Civil Service showdown in this month's Clark

ABBAVILLA -- Never was there a more polarised Clark*. After intense sparring in Wittenberg's "Hopper" forum over whether or not a proposal for an active civil service to perform routine tasks for various ministries should simultaneously create those offices or merely allow for them, two similar bills have been published in the Clark offering a stark choice to Talossa's legislators.

The bills are Cosa Speaker Charlie Xheraltescu's "Sir Humphrey Appleby Civil Service Act", and Alexandreu Davinescu's "Leaner Sir Humphrey" Act. The original motivation for the act was, in the words of the preamble, "stability, continuity, and separation from partisan politics", with Admiral Tim Asmourescu among the original supporters of such an idea. Xheraltescu's bill includes an enumeration of civil servants, including the Admiral, the Burgermeister of Inland Revenue, and various Permanent Secretaries, modeled after the British approach to the civil service.

MC Davinescu immediately took against the proposal, opining:

Sir Humphrey

[...] as I look at this, the only offices that I see any conceivable need for would be that of the PermaSec for Immigration and (maybe) STUFF. And I suspect that we could serve such needs in a much simpler manner without these complicating new bureaucracy - approval committee! - by just having these ministries establish, as needed, such positions by individual arrangement with the Ziu.

I would like the sections pertaining to Justice, Defense, and Finance struck from the bill. It would also be wise to remove or reform the "more can be created as needed" section, since no agent is specified (presumably the Ziu is meant, but that would require another bill, anyway, so why have this confusing clause?) And lastly, why are we also creating a new post whose function will be to appoint others every couple of years?

No compromise was reached before the competing bills of Xheraltescu and Davinescu were Clarked.

With near-Boolean predictability, the votes of RUMP and ZRT legislators are opposed in the matter, with some MCs from other parties voting against both proposals, perhaps in disgust at the pettiness of their appearance on the same Clark. The RUMP Seneschal, Txec dal Nordselva was, in Mormoglhen's view, considerably embarrassed by the vote, given that he is a cosponsor of Xheraltescu's original act, despite the subsequent RUMP consensus around Davinescu's proposal.

Mormoglhen gives its support to Tuischac'h Xheraltescu's proposal, not least because it is cosponsored by the editor!

* That's probably hyperbole, but hey.