Cyprus-Forum.com

[YFred]

Chris can talk all he wants....He still doesn't realise that he will have to win over the TCs.....Except for you that is......You haven't been able to pull your trousers up for years...

Dear oh dear, another blind believer. Reh, what Tc's? they don't count anymore, they account for just 25% of the turks on the dark side and you think the GCs have to worry about them??

As I told your buddy on another thread dear Zan, Turkey is at the table, Turkey controls the Turks in Cyprus we will manage Turkey, you are insignificant now, poor sods, you still think you are running the show.

Pres X should cease talking to the puppet and talk directly to the master. Bye bye, won't be long now.

Welcome back DT.
Don't be too embarrassed about Apoel, they will only go out soon anyway.

[Kikapu]

VP would you be able to explain what political equality means for you?

cheers

Each consituent state has the same weight politically 50-50 and reserves the right to stop any decisions on sensative matters effecting that state more negatively than the other. This can be in the shape of 2 houses upper and lower...the lower being proportional represenstation the upper house 50-50 with noway of one state stealing the others seats.

So your idea of political equality being totally undemocratic for starters, which would mean already violating the Federal Constitution as well as individuals democratic and Human Rights, but lets just go along with it for a minute and ask you how you would prevent when one of the 50% upper house state senators ask the people of their state to vote for a independence in a referendum and as soon as the majority of that state says yes (only the TCs voting in the north and only the GCs voting in the south on such a referendum), they will walk off the government to create a constitutional crises. This is the reason why your idea of political equality is flawed and it can never be accepted by the GCs I believe. It will make it way too easy for the repeat of 1963 all over again.!

Why should there be a referendum for independence? This can only be done if both states agree 100%.

The key is to strike a balance between the 2 states where one cannot push the other one to one side espeically on sensatives. A % of the from both sides in both houses can be demanded to get a bill through, the majority of decisions will be for the benfit of the country so why should anyone vote against it? your persistent not to incorporate safeguards just fuels mistrust and the feeling that GCs want to use their numerical advantage to steam roller over the TCs and take contol of the whole island which has always been their ultiamate goal.

You can achieve all of the above democratically, and just for good measure, you can also adopt derogations from the EU and the GCs as a safeguard just as I outlined on the BBF thread on my last posting there where after most of GC refugees land has been returned to become part of the south state, the remaining GCs (my estimation about 30,000) will be a very small minority in the north state versus the TCs at around 150,000-180,000. At this point, it can be agreed, that, what ever the TC population increases, say around 2% which will be around 3,300 per year, the same number of GCs can also increase per year at 3,300. In another words, the TC population will set the pace on how many GCs can increase in numbers in the north state, assuming they even want to live there. Personally for the north to develop, you will want the GCs living with you, but they may choose not to also. I have told you before, that I'm all for political opposition to any party and that never one party should have all the power. And that won't be the case, if you would just return almost 50% of the north back to become part of the south state, otherwise, in what you are suggesting, you will not have any incentives to give very much back.

If you argue what if the EU and the GC will not allow derogations to limit growth of the GC population in the north to the TCs, then you should not expect them to give you what you want either, because you will be committing more Democratic and Human Rights violations in what you want to do. When a community hold 50% power, they will not want to play by the rules and will look for ways to create constitutional crises for independence by walking off the government, which would make the constitution unworkable. Does that sound familiar to you. No, the way to get around this problem, is to give the 5 upper house seats to the state, which will then be forced to maintain checks and balances by making sure the constitution is observed as well as all its laws from the Federal and State government. This way, if any "mutiny" is tried, the constitution just keeps on working and those who committed the "coup" will be dismissed and others are elected to take their places. That will be one of the safeguards built in into the Federal and State constitutions.

[Kikapu]

Yep. Like a sick animal, it should be put out of its misery. I had so much hope for Muhtar X but had serious doubts when he made the deal with TPapa for their votes he sold his soul to the devil and the Cypriots down the river at the same time.
I think in 6 months time even the UN will finally accept it and they will start the process.

Do you want to wager a little money on that YFred, like couple of Thousand $$$$$ or £££££ perhaps. You can choose the currency. We'll get a trusted individual to hold the money. What do you say.?

After you pay your last dept, I'll take you on. It'll be my pleasure to clean you out twice.

There is no back debt. You backed out of the deal, and rightly so too, but lets not go there. That's in the past. This is a very simple up and down wager. All is needed is a trusted secure hands in the UK who can hold the cash. No other information is needed from our lives...just HARD CASH. Right now Deniz is the best candidate available to be the "escrow man".! What do you say.?

You have Deniz to thank for that. But keep taking the medication. You do know that OCD develops into madness, don't you? Or is it too late?

Are you going to wager or you are going to make noise all night.?

Till you pay up your last dept which you crapped out of, I will just ignore you. Knowing your OCD it will really crack you up because you love being the centre of attraction. I would get all your other issues sorted as well if I was you.

What's my last debt to you.? What did I lose to owe you anything. I called your bluff and your whole challenge thing collapsed. You should be lucky I didn't take you to the cleaners, or your lawyers to jail, so be grateful. Now, if you don't want to wager on this prediction that you have made, just say so and stop farting around with excuses, which means then you must not believe or trust in what you say.!

Well yeah, I can go along with that.!

[Viewpoint]

VP would you be able to explain what political equality means for you?

cheers

Each consituent state has the same weight politically 50-50 and reserves the right to stop any decisions on sensative matters effecting that state more negatively than the other. This can be in the shape of 2 houses upper and lower...the lower being proportional represenstation the upper house 50-50 with noway of one state stealing the others seats.

So your idea of political equality being totally undemocratic for starters, which would mean already violating the Federal Constitution as well as individuals democratic and Human Rights, but lets just go along with it for a minute and ask you how you would prevent when one of the 50% upper house state senators ask the people of their state to vote for a independence in a referendum and as soon as the majority of that state says yes (only the TCs voting in the north and only the GCs voting in the south on such a referendum), they will walk off the government to create a constitutional crises. This is the reason why your idea of political equality is flawed and it can never be accepted by the GCs I believe. It will make it way too easy for the repeat of 1963 all over again.!

Why should there be a referendum for independence? This can only be done if both states agree 100%.

The key is to strike a balance between the 2 states where one cannot push the other one to one side espeically on sensatives. A % of the from both sides in both houses can be demanded to get a bill through, the majority of decisions will be for the benfit of the country so why should anyone vote against it? your persistent not to incorporate safeguards just fuels mistrust and the feeling that GCs want to use their numerical advantage to steam roller over the TCs and take contol of the whole island which has always been their ultiamate goal.

You can achieve all of the above democratically, and just for good measure, you can also adopt derogations from the EU and the GCs as a safeguard just as I outlined on the BBF thread on my last posting there where after most of GC refugees land has been returned to become part of the south state, the remaining GCs (my estimation about 30,000) will be a very small minority in the north state versus the TCs at around 150,000-180,000. At this point, it can be agreed, that, what ever the TC population increases, say around 2% which will be around 3,300 per year, the same number of GCs can also increase per year at 3,300. In another words, the TC population will set the pace on how many GCs can increase in numbers in the north state, assuming they even want to live there. Personally for the north to develop, you will want the GCs living with you, but they may choose not to also. I have told you before, that I'm all for political opposition to any party and that never one party should have all the power. And that won't be the case, if you would just return almost 50% of the north back to become part of the south state, otherwise, in what you are suggesting, you will not have any incentives to give very much back.

If you argue what if the EU and the GC will not allow derogations to limit growth of the GC population in the north to the TCs, then you should not expect them to give you what you want either, because you will be committing more Democratic and Human Rights violations in what you want to do. When a community hold 50% power, they will not want to play by the rules and will look for ways to create constitutional crises for independence by walking off the government, which would make the constitution unworkable. Does that sound familiar to you. No, the way to get around this problem, is to give the 5 upper house seats to the state, which will then be forced to maintain checks and balances by making sure the constitution is observed as well as all its laws from the Federal and State government. This way, if any "mutiny" is tried, the constitution just keeps on working and those who committed the "coup" will be dismissed and others are elected to take their places. That will be one of the safeguards built in into the Federal and State constitutions.

We can continue with the current % divide and allow right of return or compensation, the balance can be maintained by allowing the whole island to vote for candidates all over the island seeing that the GCs always claim the size it not relevant and for voting purposes can be considered as one big voting pot, The candidates with the most votes will represent both states. The only stipulatiion would be that the first 75 GCs and first 35 GCs past the post will be elected the first 5 in each going forward to the upper house the balance remaining in the lower house therefore providing proportional representation. To get a bill through the lower house 50% of GC votes being 35 and 50% of TCs votes being 15 minimum would be necessary to send the bill forward to the upper house where the elected candidates 5 GCs 5 TCs would need 3 votes from both sides to get the bill through. If there should be any defection in the upper house candiates inline from the lower house would move up to keep the mechanism working.

[Nikitas]

These complex voting systems presumably refer only to Federal legislation. State legislation would be according to other rules. It will be interesting to contrast the systmes chosen by each state for its local legislation, and compare it to the complexities they impose on the Federal level.

[YFred]

These complex voting systems presumably refer only to Federal legislation. State legislation would be according to other rules. It will be interesting to contrast the systmes chosen by each state for its local legislation, and compare it to the complexities they impose on the Federal level.

You really put too much emphesis on the EU way of doing things. Over in the UK there is no such problem where the second chamber is not ellected and nor is the head of state. You guys need a bit of waking up in political terms.
EU will accept what ever the negotiators agree with. Stop kidding yourselves.

BTW EU has no problem with UK troops in Cyprus either. I wonder why?