Commonwealth Forums

My Lords and Gentlemen,

As the rules of Our Parliament are suspended for the discussion of the Organic Law, We shall open the discussion of "Part I", and the reference "Schedule I". We shall not be constrained to discuss the topics in order, but this is Our judgment, with advice from the Prime Minister, as to the most effective place to start the discussion.

Opening comments from the Chair.

Part 1, point 1. I am concerned that using the term "micronation" in the organic law does not follow international standards language commonly used in such documents, and while I have determined to style Hanover as a micronation, to enshrine it in the organic law may diminish the purpose of the Kingdom.

Part1, point 4. I have decreed that this shall be the last such document produced during my reign, and indeed We shall see to this. Therefore I exhort the members of this body to take this into account when discussing this document as I intend to have Hanover operate under its direction for years to come. Short term solutions are to be dispensed with in favor of the longer view at every instance.

Looking at the acts being repealed:
The Naturalization Act 2006 - I don't understand why this is being repealed? Proper regulation of the naturalization process seems important. Perhaps it should be modified separately?

The Constitution Act 2006 - This document would be in clear conflict with the organic law here, and makes perfect sense to repeal.

The Government Act 2006 - This document also makes good sense to repeal. However, it makes me wonder if the current ministers should be added as a schedule to make it clear that they are not also repealed with the document, unless that was your intent?

The Royal Household Act 2006 - I see no problem here.

The Parliament Act 2007 - I agree with this without comment as well.

These opening comments are to initiate the discussion, and not constrain it. The Parliament is encouraged to discuss any and all issues on this topic as it wishes.

The Chair recognizes the next member to post and grants the floor to that member for the duration of his post until another member posts whereupon the subsequent member shall have the floor for the duration of his post, and so on, until the chair reclaims the floor or there is a motion made by a member.

I agree that the naturalization act should be kept. Is it really necessary to include the current Ministers in a schedule?

Most Gracious Sovereign,

Originally I had intended to give Parliament power to naturalize, hence the repeal of the Naturalization Act which would have become obsolete. However, that change did not make it into the final draft, and hence the Act's inclusion in the repeals is an error.

I believe that using the word "micronation" in this document is proper. Hanover is a micronation, and we should not be ashamed of it. While using that word may seem unusual, it is my belief that this constitution should not be overly philosophical, but rather a working document, designed to describe our nation and its workings in the clearest terms. Hanover is a Kingdom and a nation, yes, but "micronation" is the clearest way to describe it.

Most Gracious Sovereign,

If we have agreed that Hanover is a Micronation, what then is the reason for not including it in our Constitution? I agree with the good Monsignor and I find no problem with the term and in fact I believe it best expresses what we are and is entirely appropriate.

Could Your Majesty clarify what he meant by "that this shall be the last such document produced during Our reign"? Do you mean to not allow any amendments to the Constitution or just that this shall be the final Constitution in that we must modify this if we see the need for changes?

Otherwise I am in favour of this first section of the Organic Law, with the fixing of the error in the First Schedule.

The Chair takes the floor to respond to the Count of Damoneigh and the Archbishop of Bergen in the order of their inquiries, and to clarify a point of order for the Prime Minister.

Count, I do not know if a schedule of ministries is required, or even proper or best practice to include the current ministries and leave that for Parliament to decide.

Your Grace, Hanover has a history of tossing out entire constitutions upon a crisis. This has happened enough that right thinking citizens might wonder if the His Majesty's government ever intends to operate under the rules it sets before itself. Such a state of affairs cannot maintain a well run society. I call upon this Parliament to put its best foot forward and live under the constitution once ratified. I'm not at all saying Hanover should not amend the constitution, but only that it do so surgically, and not simply lay waste to the past.

The chair has observed that the Prime Ministers comments might be cause for a revision striking the identified line to be resolved. The chair chooses to table this action until the membership seems satisfied with the His Majesty's answers, or a member puts forth a motion as a division now would merely distract from the discourse.

Tabled: Strike The Naturalization Act 2006 From Schedule I

The chair recognizes the next member to post and grants the floor to that member for the duration of his post until another member posts whereupon the subsequent member shall have the floor for the duration of his post, and so on, until the chair reclaims the floor or there is a motion made by a member.

Most Gracious Sovereign,

Because I am the author of this Bill, I am able to make amendments without a division; I am choosing to exercise this power to omit the Naturalization Act from Schedule I.

The Chair takes the floor on this point of order.

The Prime Minister is correct and the bill is thus amended and now reads:

The Chair relinquishes the floor as before.

The King, seeing no discussion, takes the floor.

After amendments the proposal is rendered thusly:

The parliament shall now divide upon the issue of Part I and Schedule I as presented with content to accept and not content to reject.

Alexander R.

Content.