Debate on The Clockmakers' Registration Act

Official report · Assembly of SchwartzistanSession 1974 · col. 15946

The Speaker: The House will come to order. The Bill stands for its third reading. The Minister.

Anja Neitzvaur (Minister of Chronology): I move the third reading. I am asked why the Bill is necessary. It is necessary because the clockmakers have asked for it, and because the Ministry has agreed with them. The printed Bill says it better than I can: Administered by the Ministry of Chronology. I ask the House to pass it.

Otto Salm (The Ostrand; The Continuity Party): Speaker, The Ostrand has had a hard year. I say that not against the Bill but so that the Minister remembers it when the fees are fixed. I have read the Bill for what it does to the record, which is the only reading that matters, and it does nothing to the record. I read the clause. Offences under this Act are tried before the Court of Chronological Offences. The calendar is the calendar. The licence is a small thing to ask of a clockmaker, and the clockmakers have said so themselves. The Bill should pass and I shall vote for it. [The Line!]

Paul Klasen (The Ostrand; The Continuity Party): Mr. Speaker, The Continuity Party supports every measure that keeps the record whole and opposes every measure that does not. This one keeps it whole. In The Ostrand, which I have the honour to sit for, the Bill will be read at the market cross and understood by half. I have no observation on the reckoning of years, which is the Ministry's business and not mine. The schedule is plain enough. Offences under this Act are tried before the Court of Chronological Offences. I cannot vote for the Bill as it stands and I shall not. [Hear, hear.]

Karl Hauk (The Osmoor; The Continuity Party): Mr. Speaker, The Continuity Party supports every measure that keeps the record whole and opposes every measure that does not. This one keeps it whole. The calendar is the calendar. The licence is a small thing to ask of a clockmaker, and the clockmakers have said so themselves. The people of The Osmoor will ask what it costs them, and I should like to be able to tell them. My party will divide the House on the Bill.

Willem Bohm (The Capital District; The Continuity Party): Mr. Speaker, I have read the Bill for what it does to the record, which is the only reading that matters, and it does nothing to the record. The people of The Capital District will ask what it costs them, and I should like to be able to tell them. The Bill concerns dates, and the House does not argue about dates. It passes Bills about them. I have the Bill before me and the House has it before it. I oppose the third reading. [Shame.]

Jonas Ilgen (The Capital District; The Reed Party): Speaker, The land pays for everything in the end. The Reed Party will vote as the land would vote if it could. The Capital District has had a hard year. I say that not against the Bill but so that the Minister remembers it when the fees are fixed. The Bill concerns dates, and the House does not argue about dates. It passes Bills about them. I have the Bill before me and the House has it before it. My party will divide the House on the Bill. [Interruption.]

Otto Brenn (Norrfeld; The Continuity Party): Speaker, The Continuity Party has one thing to say on the Bill and it is this: the record is whole, the Bill leaves it whole, and there is nothing in it that the Ministry of Chronology has not already seen and approved. Nothing irregular. I repeat: nothing. [The Line!]

The Minister, in reply, said that the points raised were answered in the printed Bill and that the Ministry would consider the rest.

The question being put, a division was called for, and the members went to the lobbies.

The Speaker: The Ayes have it. The Bill is passed and will go to the Grand Chancellor for assent.

The House then proceeded to the next Order of the Day.