[Decision] Curator and CdeC

[the Black Prince]

I am puzzled and curious by the announcement that the Curator sees no conflict of interest in his roles as Curator and also as CdeC councillor.

I therefore propose a decision that

The Curator immediately resign as a councillor from the CdeC and hold elections for his replacement.

The Curator's role is that of an administrator. He runs the CdeC, does all the admin work there, but also holds a veto over the actions of that body, and a casting vote in the event of the tie.

The veto in particular is the area of concern, since the veto over curial matters is now vested in a sitting councillor, which creates a very clear conflict of interest.

One person is effectively holding two different seats on the CdeC, and i do not think that it is right or proper for him to do so, regardless of the fact that the previous Curator has ruled that it is within the constitution.

[Agent Provocateur]

Not fully up to scratch on the proper structures of our little world. But I don't understand exactly what your point is. Are you asking that the veto or the role of councillor be taken away from the Curator? If it is councillor(ship?) but not the veto it seems a bit pointless. A veto implies making a decision based on some debate or other. If the Curator can simply veto without participating in a debate that seems somewhat counter-intuitive to the proto democratic set up aimed at here.

Just saying the person who can veto should be involved in all parts of an argument or have that power taken away. Otherwise there is an arbitrary element introduced.

[sapi]

He is asking that Scorch resign as a councillor

To be honest, I'd rather he didn't hold two votes, as well - though as I agree with him most of the time, I'm obviously not as concerned as tBP

[Tom Paine]

And I agree with tBP. There is a definite conflict of interest. Any other role - Council member, even - can hold that as well as CdeC member, since they do not have a conflict of interest, nor hold a veto. I don't think its likely to happen that Scorch will abuse his powers, but I don't like the precedent set where the situation is created that a later Curator, on the basis of Scorch's precedent, could be in a situation to so do.

I do however have to ask if Scorch has been privately contacted about this first, to try to persuade him to resign from the CdeC?

[Scorch]

I do however have to ask if Scorch has been privately contacted about this first, to try to persuade him to resign from the CdeC?

To the contrary. I have been privately contacted by the Curator to persuade me to stay, and have checked with the speaker of the house to see if there were any problems with this.

My plan (and the one that Manstein agreed to) was that tie-breaking powers and the veto would be passed onto the Speaker of the House, in the extremely, extremely unlikely event that they must be used.

If this plan does not satisfy certain people, I will gladly resign from the CdeC and add another spot to the current round of applications, no curial decision necessary.

[jimkatalanos]

My plan (and the one that Manstein agreed to) was that tie-breaking powers and the veto would be passed onto the Speaker of the House, in the extremely, extremely unlikely event that they must be used.

I think the constitution says that the Curator has tie-breaking and veto powers, not the Speaker.

[the Black Prince]

Scorch is both Curator and a CdeC Councillor.

I'm asking that he resign as a CdeC Councillor, as he cannot hold that position and also be Curator without there being a conflict of interest.

As sapi states, in certain cases, Scorch will now hold 2 votes on the CdeC. In other areas, he may be required to veto something that he has already voted on.

I find it hard to see how we can expect the Curator to do his job properly in this regard when he is automatically biased by his position as a councillor. When it comes to tied votes, it won't be the Curator stepping and making the decision, Scorch will unsurprisingly and inevitably vote for the option he has already voted on.

If Scorch in such situations discounts his own activities as councillor so that he can act as Curator in an unbiased fashion, then he will then be acting in dereliction of his duties as councillor. you simply cannot fairly do both.

These two roles are incompatible, and should not be held by the same person. I find it very illogical that the previous Curator saw fit to say it is legitimate that they can be, since the conflict of interest here is very clear.

Given the wording of the constitution, i would not have made the decision Elrond did, but so be it. I could always try amend the constitution to change it, but i prefer this method rather than a retrospective amendment.

[Agent Provocateur]

As sapi states, in certain cases, Scorch will now hold 2 votes on the CdeC. In other areas, he may be required to veto something that he has already voted on.

Right. I'm with you then. Mea culpa, I should really go and read the constitution.

[Tom Paine]

I'd suggest you resign - the Speaker has responsibility x, the Curator responsibility y, and when its not wholly necessary I don't like blurring it. Especially when the Speaker has just announced the Curator needs to take some of his duties temporarily

[Scorch]

I'd suggest you resign - the Speaker has responsibility x, the Curator responsibility y, and when its not wholly necessary I don't like blurring it. Especially when the Speaker has just announced the Curator needs to take some of his duties temporarily

Well yes, that complicates matters more than a bit. I was under the impression that Erich was happy to take these duties and remove the idea of any conflict of interest. However if people are not satisfied with this, as I said, it is quite a simple matter for me to step down and open another spot in the thread.

[jimkatalanos]

However if people are not satisfied with this, as I said, it is quite a simple matter for me to step down and open another spot in the thread.

No, don't do that. That's too simple, no curia drama at all.

[Tom Paine]

That does seem the simplest and most politically expedient solution, not to mention perhaps fairest.

[Scorch]

It was always my intention to resign if anyone took issue with the decision.

[the Black Prince]

and that would of course be a happy end to this particular decision, though i may well propose an amendment to clarify the constitution in light of elronds ruling

[Tom Paine]

Well then get on and resign so we can wrap up this Curial drama?

:


Surely, tBP, precedent would work? If someone does what Scorch would have done, we can just point to Scorch's resignation

[jimkatalanos]

Scorch, don't resign. We must vonc you. It's a tradition.

[the Black Prince]

i like to avoid drama where possible...


and yes, i can just about say that with a straight face (about the only thing straight about me then!)

Precedent? What is this? There's no such thing as binding precedent on TWC... The only reason it works in the UK is because we're traditionalists... the whole doctrine is based on the fact that there is precedent for following precedent... (or rather, the courts had to formalise their own methods of doing things because actual laws passed where either so generic as to be useless or too specific to have any wider application). TWC is not blessed with such a curse. Or cursed with the blessing of a so called ministry of justice... (defined today by the daily telegraph as "headed by a Lord Chancellor who is not a lord, became responsible for telling judges what sentences to pass and then for letting prisoners out. Responsible for Early release. A reward for the criminal community having exceeded its productivity targets and filled up all the prisons.")

In otherwords, this thread is as it should be - or will be.... problem resolved, move on to act 2 scene 6

[Erich von Manstein]

I couldn't find anything in the Constitution expressly forbiding the type of arrangement Scorch has proposed, nor am I in the habit of creating provisions where none explicitly exist - that's the Curia's job. That being said, I can understand why some people would take issue with the Curator keeping his seat on the CdeC, in which case this type of Curial decision is perfectly sensible. Kudos to the OP (not because of any vendetta against Scorch, but rather for taking the step of helping the Curia help itself).

Oh, and let's refrain from making personal attacks on other members, please. The Curia's not the place for that type of thing.

[Marie Louise von Preussen]

I agree with tBP, with the reasons already well explained above.

[removeduser_487563287433]

I disagree, it makes the Curator's job much easier which is sorely needed. The Curia is a pit of bloodied snakes at the best of times, and should a curator abuse his position it would be short lived.

Against.