somehow doubt you think this. Please, I caution everyone, to choose words wisely. The word dictator has tons of very negative implications.)

If you mean a more effective Duke or Duchess as in one who will have little or no opposition because his or her cronies fill the spot then yes it would be effective

effective at assuring that ONE view is tantamount to any others.


I strongly disagree with any action that empowers one person to that extent.

As I have stated even the Regent of England cannot veto HOP and must work with them because all approx 100 members of it represent ALL of the Voices of the citizens of the Kingdom.

The King does not even allow the Regent to maintain allegiance to any organizations to assure lack of bias and fair rule to all.


And as we cannot achieve lack of affiliation on the county level it is important we DO maintain ENTIRE counsel votes on every issue possible to assure ALL citizens have as much representation as possible and the potential of loss of representation is made minimal.


( I think if the President makes calls and takes actions on his own accord and pushes congressional input aside that YES he is behaving in a dictatorial fashion and desrves to be impeached.)

A Lord Protector is not intended to be opposition, it is intended to continue the Ducal policy in case of real life iinapacity. A deputy who is opposition is no use to a Duke.

It is not supposed to be the tool of the Duke to ensure Dictatorship and single party view either but to be the Protector of the laws of Somerset and the Leader of its council and responsible to ALL of it's citizens


But Your position is it should be the clone of the Duke to ensure there is ONE view pushed and ONE view held and ONE view maintained and ONE VOICE for a multitude of people who all hold INDIVIDUAL Views


It appears that You do not want a Duke you want a God and 11 disciples.

Resistance is futile Somerset, You will be assimilated is the impression I get from the overall movement toward the limitation of the council power and expansion of the ducal power.

I believe the Duke/Duchess is here to bring diverse councils together. To give leadership when needed to guide when needed to build consensus and weld 11 diverse personalities into a glittering weapon for justice, intelligence and effectiveness. We as councilors should vote to put the person we believe best suited to do that in place to begin with, despite party lines.

We should then place the next most capable person in place as lord protector.

The Duke/Duchess is not here to tell us what to do, they are here to guide, share experience, demonstrate their knowledge of procedure and law. To make sure we do our jibs to the best of our ability and to ensure we are used to the best of our ability.

None of the above has anything to do with the persons party. Vote your conscience and select the right person and Somerset flourishes. Select the wrong person and suffer an ineffective council that follows.

I think we have the ability to be an effective council if we can just get on with the important business before us. Sorry I wondered a bit there.

Wow I am shocked by some of what I have read here. First, I absolutely disagree with the notion that the Lord Protector is some kind of political deputy of the Duke, that is nonsense. The Duke is not here to press a political agenda and despite, what some have said, our Dutchess has no desire to do this and has made no attemt to do this. Her appointments of SNP Councilors to the key positions of Trade Minister and Judge is a clear demonstration of this. Second the notion that the Dutchess has attempted to silince the opposition so that we speak with one voice is absurd. LoF has stood for free speech for all, since our inception. We welcome dissent. We were the opposition and still are in many ways. Gergarious's summation of the role of the Duke is 100% correct! If people would get back to business and stop posting with alarmist and inflamatory language like assimilation and Dictatorship, our Dutchess and our Council could do their jobs with far less bickering I think, we have a good Council. Our Dutchess has more experience then anyone I know in RK as a Councilor, our TM is the second best TM I ever saw, second only to Sajanzv, our Judge is one of the most intelligent, capabable and dedicated councilors I know, Our PP has proven to be a man of wisdom and even temperment at a time when such qualities are needed the most, our sheriff is capable and well spoken and clearly a dedicated civil servant as well as great writer. Lets get on with the business of the council and dissent when you must, but without the inflammatory language ok. I will try harder too, I promise