Viewpoint wrote:Kikapu wrote:zan wrote:Perhaps that as you agree the 13 point change was needed to make the 1960 Zurich agreement work then you should also accept that the two states are needed for the same purpose....
That's what I have been proposing, Zan, a Democratic system and BBF under True Federation with Federated states of north and south.!
Whats wrong with my proposal? one man one vote is totally democratic and does not infringe on anyones rights.
I don't know, VP, because you have ONLY given us very few details, but from what I gathered in what you wrote in few paragraphs, is that the TCs will vote for the TCs and the GCs will vote for the GCs no matter where they live to elect the representatives, but the GCs can only vote for representatives for the south state and the TCs can only vote for representatives for the north state.. It may be "one man one vote", but you are still violating ones democratic and Human Rights by denying them to vote for representatives in the areas they live and pay taxes. Hardly the norm for one nation under one citizenship in a democratic 27 EU nations and the west in general. Lets just say GCs living in the north state who pay taxes for the local and state government will not have any say so in how the local and state government is run that may effect their day to day lives as the citizens of the north state. This is generally known as "Taxation without Representation". This is what brought on the famous "Boston Tea Party" protest by the new Americans over the British in 1773 at the Boston Harbour, because Britain were taxing the Americans and yet the Americans had no representation in the British Government. It was a one way sweet deal for the British.
I also don't know how you reached the 75 GC representatives and 35 TC representatives. I guess you gave 70 GCs and 30 TCs for the Lower House and 5 and 5 each for the Upper House. Well, for the lower house the ratio between the two is almost 2:1 in favour of the GCs when they are in fact 4:1 ratio based from the 1960 figures, even though it is much higher right now. The upper house is agreed with the 5-5 which is what the upper house will be 50% representation from each state, but I must once again state, that those 5 seats in the upper house will belong to the state and not to any one community. Then you go off the rails with your undemocratic ways of running the lower house by allocating 50% power for the GCs and the TCs in passing bills in the lower house by requiring (I assume from what you wrote) that 50% of the 70 GCs will need to say YES as well as 50% of the 30TCs saying YES also. Once again you are allocating power to the two communities to be the guardians of the Federal Government and the country and if one of the two communities decides to walk off the government to seek independence with the established state lines of north and south states, then the whole system will collapse by bringing a Constitutional crises much like 1963. You cannot run a country based on 50% approval from each community in the government, specially when the ratio of the communities "selected" by the people of each ethnic groups, and that one of the communities to be the guardian of the country are at 4:1 ratio (GCs) to the other (TCs).
Your Upper House idea is also non democratic to say the least from what I understood of your proposal. If we are going to have all these undemocratic way of running the country, why go through the motion of all this democratic nonsense and not just put Talat and Christofias in charge like dictators to make all the decisions for us. It will be the same thing, right. 50-50 representation of the GCs and the TCs and lets save a lot of money to the tax payers by not having to hold any elections or even have two states under BBF. What for, when they can just appoint whom ever they want to represent the GCs and the TCs. Why waste time and energy by pretending that we are a democratic country in what you are proposing. One man one vote is just the individual right that every citizen is entitled to, but then you go on by destroying the whole essence of Democracy and Human Rights by not practicing Democracy and Human Rights and instead use a policy of "community rights" to run the country. Now, we can do that if you want, but then we must also make other Cypriot communities an equal partner, otherwise you are making the TCs and GCs as the only communities in Cyprus, which is not the case and which is also not fair as well as being a Racist policy towards the Armenians and the Maronites.!
I appologise if I mis read your proposal which brough on the above argument. If I got it wrong, perhaps you can write out your proposal in detail for us to see.!
