WARNING: ONGOING EVENT

This is a currently ongoing event. Updates / Corrections will be sent through the channels and added at the end of this section as needed. Please take all information presented with a grain of salt as while everything is attempted to be independently verified, the topic is highly contested and politicised.

Please contact CHC Media with evidence if you spot any inaccuracies within the article.

Fact-Box

Not necessarily in chronological order.

  • According to some sources1, the approval of the Parliament for the Special Advisor is not required, however, the votes are done due to tradition.
  • The Prime Minister Cookies has agreed to the Parliament holding a hearing for TeddyTaps for his 'nomination'. Whether or not PM Cookies has made this agreement with the promise of adhering to the parliament's decision is debated.
  • The Parliament holds a hearing for TeddyTaps considering a vote on his 'nomination' as special advisor.
  • TeddyTaps was appointed as a Special Advisor by the PM Cookies, which was highly debated by the Parliamentarians, as the Parliament voted to not accept TeddyTaps as the Special Advisor.

1: The said sources consist of opinions of those advocating for, and an inquiry ticket opened to the Supreme Court. Justice Cooleagles has stated; "I mean. I'm led to believe that approval is not needed; however, if the PM has already been getting approval from Parliament then you might as well just continue (it can't hurt). Additionally, it is more checks and balances as well. It makes sense to me also though that the AG would need approval but the Special Advisor not because the Ag represents the entire government, while the sepcial advisor only works within the Office of the Prime Minister."

TeddyTaps at his parliamentary hearing following the inauguration on Saturday, CHC Media.

During the inauguration ceremony on Saturday, messages of unity, collaboration and a new path forward was emphasized by all speech-givers from all branches of government. However, the Parliamentarians and the Cabinet Members are already at odds with each other, with a debate around the new Special Advisor to the Office of the Prime Minister: TeddyTaps.

Two hearings were held almost immediately following the inauguration ceremony: one for the legally grounded nomination of Cherub as the Minister of Construction, and the tradition-based[potentially debated - see factbox] hearing for TeddyTaps for the position of Special Advisor.

While the chronological order could not be independently verified, it is known that the Parliament has voted overwhelmingly against TeddyTaps, and that TeddyTaps was appointed as the Special Advisor by the Prime Minister.

Speaker of Parliament Fred commented:

"Originally Cookiez had told Parliament that she would respect tradition and allow Parliament to hold a hearing and vote, never once did she inform Parliament regarding her updated decision."

According to the evidence the Speaker has provided to the T&P team, the fact that the Prime Minister had agreed to the Parliament having a vote seems to be correct, however, due to a lack of an official disclosure by the Cabinet, and the fact that the most of the Cabinet has not returned to the T&P staff so far, this could not be verified with the Cabinet members. Furthermore, points such as whether the PM was meaning the vote to be an advisory or a binding one may still be debated.

Speaker of Parliament Fred's Position

One of the sparking points of the event was an announcement made by the speaker of parliament fred regarding the hearings and the results of the votes held by the parliament, in the official government outlets, where he used wording such as "record of condescending and inappropriate behavior towards members of the community and the government at large" and "we feel he is arguably the worst nominee for this position in the entirety of Stratham" When asked about, Mr Speaker commented on the announcement as following, while making clear that these were not accusations, but his opinions and record of events.

"My announcement was discussed with DoE Minister Mega and the rest of the cabinet today. I answered and addressed their questions and concerns to the best of my ability. A lot of people have been personally bothered by the wording of the statement, and I will admit that it was very hyperbolic and could have been worded nicer. Ultimately Parliament decided to make that statement based off of a lot of evidence we have collected regarding TeddyTaps230, upon sharing this information with the cabinet DoE Minister Mega was able to understand why Parliament had made the the comments it did. I am truly sorry if people found the statement to be hurtful and unprofessional, the past few days have been incredibly heated between Parliament and the Executive Branch and I would like to see a calming in the behavior from both sides. Parliament decided to release that statement after a majority of MPs approved it, and there was lots of evidence presented to the MPs to warrant the statement's wording. Again, I would like to apologize if I personally hurt anyone with the wording of that statement, ultimately I would like to see things mend between Parliament and the Executive Branch, let's work together to make that happen."

Mr Speaker critisized that the Prime Minister Cookies had agreed to let the Parliament make a vote,[debated] and then decided to ignore the result of the vote and continued ahead with the appointment of Ted.

"I approached Cookiez privately regarding the matter before bringing it into the public eye. I had reached out last night to ask why this decision was made and who made the decision. Originally Cookiez had told Parliament that she would respect tradition and allow Parliament to hold a hearing and vote, never once did she inform Parliament regarding her updated decision. Cookiez said that the decision to not tell Parliament and to promote Ted before our vote could take place was a decision that involved multiple people. When I had asked her who all made the decision she refused to tell me. I then expressed that not informing Parliament who made the decision was shady and might upset my MPs as we would like answers. Cookiez continued to refuse to answer the question."

After the above statement, Mr Speaker provided his personal views on the situation, which made clear was opinions that he was not claiming to be facts;

"I personally find it suspicious that Cookiez refuses to tell me who helped make this decision. She said it was a genuine mistake and I am more than willing to believe her, but the fact that she won't mention who was involved in these decisions make me wonder what she's hiding and why. I stand for government transparency and always have, in fact I've been more than happy to provide the full transcripts to these hearings without any issue. In my opinion it's clear that the Executive Branch does not intend to fully cooperate with Parliament. DPM Cherub has previous told me to stay away from Ted out of an abundance of caution, so that begs the question, why was he appointed? And more importantly, why did Cookiez feel the need to subvert Parliamentary tradition?"

Executive Offices Act

During the confusion, yesterday afternoon, the Parliamentarian Ryan had proposed a legislation titled 'Executive Offices Act', in an attempt to clear out the ambiguity. However, the said legislation included that the Special Advisor(s) shall be appointed by the Prime Minister with a majority vote confirmation by Parliament.

This was later claimed as a mistake by Parliamentarian Ryan, and was removed in a re-submission of the act into the parliament later in the day. It should be noted that original document, which had included the parliamentary oversight provision was created on 5th of April, way before any of these events.

Change #1

22:28 Monday, May 15, 2023 (UTC)

The article has been renamed to "Parliament and Executive Brawl Over Special Advisor Appointment" due to:

Small typos and mistakes were corrected as well.

Advertisement