The Shipyard Worlds Non-aggression Pact

LomenRyuun

Date: Friday, 13 Apr 2012, 4:34 AM | Message # 1

Lieutenant general

Group: Users

Messages: 696

Awards: 1

Reputation: 1

Status: Offline

Senators, if you will permit, I realize the closure of this year is close upon us, but I would propose one final bill. As the new Senator Abram stated in regards to shipyard worlds, "There are not enough of these shipyard worlds, and those that are functioning are vastly over worked and many have a large backlog when it comes to vessels being built." As such, I propose the following:

The Shipyard Worlds Non-aggression Bill

I. No shipyard world that produces for the Empire, or for private production, or that handles the sub-contracting of another shipyard world will make war or damaging efforts against the economy or superstructure of another shipyard world.

II. The non-aggression pact between shipyard worlds is subject to the terms and relations of non-aggression pacts currently in place at this time.

III. Shipyard worlds will work together if one world is threatened by another shipyard world to assist and defend the threatened world against assault.

IV. The Shipyard World Non-aggression Bill may be waived in specific instances by a majority vote within the Senate.

V. The Defense Committee will have final say on whether or not a world qualifies as a shipyard world.

VI. Privatized shipyards will be considered for this act on a case-by-case basis, subject to the Ruling Council and the Defense Committee.

Terms

I. 'Shipyard' shall be defined as any structure specifically designed to produce vessels. Shipyards intended as maintenance and repair facilities do not fall under this classification.

II. 'Shipyard world' shall be defined as a world possessing a shipyard of orbital capacity that can produce ships of cruiser-size or larger.

III. 'Privatized shipyards' is defined as a shipyard owned by a person or persons that is not available for publicly traded stock.

IV. 'Cruiser' shall be defined as a warship of 450 meters in length or larger.

V. 'Warship' shall be defined as a vessel intended to be used in battle for the purpose of damaging or destroying enemy vessels or equipment and mounting at a minimum forty turbolasers or equivalent heavy cannon.

Lomen Ryuun
Senator, Doldur Sector
Senator, Druckenwell
Representative, Monor II (10 BBY - 9 BBY)
Representative, Geridard
Representative, Boranall
Representative, Therenor Prime
Vice-chairman, Defense Committee (Temporarily suspended)
Controlling Shareholder - Druckenwell Arms Corporation

Message edited by LomenRyuun - Saturday, 14 Apr 2012, 2:13 PM

Senator_Ordan

Date: Friday, 13 Apr 2012, 6:09 AM | Message # 2

Lieutenant general

Group: Users

Messages: 633

Awards: 0

Reputation: 1

Status: Offline

So this is a motion or law? Surely if it's a pact I.e. a treaty it doesn't need to go onto the Senate floor.

Also, define "shipyard" and "shipyard wold" within the context of the motion/act/treaty.

Senator Hubert Ordan
__________________________

Senator of the Azure Sector
Foreign Minister of Anaxes
Captain-General of the Azure Interest Protection Squadron
Deputy Chairman of the Ethics Committee
Worshipful Master of the Most Loyal and Honourable Company of Blockadeers
Archtreasurer of the Vault of Pols Anaxes
Autocrat of Selgon
Owner of Azure Durasteel
Systems Admiral (Ret)
Order of the Canted Circle

LomenRyuun

Date: Friday, 13 Apr 2012, 7:59 AM | Message # 3

Lieutenant general

Group: Users

Messages: 696

Awards: 1

Reputation: 1

Status: Offline

This is intended as a pact to be made into a law, and the definitions shall be added.

Senator_Ordan

Date: Friday, 13 Apr 2012, 9:14 AM | Message # 4

Lieutenant general

Group: Users

Messages: 633

Awards: 0

Reputation: 1

Status: Offline

Not really a pact then surely?

Added (13 Apr 2012, 9:14 AM)
---------------------------------------------
Many worlds own reasonable grade Cardan stations? Many capable in theory of building huge vessels. Would they all be covered?

Why penalise a world for using Imperial Shipwrights? This just encourages every world to build a shipyard for automatic protection.. It thus innately is a motion to harm the industry it seeks to protect. It would only end up on producing more small poor quality shipyards who would produce poor vessels and thus bringing standards down and damaging the present shipping Sector?

LomenRyuun

Date: Friday, 13 Apr 2012, 11:48 AM | Message # 5

Lieutenant general

Group: Users

Messages: 696

Awards: 1

Reputation: 1

Status: Offline

As you wish, Senator Ordan, not a pact. As for the Cardan-class stations, the Imperial notion defines them as repair and maintenance facilities. Can they and are they capable of producing ships? Yes. However, their primary designation is still repair and maintenance which would exclude them from this. As well, the wording will be altered once more to better improve upon the definition of what a shipyard world consists of.

As for penalizing a world for using Imperial Shipwrights? I see no penalty forthcoming. It is simply a law meant to prevent shipyard worlds from attacking one another.

Senator_Ordan

Date: Friday, 13 Apr 2012, 4:35 PM | Message # 6

Lieutenant general

Group: Users

Messages: 633

Awards: 0

Reputation: 1

Status: Offline

I believe there are private shipyards which probably operate using the same stations as are generally used for repairs. I think this is revealed to all as a completely unendurable act for interplanetary intercourse.

I could build some awful space station, with enough production lines to produce some dinky system ships and should I thus be invulnerable? Of course not.

The idea is poorly thought out, and the Imperial Navy already guarantees the safety of certain worlds (Kuat, Imperial Center etc) and I think the Emperor is capable of deciding which shipyards he wants guarded and has indeed demonstrated this thus far. You forget also military operations require Ruling Council consultation, and I think their discretion stands as much more significant and useful than any act, especially one with more loopholes than a sieve.

Message edited by Senator_Ordan - Friday, 13 Apr 2012, 4:37 PM

LomenRyuun

Date: Friday, 13 Apr 2012, 4:46 PM | Message # 7

Lieutenant general

Group: Users

Messages: 696

Awards: 1

Reputation: 1

Status: Offline

There is a simple fix to all of this, Senator Ordan, and there are hardly that many loopholes. You are just accustomed to trying to work around the edges, I believe, and so what you see as loopholes are actually not.

Added (13 Apr 2012, 4:46 PM)
---------------------------------------------
You will also find, Senator, that several changes have been made.

Senator_Ordan

Date: Saturday, 14 Apr 2012, 5:46 AM | Message # 8

Lieutenant general

Group: Users

Messages: 633

Awards: 0

Reputation: 1

Status: Offline

Define cruiser size? Vessels of all shapes and sizes are described as "cruisers".

Also let everyone note that this communistic act massively prejudices the market against private shipyards in favour of state owned ones!

LomenRyuun

Date: Saturday, 14 Apr 2012, 6:08 AM | Message # 9

Lieutenant general

Group: Users

Messages: 696

Awards: 1

Reputation: 1

Status: Offline

Cruiser has been defined as per your request, Senator.

Furthermore, this does not prejudice against private shipyards. A state-owned shipyard has the automatic protection of the Emperor, as you said. Private shipyards, as you mentioned the possibility of yourself doing, can produce inferior vessels simply for the purpose of gaining protection under this act; therefore, the Defense Committee has the process of reviewing said shipyards. It hardly hurts the market at all. In fact, it does nothing whatsoever to change purchase, sale or prices of any ships. All it ensures is that worlds with shipyards won't assault one another.

Perhaps this is a necessary bill, seeing as to the actions of certain beings as of late.

Senator_Ordan

Date: Saturday, 14 Apr 2012, 6:16 AM | Message # 10

Lieutenant general

Group: Users

Messages: 633

Awards: 0

Reputation: 1

Status: Offline

Define warship?

LomenRyuun

Date: Saturday, 14 Apr 2012, 6:36 AM | Message # 11

Lieutenant general

Group: Users

Messages: 696

Awards: 1

Reputation: 1

Status: Offline

I'm fairly confident the Senate knows what makes a warship, as do all beings. Nonetheless, Senator, just for you, I shall define it.

Senator_Ordan

Date: Saturday, 14 Apr 2012, 7:48 AM | Message # 12

Lieutenant general

Group: Users

Messages: 633

Awards: 0

Reputation: 1

Status: Offline

So as long as Axum builds a station to produce the the "Girder-class Picket" vessel I just made up, a give hundred meter long frame of Durasteel, with a small crew compartment and a turbolaser on each end it should be invulnerable to attack and all other shipyards should be obliged to defend it?

This is a complete farce of an act that will just lead to the production of poor quality shipyards building poor quality ships just to classify a world as a "shiipyard". This act really invites ridicule, and I now turn over the floor to the rest of the chamber to continue said ridicule.

LomenRyuun

Date: Saturday, 14 Apr 2012, 8:03 AM | Message # 13

Lieutenant general

Group: Users

Messages: 696

Awards: 1

Reputation: 1

Status: Offline

You are an extremely unhelpful and petty little man, Senator Ordan. The purpose of amendments is so that senators can make additions to a law. All you have seemed to do this far is nitpick like an old woman. If you have an amendment to add, make a complete thought and submit it. Other than that, I am willing to open the matter to the rest of the chamber.

Augusta_Aurelius

Date: Saturday, 14 Apr 2012, 12:18 PM | Message # 14

Lieutenant colonel

Group: Users

Messages: 109

Awards: 0

Reputation: 0

Status: Offline

Just to be clear, Senator Ryuun, this is a bill which requires worlds with shipyards to not go to war with one another, correct?

Augusta Aurelius
Queen Conosrt of Deralia
Chair of the Human Rights Monitoring and Crisis Resolution Sub-Committee of the Planetary Defense Committee

Senator of Deralia and the Tammuz Sector (30 BBY - 18 BBY, 10 BBY - Present)

LomenRyuun

Date: Saturday, 14 Apr 2012, 12:19 PM | Message # 15

Lieutenant general

Group: Users

Messages: 696

Awards: 1

Reputation: 1

Status: Offline

That is correct, Senator.