In this thread, Antican citizens are invited to field questions to the candidates for the Speakership, as part of their constitutional right to determine eligibility. You have three days to do this, and to complete all other legal mechanisms which will, to your satisfaction, fulfill that prerogative. Let us begin!

What are the candidates thoughts on the operations of the Treasury Ministry?

Should the raising of hard (macronational) currency be made a priority in the Treasury, or should it become someone else's job?

Would reforming and/or removing the yet unused Bureau system in the Archon's Office be more pointless reforms proposed by the Archon?

The Treasury Ministry is usually pretty controversial, or has been up until the departure of V-who-must-not-be-named, mainly because the Treasury Minister was so in favour of taxation and generally applying all sorts of governmental economic regulation to what most considered a non-existant economy. I think any new Treasury Minister must seriously consider the chronic opposition of the Assembly to taxation. If taxation will happen, it will be when our economy has actually started getting going. And even then, constant taxation isn't necessary. Take the Eastern Benacian model; taxes are only applied when the Shirekeep Treasury runs out of money, which is not very often I believe. And as for how to get the economy going? We must make pecuniae worth something, make it mean something to people. Basic economic activity is fundamental to this- we need citizens to be making things and providing services that are worth stuff, which hasn't really happened in a while- and then we can consider the role of the Treasury in terms of international trade. I am very much a supporter of utilising our MCS resources as part of international exchanges, as well as Antican economic projects abroad and foreign investment in our country. The Treasury Minister's role is a hard one, because it should be two-fold: encouraging internal economic activity, and organising international economic agreements.

While it's tempting to give the Treasury Minister something to do while simulatory economic activity is at a low point, I believe macronational currency raising initiatives should be the reserve of the Assembly. Individuals can raise ideas about raising money, and how to spend it (prominently webspace costs and advertising would be good), and present them to the Assembly for discussion. The Treasury Minister can mess up the simulatory side of Antican fiscal policy as much as he wants, it doesn't REALLY matter, but we must make sure our hard currency is in the safest hands. And the safest hands are all of our hands, manifest in the Assembly.

The Bureau system was designed at a time when Antican statesmen were much more optimistic about Antica's active population size than we are today. We're much more realistic these days. As such, it appears tempting to remove the Bureaus. However, I would apply the same reasoning I applied when pushing for the three-man College of Inquisitors: it's said that, in micronations, there will always be more desks than people. We should always have space to accomodate new citizens, basically governmental jobs they can fill to get more interested. I would like to see at least a small rise in Antican citizen count within the next few months, and maybe, when they come, ideas like Committees and Bureaus will be more viable. For the time being, I would argue that reforming the Bureaus would be unnecessary- while they've never operated, the idea is fairly basic and shouldn't be changed. The debate should be whether to keep it or not. Frankly, it is a two-line section of an otherwise quite bare Part concerning the Archon. I think in time the Bureaus will prove themselves.

I'm more or less in agreement with Benkern on all these points.

I get the feeling that nobody else has any questions.

Shall we proceed to the vote?

It has been three days, so that would be the correct procedure.