It failed to get the votes required to come up for consideration (3/5). Still, I appreciate the engagement of yours with the mechanic, having more proposals up for considerations increases our chances to get things done.
[X] Plan a Red Poker
-[X] Let's All Be Reasonable
-[X] Let's give them a reason to trust us
-[X] Demand Estonia
-[X] Get the Red Army in
-[X] Subordinate the Engineers to the Soviets
This is my proposal, a small gamble on the German side but without so much to lose
So, might as well draft my own plan with my agenda suggestions:
[X]Plan Delaying For The People's Victory
[X]Let's All Be Reasonable
[X]Let's give them a reason to trust us
[X]Narva is Ours
[X]Get The Red Army in
[X]Keep the Department in Sovnarkom
Peace treaty: This plan attempts to sidestep active cooperation with the Germans due to concerns about the UK ramping up the support of the whites. We should not make an enemy out of a superpower in our current position. We miss out on technological and industrial aid for now, though this could also be renegotiated once if we capture Crimea before Baku. I mean, half the technical aid for half the goals would probably be on the table.
On the subject of them stationing troops in Ukraine, I think the Commisars trying to call the bluff are advocating for this more because of wishful thinking rather than solid reasoning. I don't think Germany is desperate enough to just outright give up on their Ukranian puppet, especially considering the disposition of their military government. So I think Sverdlov has the right idea - they want leverage on us by occupying the area, we counter by stationing our own soldiers in their. Meaning that any attempt to pull of what France did in 1923 is liable to trigger and active shooting war, and the subsequent denial of any reperations. Additionally, this demand is so self-evidently reasonable that denying probably requires further concessions (a state not being allowed to put troops into their territory?) and the pressure method turns into a military burden on Germany rather than a pistol aimed at our head for leverage. Under these conditions, Germany might eventually just give up on their Ukranian puppet due to the military burden, without us demanding this upfront in the negotiations.
Aside from that, I think seizing Narva gives us a nice logistical link and a little buffer, no reason not to take the free port being offered.
In regards to politics: I think Sverdlovs power grabs should be countered by forcing compromise. Putting the DepTech into the hands of trade unions is a very, very appealing idea in the abstract. I like empowering the trade unions. But I think with the present situation we need to focus and centralize, rather than a dozen seperate projects improving industry in general. There are key technologies we need, we let all those projects run in parall. Additionally, technical decisions really need to be made by engineers and educated people, project management is taught for a reason.
Onto my suggested agenda motions, which I will leave unvoted until my question is answered.
Edit: With the available information, I'm proposing my motions unedited. I would appreciate votes as usual.
[X]Rural Food Security Act
Motion To Add To The Agenda: The current method of seizing grain is causing a number of internal issues, especially due to both a lack of proper data regarding agricultural production. This motion proposes to expand on Prodrazverstka by including concrete and clear standards for guarantueeing the storage of subsistence and harvest grain for agricultural producers, in order to avoid famines in the countryside.
Reason For Agenda Item: With the current lack of objective data, the provisional nature of our adminstration, lower presence of key party members in rural areas and the continuing issue of plain old corruption, the current policy of grain seizure runs the risk of causing starvation in rural areas by seizing grain excessively. Furthermore, the potential return of the Ukranian heartlands, reduction of reperations and introduction of agricultural machinery with certain diplomatic developments lessen the pressures on agricultural producers somewhat, making this a good time for reform. The people's government has an obvious interest in avoiding starvation among any segment of the population, but especially those who food production depends on. Giving the peasentry some protection against bad harvests and excessive seizures would be very useful in building popular legitimacy, preventing rural insurgency and general hostility among agricultural producers. This also ensures regional agricultural production doesn't collapse due to bad harvest or corruption creating a manpower deficit in agricultural production.
Proposed Policy Direction: This motion proposes the setting of standards for a minimum grain storage allowance in rural communities based on the number of people in the household/village and known agricultural production, to be updated as census data and agricultural information becomes more available. This would mean creating a formal set of rule guaranteeing that "the quantity needed for sowing and subsistence of the household", as per decree on food procurement, is kept by the peasentry. To achieve this, this motion proposes to regulate the storage of the food security grain which is to be legally protected against seizure, except in cases of emergency declarations of famines by the local government. Grain must be declared as part of this basic food reserve upfront of any inspection. Should an emergency allowing the seizure of grain be declared, the upper Soviets are to be immediately notified and shall investigate the basis promptly. The government shall strive to replace the seized grain after the emergency ends as soon as possible. In cases where local officials seize this protected grain without emergency powers or misuse emergency powers, formal charges shall be filed against them due to their abuse of power and they shall be dismissed from office if sufficient evidence is shown against them. Peasents are to be swiftly informed and educated on the legal guidelines protecting their food storage by officials not affiliated with the local adminstration, as well to be taught on how to bring charges against officials who seized their basic food supply in order to ensure these guidelines are being followed.
Here I basically try my hand at a structural reform. With the reduction of food reparations to Germany and the likely return of the Ukrainian Heartlands, this motion tries to lessen the burden on the actual peasentry in an effort to prevent over taxation of grain by giving them a formal right to a minimal amount of grain. It's a step forward that hopefully buys us some time until we can phase this policy out in favour of something actually functional. For the sake of information, I will also note this policy is under the control of Skobelev (PC for Food) and thus unaffected by the current chaos in agriculture (Milyutin).
[X]Red Army Reform Investigation
Motion To Add To The Agenda: The current power of the red army is woefully inadequate, with the RSFR being in the midst of a civil war and potentially threatened by German troops. This motion proposes tasking the Red Army, specifically it's high ranking officers, with the investigation of its most pressing weaknesses, lessons learned by from the ongoing civil war and the creation of future military reform plan to address those weaknesses to SurNaKom.
Reason For Agenda Item: Military reform in the Red Army is of obvious interest to the people's government. And while the current resources to actually implement those plans are scarce, having the knowledge of what those resources are upfront would allow the military modernization to be done more smoothly when those resources are available. The creation of the necessary war production for the modernization is also a slow and gradual process, allowing SurNaKom to make better decisions about how to provide the basis for the people's defense.
Proposed Policy Direction: This motion proposes tasking the high-ranking military officers with a comprehensive investigation of the Red Army's military shortcomings, in addition to investigating doctrinal soundness and appropriateness under the unique conditions of the civil war. The People's Commisar for Military Affairs would thank be tasked with overseeing and directing the drafting of short-term military plan achievable under present conditions by the highest-ranking officers to increase military power alongside a long-term plan to be implemented later, under conditions of peace. These plans shall than be presented towards SovNarKom, to be implemented in due time. The compiling of these plans will take time and would allow SurNavKom to implement military reform once resources are available, meaning a sensible amount of time can be taken to draw up the plans for military reform. And even small gains from the short-term plan would allow the People's Government to consolidate quicker, thus securing our position somewhat.
This is just fairly straightforward. We are in a civil war, surrounded by enemies. Somebody should probably make a plan about how to make our army less shit.
[X] Plan Delaying For The People's Victory
-[X]Let's All Be Reasonable
-[X]Let's give them a reason to trust us
-[X]Narva is Ours
-[X]Get The Red Army in
-[X]Keep the Department in Sovnarkom
I like this plan
Edit:
[X]Rural Food Security Act
[X]Red Army Reform Investigation
[X] Let's All Be Reasonable
[X] We've made our bed with the Germans now
[X] Demand Estonia
[X] Get the Red Army in
[X] Keep the Department in Sovnarkom
[X] Plan Delaying For The People's Victory
-[X] Let's All Be Reasonable
-[X] Let's give them a reason to trust us
-[X] Narva is Ours
-[X] Get The Red Army in
-[X] Keep the Department in Sovnarkom
I appreciate the support. I did reformat my plan to be in compliance with the voting guidelines, so I would humbly request that you edit your post to not include spaces between [X] and the item.
In light of the present disorder and confusion, the Sovnarkom executive committee requests in that in the future, all people's commissars adhere to the following guidelines when voting on agenda items:
1) Votes are to begin with [X], after which, without any spacing, one is to include the name of the agenda item, without any written description of the agenda item included.
THIS shall be considered a correct vote:
[X]The Narodnik Knows the Peasants Best
The following variants shall be incorrect, and in future vote tallies may be summarily voided:
1) Votes are to begin with [X], after which, without any spacing, one is to include the name of the agenda item, without any written description of the agenda item included.
[X]Plan Delaying For The People's Victory
-[X]Let's All Be Reasonable
-[X]Let's give them a reason to trust us
-[X]Narva is Ours
-[X]Get The Red Army in
-[X]Keep the Department in Sovnarkom
[X]Sverdlov's Ploy Succeeds
[X]We've made our bed with the Germans now
[X]Demand Estonia
[X]Get the Red Army in
[X]Keep the Department in Sovnarkom
These seem like the clear best options imo. As for the voting thing, I think the issue is just that the guide says for there to be no space between the [X] and the vote, while most people are used to having a space and the vote options presented come with a space written in if you just copy paste it
2) Plan voting is permitted, but all plans must be denominated in the same format. This means that the precise text of the original plan must be copied. Finally, when proposing a plan, individual items in the plan should adhere to the format outlined in 1).
[X]Sverdlov's Ploy Succeeds
[X]Let's give them a reason to trust us
[X]Demand Estonia
[X]Get the Red Army in
[X]Subordinate the Engineers to the Soviets
[X]Let's All Be Reasonable
[X]Let's give them a reason to trust us
[X]Demand Estonia
[X]Get the Red Army in
[X]Empower the Trade Unions
On the treaty side of things let's force them into an awkward position where they can't easily disentangle with us as we slowly damage them.
On the internal side of things bring reasonable is always nice. Empowering the trade unions with this technical body will allow technology to be adapted in a lot healthier ways for the workers and keep the economy dynamic by avoiding a central body prone to corruption being the central lynchpin of the economy.
Please note that failure to adhere to the voting practices will only lead to your vote being voided on a case-by-case basis; all instances of incorrect votes are dealt with by the 3-man administrative committee, who may allow certain votes which accord with their political sensibilities to be counted even if they are not written in the correct format.
@Curby A question for the next agenda motion: How were food seizures implemented in this timeline? Are there any notable differences from the one in our own, given the greater role of the SRs? Second question, is there any information available to parliament about Milyutin's condition?
On the matter of food seizures, they were somewhat lighter than IOTL, and tended to involve more representation from local peasants, so they were not quite as repressive and did not provoke the same degree of discontent. Overall, our food production is in a much better situation than IOTL because there's been much less fighting in Central Russia.
Regarding Milyutin, he is currently going on "strike" in an attempt to convince Sovnarkom to reverse its previous decision on the agricultural survey. Sovnarkom is planning to address this matter next week, where they will likely vote in a new commissar of agriculture.
[X]Let's All Be Reasonable
[X]Let's give them a reason to trust us
[X]Demand Estonia
[X]Get the Red Army in
[X]Empower the Trade Unions
[X]Red Army Reform Investigation
[X]Rural Food Security Act
[X]Let's All Be Reasonable
[X]Let's give them a reason to trust us
[X]Demand Estonia
[X]Keep the Deutsches Heer Out
[X]Keep the Department in Sovnarkom
