Things that make you go WTMC?!?!?

[Redlum08]

I agree, it sets Term Limits...the same two men should not be taking turns running the country, that is not a democracy, its called an even exchange Dictatorship...

I also agree that yes the Executive President has the power to make decisions without permission, BUT those decisions can be brought before the senate for debate and for vote whether or not to Veto that decision and further taken to the Judiciary for the final decision...Checks and Balances are extremely important.

[Crixx_Creww]

if the president uses executive power to push through an action with out going before senate.
IF the decision is an illegal one, or the decision leads to something harmfull to the country, the executive president can be then raked over the coals by the senate and with due process , removed from power.
also, as we saw with Mr  Clinton, if the president is suspected of conduct not befitting the office of the president and evidence can be brought forward to support it, again, the president can be impeached and removed from power.

With our current system, do any of you know what it takes to remove a prime minister from power?

[W1nTry]

With our current system, do any of you know what it takes to remove a prime minister from power?

Even if what you claim is to be, do you know how hard it would be to remove Patrick with the current cabinet? WHO in his cabinet whom holds the majority would try to upsurp him? *W1nTry hears crickets churping*... right didn't think so.

Removal of
President from
office
54.(1) Subject to subsection (2), the President shall
vacate his office where the House of Representatives passes a
resolution, supported by the votes of a majority of all the
members of the House, declaring that it has no confidence in
the President.
(2) Where a resolution is passed under subsection
(1), the President shall continue to hold office until a President
is elected and assumes office.
(3) The succeeding President shall assume office in
accordance with section 49(4).

And because I am *stupid public under fear of emperor syndrome* could ANYONE explain the following to me:

Immunities of
the President
57.(1) The President shall not be answerable to any
court for the performance of the functions of his office or for any
act done by him in the performance of those functions.
(2) Without the fiat of the Director of Public
Prosecutions, no criminal proceedings shall be instituted or
continued against the President in any court during his term of
office and no process for the President's arrest or imprisonment
shall be issued from any court or shall be executed during his
term of office.
(3) No civil proceedings in which relief is claimed
against the President shall be instituted during his term of office
in any court in respect of any act done by him in his personal
capacity whether before or after he entered the office of
President, except on the condition specified in subsection (4).
(4) The condition referred to in subsection (3) is that
two months shall elapse after a notice in writing has been
served on the President either by registered post or by being
left at his office stating the nature of the proceedings, the cause
of action, the name, description and address of the party
instituting the proceedings and the relief claimed.
(5) A period of limitation prescribed shall not run in
favour of the President in respect of a civil action during the
period of two months after a notice in respect of that action has
been served on him under subsection (4).

[Crixx_Creww]

iam sure you saw the impeachment process that took place for Clinton, it is carried out by a neutral arm of the government and it is the burden of the state to prove the wrong doing of the president.

And as for what you quoted, thats the president, not prime minister no?
What does it take to remove the prime minister.

In an executive presidency, the houses would not operate as they do right now.
so we would not be at the mercy of the lackies of any head of state.
Look how Nixon was ran out of presidency. They witch hunted clinton.
If he had indeed done anything wrong or illegal
his ass would have been out.

[Redlum08]

and that's why that Constitution will NOT pass..if it does, then there is only one action:

The Citizens of Trinidad & Tobago
                 vs.
  The Gov't of Trinidad & Tobago

[W1nTry]

Crixx you keep making reference to the US. THIS IS NOT THE US. This is T&T. I am taking excerps directly from the draft consitution taken off the OFfice of the prime minister's website. Please address the questions I am raising.

The Senate
Composition of
Senate
60.(1) The Senate shall consist of forty-nine members (in
this Constitution referred to as "Senators") who shall be
appointed or assigned seats in accordance with this Part.
(2) The Senators shall be appointed or assigned
seats as follows-
(a) twenty-eight shall be appointed by the
Local Government bodies in accordance
with section 62;
(b) three shall be appointed by the House of
Assembly in accordance with section 63;
and
(c) eighteen shall be assigned seats by the
Elections and Boundaries Commission in
accordance with section 64.

Someone with more legal (read studying law or who IS a lawyer please expand on these)
If what I read is correct, or rather what I understand from this, 18 seats of the 49 will actually be due to the 'peoples' vote... all other senators are elected by government bodies... how is this a good thing?

[Redlum08]

Crixx you keep making reference to the US. THIS IS NOT THE US. This is T&T. I am taking excerps directly from the draft consitution taken off the OFfice of the prime minister's website. Please address the questions I am raising.

Also, the Trinidad Gov't will NOT copy the democratic process of the US because of that fact...the mere fact that it is DEMOCRATIC in nature...THE PEOPLE OF TRINIDAD & TOBAGO NEED TO STAND UP FOR THEMSELVES! The Big problem is Term Limits which should definitely be addressed as the # 1 problem with the Gov't. WAKE UP PEOPLE!!!! STOP WAITING FOR CARNIVAL NEXT YEAR AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT THE INJUSTICE!!!

[W1nTry]

It gets better:

Qualifications
for election as
member
71. Subject to section 72, a person shall be qualified
to be elected as a member of the House of Representatives if,
and shall not be qualified to be so elected unless, he-
(a) is a citizen of Trinidad and Tobago of the
age of eighteen years or upwards; and
(b) has resided in Trinidad and Tobago for a
period of two years immediately before the
date of his nomination for election or is
domiciled and resident in Trinidad and
Tobago at that date.

So basically, I can be... *cough* some foreign consultant *cough* who was doing construction projects for the government, drop some blue notes on the right ppl hand to get citizenship, lime for A LONG AND BELITTLING PERIOD of OMG... *cough* TWO WHOLE YEARS... and still make it to the house... Nice... I wonder what the Governator would think of this?

[Crixx_Creww]

well when i had responded to you, that whole thing wasnt there eh, just the first part.

The presidency must have immunities attached to it, the same immunities apply to the US presidency, for which the executive model obviously has taken a hefty dose from.

Those immunities are mainly to protect the president from claims from individuals, which is what civil suits would apply to. In us law a single citizen cannot bring suit to the office of the presidency.

What that means is that you need the people, probably by way of formation of a legitimised body, to make representation of illegal and , very importantly,, unconstitutional acts, carried out by direct consent from the office of the president. PLausible deniability exist to protect the president from the actions of arms of his government. Thats where that, performance of its functions part comes in.

You have to look at it from the whole, we as a nation have experienced a coupe already, so to prevent any one citizen or minor majority from relieving a president of post, acts like this must be created.

But if the president, can be proved , to directly by making orders taht are unconstitutional and to the direct detriment of the citizens , such as sanctioning genocide or any such wildness. Then the PEOPLE
not a person, but a representative board of the people, can ,with evidence, bring forward a motion to impeach a president.

[Kraeoss]

uhh yall should take this talk to power102 fm

[W1nTry]

And considering even video evidence is inadmissable in court... how would anyone form a case against the President exactly? Oh.. please explain this too:

Qualifications of
voters
76. Subject to such disqualifications as Parliament
may prescribe, a person shall be qualified to vote at a general
election if, and shall not be qualified to vote at a general
election unless, he-
(a) is a Commonwealth citizen (within the
meaning of section 37) of the age of
eighteen years or upwards; and
(b) has such other qualifications regarding
71
residence or registration as may be
prescribed.

...


Did they just say... the COMMONWEALTH?  as in 50+ nations.... err.. what?

[Redlum08]

uhh yall should take this talk to power102 fm

So Manning can track them down and have them silenced?? ROFL!

[Kraeoss]

lol... i damn we need V

[Crixx_Creww]

but winny
those conditions of eligibilty to be in the senate
and to be a voter, EXIST NOW!

and are pretty standard the world over
along with a person is only eligible to be a president after the age of 40

as for video evidence not being admissible, thats not manning fault
and that would change if  they could get the constitutional changes passed!!
manning has been saying that for the longest while, and other politicians keep shouting that the changes not going to stop crime
and the stupid masses runnin with that ole talk as always!
but what they dont realise is that simple changes like the use of breathalysers, speed guns and speed traps, video evidence.

all that falls under the changes that they have been pushing and having shot down by the opposition, not for the good of the country but for petty feudalism!! because they loss they goin an make sure the victor cant govern!! and then they expect to be voted in afterwards! insanity!!

[W1nTry]

Which brings me back to my first question, so Crixx, you are all FOR Uncle Patrick Emperor for Life? I mean they are paying your salary and all XD but is paid patronage the only reason?

[Crixx_Creww]

they are not paying my salary.
i dont work in moe anymore
even if i was i couldnt give a damn  because i have the right to speak truths.

I am all for an executive president, because i am all for term limits and constitutional reform and the ability to make decisions in the best interest of the public with fair and just accountability.

Manning also wants the ability to get rid of permanent secretaries, which i fully support, as it is right now, a ps has more power than a minister, and cannot be forced out. PSs are one of the chief reasons for the slow inefficient movements of ministry, because the wield so much unchallenged power, they develop nasty clanish mentalities and refuse to give way to newer better ideas

[W1nTry]

Manning also wants the ability to get rid of permanent secretaries, which i fully support, as it is right now, a ps has more power than a minister, and cannot be forced out. PSs are one of the chief reasons for the slow inefficient movements of ministry, because the wield so much unchallenged power, they develop nasty clanish mentalities and refuse to give way to newer better ideas

I am glad you acknowledge there is a problem with the older mentality that prevents positive change... however I don't agree with one thing... the First word I qouted from your last post... Manning.. he's like a damn PM anyway, putting PUPPETS in power, ppl he can control, manipulate and keep himself in the driving seat. Vision 20/20.... do you see it? I don't I would support reform IF it were indeed for the benefit of the ppl and not lining the damn walls of the *cough* Manning Mansion

[Crixx_Creww]

so if manning looses next election to say dooks.
and dooks move into the "manning mansion"
does dookeran inherit some sort of corrupted emperorism?
and until i here manning asking for a executive presidency and then specifically asking for removal of term limits, a la chavez, then i wouldnt be want to believe such base conspiracy mindedness.

I am so much in favour of this move, that even if much maligned Mr Panday suggested the move, with the same changes, i would support it.

[W1nTry]

I would not support Panday or Patrick, I consider them 2 old cocks fighting over the same seed without any regard for the ppl they are supposed to represent. As for Dooks, no man/woman is without flaw or the possibility of corruption, I just rather we try something new though with the backwards thinking ppl we have, last time they tried something 'new' they also decided to have a coup. Ppl don't realise that the actions of governments to implement measures to combat the financial woes of the previous regime is exactly that... wait WHO was in power? the same old cocks that are now. My take on it is this nation has NO chance for change as long as Manning or Panday are around. I don't see what it is you follow so blindly and call baseles conspiracy.

[Crixx_Creww]

iam not following any political party blindly
iam not following any leader or politician blindly.

Iam support the changes that need to be made.
At this point i dont care who makes them, iam so far beyond this or that party.
This country wont change until the people change it. (full stop)