[MoLA] New Citizenship Procedure
Day 1,915, 14:46
•
Published in United Kingdom 
•
by
•
by Department for Education
So - here you go. Please read the whole document carefully!
I'd love to hear your feedback!
Aims and objectives
- To create a system which upholds congressional freedom but at the same time gives the government control over immigration when required.
- To educate congress on matters which they can be educated on with regards to congress but to also educate on the reasoning behind overall state control in some circumstances.
- To create an easy to view, transparent and accountable system for immigration which draws on the knowledge of numerous members of the eUK community
- To provided useful information to those giving out citizenship
This system combines the best parts of both viewpoints on immigration - allowing government control when its required but for the majority of the time allows congress to decide. This will also be backed up with a couple of congressional education articles allowing them to make an informed choice.
Methodology
The government, through a ministerial body, will allocate a yes/no decision along with a level of authority. This will be on a sliding descending scale from 3 to 1 with 3 being the lowest level of authority and 1 the highest.
As such congress will see
Mr IwantUKCit || Info about the person here || Yes 3
gimmeyourgold || Info about the person here || No 3
Ienjoytrolling ||Info about the person here || No 2 Reason if pos
Ambssdr2yourmum || Info about the person here || Yes 1 Reason if pos
Allyourcountries || Info about the person here || No 1 Reason if pos
More information about the levels are as follows:
3) We’ve done a check, you should too.
Basically this is a basic check that all congress can do and make up their own mind. The Gov’s position is indicated but it is up to yourself to determine if the individual should be let into the country.
2) We’ve done a check an
😛found something out/are a bit worried/something important to consider
Make sure you check thoroughly and get some more information. Contact the gov if you’re not sure or you want to discuss it further. In this case we’ll put the reason down in the column if possible - but it might be sensitive so check with us! Ultimately the decision still rests on congress though - and it will be up to congress members to make their own minds up based on all the information that they find out and is made available to them.
1) We’ve got our reasons - please follow this directive
This is the only level where to government is trying to have authority over your button pushes - and it’ll be for a damn good reason. Unfortunately these reasons are not always able to be discussed with congress. Sometimes its known PTO groups or people of interest moving into the country. Sometimes it might be a changing alliance. It might be that the person is an ambassador/state official. It could be any number of reasons, but if this one comes up, please follow the sheet!
IMPORTANT NOTE: Level 1 directives will ONLY come from the CP.
Reporting
As such reporting will only be done on levels 1 and 2, with it made clear to the public that level 2 is advisory and up to congress to decide, whereas 1 is a Country President directive and expected to be followed.
There is at this point in time no real methodology to how to enforce this other than to inform the citizens and to inform the Party Presidents. However we believe that the balance can be struck to ensure that congress makes the majority of the decisions autonomously and as the CP only intervenes in exceptional circumstances and is an elected official of the country as well they will respect his/her decisions.
Uptake
A straw poll of all congress members to quickly assess if the system has been used and if they feel that it is useful.
NEW APPLICATION FORM
A new application form has been filled in. You can find it at: http://gov.erepublik.co.uk/services/
The reasoning behind hosting it there is so that every month new MoLA’s if they wish or if they need to can create a new gdoc and have it hosted in the same place. So even if the forms change and the application goes to a new spreadsheet the actual form can be located under the same link! Yey for consistency!
For the time being the responses can be found here: http://tinyurl.com/bpxwwvo
Feedback
If you have any feedback please feel free to drop me a PM, Post in the congress threads, use the article comments or use the forum discussion found here: http://tinyurl.com/czxqrpf
Many Thanks
~ Madacaion
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Yey!
Excellent work Mada, look forward to seeing it in action : >
Yes you did everything which I did... again! Can't belive you added a brand new three levels of urgency in just 2 weeks, stunning.
Sounds good, assuming it gets maintained.
I generally agree but I am not comfortable with the section on level 1. I struggle to understand why as an elected congress member there is information that I am not allowed to be a party to and I would be keen to understand what constitutes a "damm good reason". I would be comfortable if what is being suggested here (CP only) could be shown to have some "checks and balances" established.
if another country was, possibly, threatening to switch sides and were our allies. We don't want to announce, before they do so, that we no longer trust them.
That's fair enough but what if we have a CP who is a liar, a fantasist and incompetent. Why should I take their word without any verification. We need a balance here, my suggestion would be that the senior congress member for each party is consulted and if they are in agreement they would recommend to the other congress members from their party.
Vistulus: "what if we have a CP who is a liar, a fantasist and incompetent."
Impeach then. The CP directive will only be used in rare circumstances and it allows the CP to act quickly before the person can be let it by someone who assumes because they dont have a decision next to their name.
Citizenship committees do not work. Although we could have an appeal system for level 1 rejections if you want.
Bit of a nuclear option really impeachment don't you think.
All I'm suggesting is that the CP consults the senior congresman from each party so that we know there is a genuine reason other than he "used to be my mate but he ran off with my bird" so he's not coming back into the country.
Fine, if the CP feels that it is such an immediate danger then lets say the consultation can be retrospective....but it can't just be done without any oversight.
Citizenship comes under congress NOT the MOLA. I sincerely hope congress members do their job and ignore you when appropriate
The whole point is to try and achieve a working relationship between congress and government. Congress of course is in charge of citizenship for 90% of the time, we (MoLA) just act as advice givers.
The difference here is that the only other elected player (the CP) is given an option to have a small amount of leeway to reject or accept some citizens based of his word alone.
This is not about mandating who pushes buttons when but it actually about education of congress for the most part - and then they will realise that sometimes information will not be able to be disclosed to them and as such they can't make a decision in a very rare case - so they defer to the person who can. Who is the CP, and the CP alone.
So its OK to treat congress as mushrooms (Keep them in the dark and feed them horse sh..)
There is no way for the CP and cronies to enforce this so there is really no point in this.
Sounds good. Voted. o7
Good work o7
Voted o7
Removed Features
1. Now only government can comment which I assume hands citizenship control over to Nebojsa/Iain Keers?
2. You took out some questions because I guess you thought they were irrelevant and replaced them with things you can find publically in game.
3. You made it harder to read. This was one of 2 complaints I got about what I did- now it doesn't fit on one monitor and has no color coding. You also removed the 2nd page which had some links and info on it.
1) This is unfortunately incorrect - the MoLA will be in charge of putting down levels 2 and 3 (so congressional advice) while the CP ALONE will be in charge of priority 1's. This means that neither Iain or neb will have control over citizenship, unless they become CP.
2) Yep - although I thought the answers would be relevant to the questions here and my aim was to put as much info as possible onto the sheet. I will add a title sheet (with pretty pastel colours for you) which will have just the name link and gov advice. People can then get more info if they want it.
3) As above.
New Features
4. You have absolutly no action on punishments. This was the other complaint I got and what I assumed you were doing.
5. What you added is using numbers instead of adjectives - instead of "This guy is a several threat" you can now right "1". This is something which once thought of would take seconds to add.
6. By integrating it into UKRP's Civil Service Website, you've made it so that any future MoLA has to either make ANOTHER new system or please that website's masters to get access / forward improvements to them to implement.
4) Only people that can "punish" members is the PP. The idea is that congress members sometimes quite rightly ignore MoLA advice (as they are un-elected) however hopefully they will see that the CP is an elected figurehead of the country and has a mandate to keep it safe. As such they are also privy to information which cannot always be shared with congress. It is my hope that they see rich's authority and they respect that.
5) Note - the numbers are only to ensure consistency and ease of reading. Also note that I stated that if the reason could be made public it would be. So in this case that reasoning would be written down beside the number.
6) The gdoc form is simply a form - hosted on a website. Next MoLA wants a different one? Simple - make it, copy the host link and send it to kumnaa (who has shown that he is happy to help out - especially if its just to copy paste 1 link at worst once a month) or the people in charge of the gov.erepublik website. Then the link will remain the same.
MoLA Citizenship Behaviour
7. In the mean time there has been no advertisement and little maintenance (none by you) on the existing spreadsheet, so we lost 2 weeks of citizenship controls.
8. I don't understand why you couldn't have tweaked the existing work instead of doing it all again, waste of time and kick in the teeth to me.
9. You refused to discuss these changes on several occassionas... if you had asked I could have helped you and we could have got some of these wall of text complaints solved.
7) After repeated attempts to gain access - I still do not have write on that spreadsheet. As such - you can see the issues new MoLA's have when trying to take over a system. Also, you can't exactly be that worried about citizenship getting out of hand if you quit the job with two weeks left - leaving it in a similar situation.
😎 See above. P.S. sometimes, just occasionally mind, its not about you. This is not about your party, your life or your work. This is about the eUK citizenship procedure and one which I, and the rest of cabinet, feel is better.
9) I dont see any walls of text issues - you've broken your complaints down in a nice easy to read and understand manner! Thank you!
[removed]
I won't be asking anyone in New Era to follow this, you are dictating to us when we asked to be invovled in improving the system.
So, Goku, I hope that this has assuaged your fears. I can only express my regret that you feel that a system endorsed by the CP while at the same time promotes responsable congressional behaviour is worth resisting simply because I did not ask for your advice. This is a position that I feel is very negative, very backwards and in-fact hurtful to the eUK as a whole.
I, for one, will hope that even if you do not force anyone in New Era to follow this - that sensible rational heads will prevail and the merits of the system (which is - an extension on the principles you based yours on - I hasten to add) will demonstrate themselves.
Very nicely done straight forward and simple to understand.If you can get everybody to work together we will then have a proper Citizenship system in place.
Curious, what did you think about my system?
It was okay but had a lack of accountability from the government in it also you didn't seem to have confidence in the system yourself.
lol wat? This system is a copy of mine.
Yours didn't have an direct no from the CP message.Your direct no solution was well i told them to not let them in and then we had to take it at face value that you had talked to them about it. Also you had so little confidence in the system that you would not even go through it yourself.
wat? Yes I did.
Just let parties sort out there own houses...