[pp.int.general] PPI board meeting minutes and some updates about the conference.

Mozart mozart.palmer at pirateparty.org.au
Sun Mar 4 15:38:37 CET 2012 

I like this suggestion:

"I think one vote per country has worked quite well for PPI. In order  
to accomodate the situation in Spain I would suggest someone whom it  
is important to drafts an amendment of the PPI statutes that allows  
regional parties in exceptional circumstances to become ordinary  
members (maybe with only half a vote?) after the GA votes in favor of  
admitting that party as an ordinary member."

But would say they should be given full vote when admitted. The  
situation in Spain does not seem to be working out at the moment, so a  
Pirate Confederation there is unlikely. They just don't seem to agree.  
And for now, PPES holds the Spanish vote I believe, even though PPCAT  
is a reportedly much larger party.

Regards,
Mozart.

On 05/03/2012, at 12:19 AM, Justus Römeth wrote:

> Hola Isabela, hola rest of Galician parties
>
> While I understand the Galician/Catalonian position on this, and  
> that circumventing the 1 voter per country makes totally sense for  
> you, it just does not make sense from a German point of view:
> - Some local parties in Germany have more members than many national  
> parties in other countries, going by member count alone is not a  
> good starting point.
> - It is unlikely to happen in the near future, but if there is a  
> rift within PPDE towards our position to PPI regional parties could  
> start to ask for votes, too. Unless the other parties grow  
> exceptionally by then this would 'allow' PPDE to 'swamp' PPI with  
> regional/local parties if we institutionalize what you propose,  
> bringing the rift within PPDE to PPI.
> - Even more problematic, an institutionalization of allowing  
> regional parties into PPI could allow PPDE to effectively take over  
> PPI if it would wish so. Not something I particularly would like to  
> happen.
>
> So where does that leave us? The PPI rule of one country/one vote is  
> obviously flawed when it comes to entities where it is unclear  
> whether they are countries in our sense or not (Kosovo, Northern  
> Cyprus, Flanders, Wallonia, and also Scotland are obvious examples).  
> If you say that Catalonia and Galicia should get their own vote in  
> PPI, why should Bavaria or Frisia not get one? But if they get one,  
> why shouldn't Northern Frisia, the Sorbs, or Amsterdam (all entities  
> that see themselves as somewhat different than the rest of their  
> country), or Limburg and Lower Saxony (who see themselves as  
> deserving the same rights as Bavaria and Friesland, since they are  
> on the same political level within their country)?
>
> I personally am not a big fan of the organization of politics with  
> the concept of nations (I am a German, but I don't quite understand  
> why I should feel closer to someone in Munich compared to someone in  
> Vienna, Berne, Luxembourg, Eupen, Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Prague or  
> Wroclaw). But I accept that this ambiguous concept is accepted by  
> the vast majority of other people, that today's politics deal with  
> this concept, that it is important to a lot of people, and that I  
> won't be able to fundamentally change it.
>
> I think one vote per country has worked quite well for PPI. In order  
> to accomodate the situation in Spain I would suggest someone whom it  
> is important to drafts an amendment of the PPI statutes that allows  
> regional parties in exceptional circumstances to become ordinary  
> members (maybe with only half a vote?) after the GA votes in favor  
> of admitting that party as an ordinary member.  (Maybe you could  
> include non-opposition by the 'affected' national party, too). There  
> is no guarantee that such an amendment would pass, however. This  
> would then allow the members of PPI to decide on a possible  
> Kosovarian PP when there is one, and not force them to make such a  
> decision now.
>
> The more fundamental question is obviously whether there is a lot of  
> use in having this discussion at all. Is an ordinary membership in  
> PPI that important to PP-CAT and PP-GAL, keeping PPI's tasks and  
> limitations in mind? Do PP-CAT and PP-GAL really disagree with PPES  
> so much as far as PPI is concerned? Shouldn't this discussion  
> instead focus on how we set up PPEU concerning national minorities  
> (or at all), or how PPES could be reformed that it is not seen as  
> such a big problem for the members of PP-CAT and PP-GAL?
>
> -J
>
> On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Kenneth Peiruza  
> <kenneth at pirata.cat> wrote:
> Hi Isabel,
>
> It would be great to see some Galician Pirates in the forthcoming  
> GA. Please think about it! There's going to be 6 PP-ES delegates and  
> 4 PP-CAT delegates there, so, we can have a nice time with a lot of  
> Pilsen beer :)
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Kenneth
>
>
> On 04/03/12 10:59, Isabel Fernández wrote:
>>
>> Hello Justus,
>>
>> We don't think PPI's job regulate between pirates parties either.  
>> That's
>> why we said we'll declare nothing of the sort.
>>
>> Our suggestion was based on the premise 'one legal territorial pirate
>> party - one vote' that we think it's a more fair than the actual
>> situation. We think PPI could give it some thought to this issue.
>>
>> We'd love to send a delegate to the GA, but rumours are saing that  
>> we'll
>> face elections next autumn at Galician Parlament and still there's  
>> a lot
>> work to do... we're not sure we can attend to Prague. Generally  
>> rumours
>> on this subject turn out to be true at the end. Maybe next time we  
>> are
>> able to send Galician Delegation.
>>
>>
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>>
>> Isabel Fernandez.
>>
>>
>> On 03/03/12 10:51, Justus Römeth wrote:
>>> Thank you Isabel (and the rest of PP-GAL),
>>>
>>> I don't think PPI's job is to regulate between individual pirate  
>>> parties,
>>> but rather to keep the movement growing, by providing  
>>> infrastructure and a
>>> place to meet for pirates who's country does not have a PP, and by  
>>> helping
>>> them through the early stages of forming a party. Therefore I  
>>> don't think a
>>> model that would give PPDE ~20 times as much voting power as the  
>>> next
>>> biggest party (PPSE is still not a member) would be appropriate.
>>>
>>> That is not to say that the current model of PPI concerning the  
>>> situation
>>> in Spain is optimal. It is not. I think your proposed solution  
>>> would make
>>> sense for something like PPEU, or a PPI with a much broadened  
>>> scope (as
>>> well as institutions like the EP, but that is a different matter).  
>>> As of
>>> yet I don't see the latter happening, however.
>>>
>>> Are you (PP-GAL) planning to send a delegate to the General  
>>> assembly in
>>> Prague?
>>>
>>> Kind regards
>>>
>>> Justus
>>>
>>> On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 3:09 AM, HerNenya <isabel.fdez at mundo-r.com>  
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I do apologize since last message was my first mail to this list.  
>>>> I'm
>>>> not used to deal w/ digests.
>>>>
>>>> I repeat the message for better reading.
>>>>
>>>> Best Regards to all,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Isabel Fernandez.
>>>> -----------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> This is a message made by the members of public relations team for
>>>> PP-GAL. It is agreed by all the members of mentioned team and we  
>>>> want to
>>>> send it through our link in this mailing list of PPI members so  
>>>> it must
>>>> be understood in the name of PP-GAL party and not from the sender  
>>>> who
>>>> forwards this message.
>>>>
>>>> Since there were direct references to PP-GAL in this list and the  
>>>> way we
>>>> organize ourselves in Spain, we consider it is important to be  
>>>> heard in
>>>> our oppinion before of the rest of pirates parties of the world.
>>>>
>>>> First of all, we would like to say we are 2 months old as a  
>>>> political
>>>> party in Spain and our foundation is based on the structure of  
>>>> Spain as
>>>> a country formed by autonomies as such established in the Spanish
>>>> Constitution Act [1] in article #148 in order to organize  
>>>> ourselves in
>>>> the Spaniard territory. Moreover we have our own idiosyncrasy as
>>>> language and culture quite different from other spaniard  
>>>> territories.
>>>> Therefore we are an approved political party by the competent  
>>>> Ministry
>>>> with same rights and duties as PP-ES and PP-CAT.
>>>>
>>>> As Kenneth from PP-CAT said in other previous message, we are
>>>> encouraging a confederation at country level to organize common  
>>>> tasks
>>>> that affect us as a nation such the cases of #megacomplaint and
>>>> #opColapso (fighting against Sinde-Wert law [2]) that we are  
>>>> supporting
>>>> PP-ES, PP-CAT and PP-GAL. Last week we have created a mailing list
>>>> called pirata-34 to discuss those affairs.
>>>>
>>>> Regarding the subject about who can vote as a country or by the  
>>>> amount
>>>> of pirate members, we consider system of countries is not fair  
>>>> precisely
>>>> because of proportion of the population densities and pirates  
>>>> members. A
>>>> possible fair solution (as a suggestion) to this matter could be  
>>>> that
>>>> depending on the number of members from each pirate party, each  
>>>> party
>>>> will provide a proportional amount of the contingency fund of  
>>>> PPI, as
>>>> well, each party would have the proportional weight in PPI  
>>>> decisions.
>>>>
>>>> Refering to mentions about how to organize internally the different
>>>> pirate parties in Spain, we considered that this mailing list is  
>>>> not the
>>>> appropiate place to discuss about it, so we are not going to  
>>>> declare
>>>> anything here.
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://www.lamoncloa.gob.es/IDIOMAS/9/Espana/LeyFundamental/index.htm
>>>> [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ley_Sinde
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Public Relations Team of PP-GAL.
>>>> http://piratasdegalicia.org/web/
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Isabel Fdez
>>>> GPG EA63DF8E
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ____________________________________________________
>>>> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
>>>> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
>>>> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/ 
>>>> pp.international.general
>>>>
>>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________
>>> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
>>> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
>>> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________
>> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
>> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
>> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/attachments/20120305/b0287883/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the pp.international.general mailing list