CONAWAY GOVERNMENT

BACKGROUND:

The Conaway Government expired between the General Election in 2010 and the Snap Election in 2012. The Government were a coalition government between the Congregationists and the Moderate Assembly - the first coalition government since 1978 where both parties earlier had formed a short-lived coalition reign. The Government were headed by the General Chairman of the Congregationists, Prime Minister Matthew Conaway from the Canton of Llianes. The Moderate Assembly were led by Senator Amelia Charleton from the Canton of Mercani who where appointed Chief of the Treasury and Deputy Chair of the People's Government.

AGENDA:

The Government were the first non-socialist Government since 1995. Focus for the new, right-winged Government were primarily combating the effects from the 2008-2009 financial crisis who striked down at Angalicania with extra toughness in comparison to many other European countries. The Government quickly repealed vast parts of the General Economic Recovery Program initiated by the Socialist Government even though they were forces to keep some substantial partes due to legal obligations and reasons of continuity. In early March 2010 the Senate confirmed a new Financial Recovery Program which in vast had been presented during the election campaign in 2010.

The Conaway Government did also increase spending on military, especially in Azali Zamber and an official bailout to the farmer's community were made in May 2010. The People's Government did also put extra state funding for welfare services: healthcare, public education, disability insurance and age care, as a part of the Welfare Protections Guarantee. In early 2012, a major reform of the Superannuation and Pensions system were made with the support of the Force of Nationalists, half of the Socialist Deputies in the Chamber of Deputies and eight (8) Senators of the Nation.

In it's inaugural adress in 2010, Chairman Conaway announced that the Government were to keep it's promise during the election campaign to stay outside of the Eurozone. Instead, bailouts should be requested from the IMF and the European Central Bank. The establishment of an obligations system in the framework of the financial recovery program were also made during 2010 and in August the bill came to the floor of the Senate of the Nation. The Conaway Government did also nominate several new Chancellors, Agency Heads and Justices since the long Socialist reign.

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENCE

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

DEPARTMENT OF THE IMPERIAL FEDERATION-ISLANDS

2012 SNAP-ELECTION

BACKGROUND

When Matthew Conaway were elected as General Chairman of the Congregationists in 2006, the two traditional factions of more Conservative respectively the more Social Humanist falangs had been in open war since the decade begun. According to all polls, the faction war had badly damaged the image of the Congregationist Party as a trustworthy and stable party. It was one reasons of why the Congregationists had such a rough time fighting against the Socialists in the elections.  During Conaway's time as General Chairman, he tried unify these factions through a harder grip of the party organization but more inclusive process of the political development.

General Chairman Conaway together with the President of the National Executive, Councilor Alan Navarro-Salazar and General Secretary of the Party Minister Michael Rowlings imposed several changes in the party's procedure and work. The General Chairmanship were given to powers of veto- and ousting the Cantonal Congregationists Leaders, all Committee Managers and Committee Chairs in the Chamber and the Senate were chosen directly from the General Chairmanship, the General Chairman only after advise from the Joint Assembly Caucus and National Executive were given joint autonomy to adopt election campaign manifestos and political programmes. 

Conaway, who belonged to tech more Social Humanist falang did however not impose all of his political views over the party's more conservative falang. He created several political Working Panels directly under the General Chairman on different political subjects who were given responsibility of developing policies to the Conference and the Joint Assembly Caucus. Chairman Conaway made sure that the Committees shared a wide of political directions; both Conservatives, Social Humanists and more Liberal members of Congregationists in the General Assembly. He did also allow the factions to form official, ideological associations and conferences inside the Joint Assembly Caucus. Chairman Conaway believed that it would make possibility of official negotiations and compromises between the falangs. 

The Conservatives were however not fully satisfied even though the open faction war did calm down, especially in front of the public. Even though Conaway didn't force through his, more social humanist views in questions of Welfare, Social Protections, Climate Change and Immigration, the party made a more moderate turn in issues of LGBTQ-rights and Abortion which led to heavy internal criticism from the Conservatives. 

When the party begun climbing in the polls before the 2010 election, and after the electoral success in 2010 - the faction conflicts diminished and the Conservative faction begun rally around Chairman Conaway. The official conferences who coordinated the Conservatives respectively the Socialist Humanists begun to evaporate and the party became more unified when it progressed in polls, cantonal/local elections and further on also the General Election.

THE WOUND RE-OPENS

Already in March 2011 discussions regarding the future of the Congregationist Party begun rising internally. Even though the party still enjoyed a bit of electoral inebriation after the election success in 2010, the party had suffered several severe and unprecedented electoral losses in the elections forthcoming. During early 2011, important elections in Cities, Municipalities and Cantons took place. Most prominently, the General Election of the Canton of the Autumn Islands. At the Autumn Islands, the Socialist Party had governed the last term, since 2008 but the Congregationists had done a remarkable electoral success in the General State Election in 2010 winning half of the State Deputies and three Senators of the Nation. Therefor it was viewed as a swing-Canton which the Congregationists thought they would win easily in the Cantonal Elections in 2011.

The electoral defeat were severe, the party backed down from 38 Cantonal Senators to only 17. The party did also lost the mayoralties of Porto Sacramento (the Capital of the Autumn Islands), Saint Gillian-Cayune, Stanley Island, Wennersthen and additional 5 cities/municiapalites. The Socialist Government could continue govern with the confidence-and-supply of the minor Communist Workers Party and the Congregationists were degraded from Official Opposition with the position of Leader of the Official Opposition, to Other Opposition i favor of the Moderate Assembly. The Leader of the Autumn Islands Congregationists, Mitchell d'Romagnio were forced to resign.

The Conservative falang took issue with the Autumn Islands Congregationists. The Autumn Islands Congregationists  were seen as one of the most Conservative Branches of the Congregationists party. They ment that the more socially humanist political direction of Conaway had resulted the electoral defeat. The 2011 electoral losses fed the underlying, resting anger inside of the more Conservative Congregationalists. However, the party Leadership didn't react in the same peaceful and constructive manner as in 2006. This time, many of the well-experienced and strategic officers had either left State politics or were busy with heavier political assignments  as for example ministerial positions. The internal matters were instead dealt with by the more junior Chairman of the Joint Assembly Caucus and new staffers with no historically experience of the issues.

INTERMEZZO

September 2011. The annual Conference had been convened in Carmichael and one of the many issues on the agenda is a political programme regarding social rights and equalities. The new National Executive had earlier decided to reach out to more Urban, Liberal and Youngers voters. They believe that the electoral defeat in the Autumn Islands is a result of that the social policy of the party doesn't approach to the younger and more urban generation (living in for example Porto Sacramento) who had a more progressive view in these matters. The programme has been written by a Working Panel under the Joint Assembly Caucus. The composition of the Committee had however been much smaller than the Working Committees in 2006-2007 and therefor, it's mostly made up by current Councilors, Committee Managers/Chairs and Leadership Officials, who the Conservative faction viewed as Social Humanist.

During the summer had the Conservative falang instead written an alternative, much more Conservative political programme. It statues that the Congregationalists should have a firm and strong opposition against same sex-marriages (and legal equalivants), gender reassignments and the so-called Queer Movement and everything it stand's for. The programme statued that the Congregationalists should work for making abortion (in other case than rape, incest or if the mother's life was threatened) illegal, work ''strategically and determined'' to prohibit same-sex couples as parents or guardians, prohibit sexual education until the year of 15,  work strategically and determined for re-establish the Angalicanian Church as the Official State Church and prohibit all forms of ''undifferentiated, radical gay propaganda directed to young children''. The programme did also statue a harder immigrational policy with restrictions on family reunions except for children, parents and siblings, asylum immigrational quotas, TRP (temporary residence permissions) and a tougher policy on Welfare and Healthcare for immigrants.  

The Conference became the intermezzo for the conflict were the National Executive on sitting meeting decided to, although the programme were sent out in the papers, ban a vote on ''the Programme as a whole or the Programme in contrast to the proposal laid out from the Working Panel''. They ment that because of the proposed Programme as a whole was the matter which should be processed - amendments and changes could be made, but the Programme as a whole couldn't be alternated. The Conservative branch of the Congregationists reacted with fury and rage openly scolded the Leadership in the lectern and declared them losing ''all confidence of the current organizational- and partly also the political, leadership''. With the entire media corps present, the story of the party in chaos spread during the entire country in a couple of days. However, it was only in the beginning of the Conference and leading officials as for example most of the Councilors of State wasn't present. Therefore they were relatively spared from the bang. It was rather the National Executive who gained the wave of criticism. 

The Conference however, with margin, went on the proposal of the National Executive which gave them really no time to transform their proposed programme as a whole into separate propositions or amendment. One of their leading characters, Cantonal Senator Juan August d'Bresca from the Imperial Federation-Islands rallied the Conservative focus to focus on a single amendment. They took strike at the same sex marriage and it's legal equalivants. A long, emotional and heated debate begun arising and after five (5) hours of the debate, the President of the National Executive Jonathan Ci'Calantra decided to close the debate (in accordance with the powers given to the National Executive relating the arrangement and procedures of the Conference). The Conservative faction saw it as an attempt of censorship, at the Speaker's List remained mostly Conservatives which they saw as a proof of the current Leaderships desire to shut down the debate in bias to the Social Humanist falang. With ten (10) votes in different, the Conference went on the proposal from the National Executive and remained in favor of the same-sex marriage. 

The day after, General Chairman Conaway held his Annual Conference Speech who focused on the Economy, the Financial Sector/ Banking Bailout Affair, Rebuilding of the Country after the Financial Crisis and contained al lot of acid political strikes at the Socialist economic management in the years earlier. It was unifying subjects which rallied and re-encouraged the delegates but rather cloaked the criticism (once again) from the public eye rather than evaporated it. The same night, a group of leading Conservatives met at a hotel room at the Conference for planning. Some of them was Cantonal Senator d'Bresca, Councilor Conway, former Leader d'Romagnio, Mercani former Minister Armstrong, Councilor Brinckerman, Senator Maloney, Senator Holdinger, Senator Katz-Hagerman, Councilor van Leightner and Deputy Murray. In addition, many Mayors, Counsels and Cantonal Senators participated.

The day after was the day of election of a new National Executive. The elections was in thought uncontroversially, most of the Members and President Ci'Cilantra stood for re-election which a united Board of Elections had proposed to re-elect. The group led by d'Bresca and Councilor Brinckerman however nominated Councilor Sigrid Montgomery - one of the most hard-line Conservative Councilors of State - for the position as President of the National Executive. Even though a Board of Elections with acorum had proposed re-election of President Ci'Calantra, the faction felt so angry and furious at the current leadership that they demanded direct change. Montgomery was a hard-line Conservative, in many opinions significally more Conservative than even many members of the Conservative faction. However, Councilor Montgomery had an sympathetic image and was a likable person which many, even Social Humanist members, considered intelligent and polite. 

In policy, President Ci'Calantra wasn't especially much more Social Humanist than for example Cantonal Senator d'Bresca - but he became a symbol of Social Humanist faction which the Conservatives considered governing the party. That was another reason why many delegates at the Conference didn't really saw it as a factional choice but rather a personal. Many Social Humanist delegates who maybe had caucused with Ci'cilantra if the factional differences were more obvious did therefore vote at Montgomery as she had a strong reputation of winning elections and getting the job done. With a margin of eight (8) votes, Councilor Montgomery was elected new President of the National Executive in a shock-election nobody thought she neither the Conservative faction could win.  

The other, definitely more Social Humanist members of the current Congregationist Leadership took the loss hard and saw it as a declaration of factional war. President Ci'Cilantra was in the end; a good, well-thought of and hard-working politician with high ambitions for the party and who only tried keeping the party together. Instead, he became to symbol of the Conservative rage and the start of the new factional war. In October 2011, the more Social Humanist Congregationist rallied for the first time since 2008 and met at the Adenport Palace. Chairman Conaway, Councilor Catarane, Councilor Rohne, Councilor Sinclair, Councilor Martínez and Senators Black, O'Harris, d'Echta and Sandford, Cantonal Senator e'Blitzmeyer from Mt. Levrain, Cantonal Senator Rosso from Roseport together with Deputies Dll'Streggia, Brohman, Coyhne, d'Cancio, and McLaughlan became the Official, Lead Social Humanist Formation during the following months ahead. 

2011 DEVELOPMENT

In November 2011, the Conservative Group discussed an eventual leadership spill in the Chamber or maybe the Senate as a vote-of-no-confidence for the current Leadership and maybe even Chairman Conaway, forcing him to resign. They chose to direct their attempts to the Leader, Deputy Leader and Chief Executive Whip in the Chamber of Deputies. The Congregationists Deputies Leader and Second Chairman, Brendan Dll'Streggia was an former Prime Minister of the Canton of Llianes - the home-canton of Chairman Conaway. He'd served as a Deputy since 1990 and was a senior member of the General Assembly and stood very close to Chairman Conaway - being a mentor, close friend and trusted advisor. 

The Deputy Leader, Councilor Sinclair did also belong to the Social Humanist faction of the party and even though he was seen as marginally more independent from Chairman Conaway's Office than Dll'Streggia - he had very social humanist views especially in Healthcare, Education and Welfare policy affairs. He was a natural target for the group who saw the Deputies Leadership as Chief Architects behind the party's more humanist, liberal views in social policy and gatekeepers to secure the Social Humanist-factions power of the party. The Chief Executive Whip, William ''Bill'' Blanchello was a centrist politician who were generally regarded as neutral in the factional battles but had a key office as Lead Whip which the Conservative faction thought they had to achieve in order to regain control of the party's policy.

Already the week between the 16th and 23rd of November, rumors had gotten out in corridors that the Conservatives tried to out Chairman Conaway. Councilor Catarane, one of the closest allies to Chairman Conaway informed him of the rumors. The procedure to call an extra Convention and elect a new General Chairman of the Party was however complicated. Chairman Conaway, in the believe of  that the oust-faction tried to get rid of him by direct measures made it even more complicated by changed the Order of Procedure for Conference convention of the National Executive Board. Conaway as General Chairman had the power of making delegational decision. The decision declared that the General Chair of the Party (him) had to approve the convention of extra-Conferences with the only exception if the National Executive and Board of Auditors jointly took a unanimous decision. It effectively made the procedure much harder to oust him and he believed that he sat safely.

The 25th of November 2011, Councilor Carl Brinckerman and Deputy Al Murray informed the Chairman of the Joint General Assembly Caucus of the Congregationists Party, that they wanted a spill of the Leadership in the Chamber of Deputies. The Caucus Chair, Councilor Bill Kadenza - a long time Senator became surprised of that the Conservative faction saw to oust the Deputies Leadership and not the General Chairmanship. In order with the Standing Order's of the Caucus, he put the decision to the General Chair to decide. Chairman Conaway, who was at a European Council summit wasn't able to manage the issue directly and the same night the newspapers and the media had gotten the information. The story about the Congregationists in chaos begun erasing again and creating a media debacle at home.

The day afterwards, Chairman Conaway returned and showed how things should be managed. He extra-convened the Joint Caucus and in a heated and dominant speech - he demanded calm and order in the Party. He also informed that he had no intention to call a Leadership Spill thus he had ''full and affirm confidence in our very Great Leader and Deputy Leader of all State Deputies in convention''. The Conservative faction however, although they were impressed by Conaways authority over the party, defied him and the morning after (the 27th of November) they sent a letter signed with 25 State Deputies and Senators of the Nation directly to the General Chairman calling for a spill to be put. Conaway called up all signers of the letter to his Office the same afternoon and informed them that the ''unprecedented and damaging internal conflicts created by this factional war'' must end with immediate action. He informed them of that he remained with confidence in the Deputies Leadership and wouldn't call a spill. He also threatened the members to ''review Committee memberships, privileges and other benefits tied to the Party'' so that ''only the most loyal members of the General Assembly received the few and most honorable spots of the parliamentary business'' if they continued create ''divison and chaos'' in the party. 

Chairman Conaway hoped that  a strong, solid and firm marking would create calm in the angry and heated up, Conservative faction. However this was a fatal mistake which in contrary made the members even more angry and humiliated. 

The 29th of November, the Council of Ministers convened at its regular weekly meeting. At the pre-meeting of Congregationist Councilors, the staunch Conservative Councilor of State, Sigrid Montgomery - Minister by Housing, Building and Urban Development together with fellow Conservative Councilors Carl Brinckerman, Education Minister and Roberto Conway, the powerful Chief of the General Secretariat raised issues with the ''growing unrest in the party and dissatisfaction against the current Leadership in the Deputies''. They thought that maybe would a spill be the ''best way forward to settle the issue once and for all''. Social Humanist Councilors of State for example Security Minister Simon Martínez, Defence Minister Sinclair and 2nd Cabinet Minister Catarane went on attack to Councilor Montgomery, Brinckerman and Conway calling the proposal ''naiv, stupid and divisive for the party - as well as potential dangerous to the National Security and Prosperity of the Country through creating unstable and unaccountable Government''. Councilor Catarane called out Montgomery for her involvement in the ousting of Ci'Cilanta for the Presidency of the National Executive Board. At contrary, Montgomery, Conway and Brinckerman said that the current oppression of the Conservative faction was the real reason of the division and unrest in the party and that the Leadership must take a more right-winged position in key, social affairs issues to keep the party united. It was a dripping point to Chairman Conaway who called the issue ''totally settled'' and declared that he alone had the power to call Leaderships spills, he did not intend to and the other Councilors of State should rather focus on their portfolios than ''internal party rumors creating conflicts and divise spills''.  

In early december 2011, discussion at the now regular Conservative faction meetings became arising relating to an eventual mass-resignation of Conservative Councilors as an alternative plan to oust Chairman Conaway and the Social Humanist governance of the party. However, many sittning Councilors of State for example Montgomery, Conway and and van Leightner felt uncomfortable to resign not even having served in two (2) full years. They believed that the strategy of a Leadership spill in the Chamber of Deputies was a better strategy as it didn't risk the party's governing authority but rather the integrity of the current Leadership and political direction. At the same time, many Lead Social Humanists called for the sacking of the ''backstabbing, disloyal and full of betrayal ultraconservative, brown muddy Gestapo-agents of the Ultraconservative faction Assembly''. Councilor Catarane, Councilor Rohne and Senator Black - all trusted advisors to Chairman Conaway called for him sacking the Councilors of State. But Chairman Conaway refused as it would be a proof to both the Socialist Opposition as for the Country that the Congregationists was incapable of governing and full of chaos and division. He also thought that many of the Conservative Councilors was hard-working, tough and effective Ministers which he didn't want to lose but rather keep close to him to be able to exercise authority over them. He feared what they could become if they became furious at him, bitter and free-of-work. 

2012 DEVELOPMENT

During the early 2012, the internal discussions and factional conflicts regarding the Leadership in the Deputies continued. The Conservative faction had during the late December 2011 had an informal summit at a Christmas Party at Councilor Brinckerman's Office at the Education and Culture Department. They'd agreed that the strategy to try oust Chairman Conaway through declaring no-confidence in his Deputies Leadership (as he as General Chairman had praised their work and repeatedly confirmed his full and loyal confidence in their leadership) was most effective and should continue with the pursuation of that during the winter and spring. However, they lacked the general support through the vast numbers of Deputies and Senators to succeed. That should soon be delivered to them.

The 15th of January, Leader (and Second Chairman) Dll'Streggia announced several changes in the Committee and Chairmanship Organization. In vast, negotiations had been made with the Moderate Assembly (who was the junior partner in the coalition of the People's Government) and the Socialist Opposition changing distribution of Chairmanships in Committees and Subcommittees. The Congregationist wanted more Foreign- and Economic Affairs Committee Chairmanships and traded them with Welfare and Social Affairs Committee to the Socialists as well as Green Collar and Rural Affairs Committees to the MA. The Leadership motivated it with ''the prospect of increasing the possibility of conducting legislative work in key areas to get the People's Governments ambitious agenda through the General Assembly''. However, it also ment that many long-time serving Deputies headed powerful Economic or Foreign Affairs Committees (or Subcommittees) lost their spots. Almost everyone of the new Chairmens was, according to the Conservative faction, Social Humanist. The Managerships in the old chairman-held Committees was also redistributed which made some Deputies formerly been Committee Chairs completely without leadership positions.

Earlier, it had mostly been individual Conservative State Deputies or Senators which'd plotted against the Leadership at the Conservative faction Meetings. After the re-organization, a general feeling of anger and disdain spread towards almost everyone of the Deputies which had lost Chair- or Managerships. The Conservative faction meetings therefore gained a larger support and participation in comparison to earlier and at their convention in early February 2012 - almost a hundred State Deputies and Senators of the Nation participated to discuss the current leadership and political direction. 

During the month following, the anger towards the Social Humanist factions cementation of power of the party increased dramatically. The discussions in the Caucus and the pre-meeting of the Council of Ministers became more and more heated and more and more infected between the factions. Chairman Conaway meanwhile in early 2012 became much less visible and present since major events at the international stage and in the European Union required him to be abroad or at other meeting very often. At the Caucus, Chairman Kandeza presided as usual but the absence of the dominant, unifying and resolut General Chairman Conaway changed the whole atmosphere making the discussions much less sensible and much more heated. During the pre-meetings of the Council of Ministers however (where at the Council at the large, Deputy Chairman Amelia Charleton from the M.A presided in Chairman Conaways absence) discussions arose regarding if Foreign Affairs Minister Conway (by portfolio the most senior Councilor) or Defence Minister Sinclair (as G.A Majority Leader) should preside. As Conway was a staunch Conservative and Sinclair a Social Humanist - the issue was also a battle of power between the factions. Permanent Secretary Catarane, himself a Social Humanist advocated for Melwin Sinclair as he thought that the link to the General Assembly was vital in the meetings discussion. At the meeting the 10th of February 2012, the Conservative factions in the Council therefore leaved the meeting in protest. 

When Chairman Conaway returned, he settled the issue by choosing Councilor Hessburger-Therninger as his Deputy to Preside at the pre-meetings. Hessburger-Therninger from Azali Zamber was one of the longest serving Congregationist Senators and served as the powerful Interior and Home Affairs Minister. He was in many policy areas more leaning to views of the the Conservative faction but hadn't been involved in the the factional battles at all. Consciously, he'd chosen not to participate at the factional meetings keeping himself above that and and was regarded as ''extreme neutral'' between the factional conflicts. Conaway knowingly chose him and motivated it with Hessburger-Therningers seniority. Most people accepted the compromise but the damage had already been done as the Conservative saw it as another proof of the Social Humanist factions cementation of power over the party. They called it ''the Born to Rule mentality which the Social Humanist faction is brainwashed with up to their head''. The day after, the story spread to the press who reported about the drama at the Congregationist pre-meeting of the Council of Ministers creating an even more embarrassing situation for them all.

The 18th of February 2012, two days before important elections around the Country, Chairman Conaway did a last attempt of reconcile between the factions (which became his last direct intervention). Together with Caucus Chair, Councilor Kadenza and Permanent Secretary Eduardo Catarane he convened Councilor Brinckerman, Councilor van Leightner and Councilor Montgomery from the Conservative faction together with Councilor Rohne, Councilor Black and Deputy Brohman from the Social Humanist faction. An initial mistake from Conaway side was to use Councilor Catarane as a mediating voice thus the Conservatives saw him as one of the furthermost Social Humanist factioneers. This angered the Conservative delegation already at the beginning of the meeting. Another mistake was the persons he chose to call, which he though was the Lead Representatives of the factions. In fact, Councilor van Leightner wasn't especially leading in the factional battle at all but rather caucused with the Conservatives of political opinions. In addition, she held a pretty thin portfolio as Chief Secretary of the Crisis Management Office and in many ways stood closer to Chairman Conaway in comparison to most other Conservatives as she formally worked at the Cabinet of State. Councilor Montgomery on other hand, although she was one the most Conservative of all Councilors of State, a pretty liked and well-thought-off Councilor who wasn't especially divisive as a character in the Social Humanist leads. Deputy Brohman on the other side was a strong Social Humanist who despised the Conservative faction but hadn't any formal Leadership Role and therefore wasn't especially influential. 

Chairman Conaway demanded calm of the factional leaders and the political battles to be settled internally. He said to be willing to compromise on his earlier decision that ''No major policy change or change of political direction in different areas could be made until the nest General Election in 2015'' and put up Working Panel's with Official Representatives from the factions on a few, specific issues but demanded the ''open and quite frankly, dangerous factional war'' to an end. He demanded the formal factional caucusing with organized meetings to end with immediate action and the settlement of ''all forms of'' open criticism to the Leaderships in the papers and openly at Caucus meetings and Conferences. 

The Conservative representatives made clear their objections and called for a ''General Policy and Ideological Affairs Review''. Chairman Conaway responded with that he was open to make som ''minor policy changes in the different specifics of a few policy areas'' but was of the believe that major policy changes must be made before, or after General State Elections. The Conservatives also called for more ''Propotional Representation'' of the factions in Leadership roles and Committee Lead position. For example, they demanded that at least two (2) out of five (5) Leadership Officials in the Deputies and Senate Leaderships respectively should be of each faction. The also called for the Second Chair to belong to the opposite faction as the General Chair as well as the Caucus Chair and Caucus Deputy Chairs to be split between the respective factions. Chairman Conaway refused and called in ''a formal and judicial cementation of the faction war rather than even a millimeter of solution of it''. They also expressed their criticism of the increased powers by the Permanent Secretary regarding appointments and policy coordination as ''Catarane, a known Social Humanist, is under significant and relevant criticism from the Conservatives and Traditionalist in his working methods of how he impose his personal views over the People's Governments structure and the party's Organization''. Councilor Catarane responded with fury and called the comments ''disgusting and totally irrelevant slurs from a pack of brownmuddy Conservatives in the Gestapo-Alliance''. Chairman Conaway marked strongly and said that the internal organization of the Cabinet of State and the People's Government was a matter for the Chairman of the People's Government with hus chosen advisors, and his alone.

The Social Humanist delegation didn't agree with Chairman Conaways proposal to dissolute the factional Alliances but said that the ''total eradication of all Conservative, internal organizations and caucuses'' must be the first step and that their Social Humanist caucusing was rather ''an administrative function to weight up the factional division created by the Conservatives''. They said that therefore, a separation must be done between the Conservative factioning ''creating chaos, division and conflicts'' and the Social Humanists ''creating a formal representation of the opinions of the party's real members''. The Conservative representatives responded that it was ''an ridiculous, unobjective and impartial lie regarding the reality of this party'' which they ment was ''governed by the idea of being born-to-govern'' by the Social Humanists'. 

The 20th of February 2012, Cantonal elections took place in the Cantons of Sarteni Pauley, the Imperial Federation-Island and Metropolium, and the Cities of Adenport, Lastrage, Callaghan Haven, Cathedra, Giugliano in Carrara and City of Llianes. At the Imperial Federation-Islands and in Sarteni Paeuley, the Congregationists held the premierships in different constellations and in Metropolium, it served as the Official Opposition. It also held the powerful and important mayoralties of Callaghan Haven, Cathedra, Giugliano in Carrara and the City of Llianes. In Adenport, the Congregationists governed together with the M.A who held the mayoralty and in Lastrage, it was the Official Opposition. The 2012 elections was the first really major elections after the 2010 Government, especially as Adenport and the Canton of the Imperial Federation-Islands was powerful devolved governments - important to pick- and keep up for the Congregationists Government. 

CRISIS MANAGEMENT

The 2012 elections was a crisis for the Congregationists. The party lost the power of governance and the premierships the Cantons of Sarteni Pauley and the Imperial Federation-Islands. At the IFI, the long standing, social democrat and independence party the Imperial Federation Party made a massive victory and became the largest party. Together with the Socialist, they could form a majority government which put the former Congregationists led coalition together with the Moderate Assembly, the Liberal Party and the Force of Nationalists out of office back to Opposition. In Sarteni Pauley, the Socialist Party won own majority Government and in addition, degregated the Congregationists from Official Opposition to Other Opposition in favor of the Moderate Assembly. The Congregationists also lost a plurality of the seats in the Assemblies of Callaghan Haven, Cathedra, Giugliano in Carrara and the City of Llianes. 

In Callaghan Haven, the Moderate Assembly won own majority-government as well as in Cathedra. In Giugliano in Carrara and the City of Llianes, the Socialist Party won (in the last however being forced to create a Coalition with the Left-Wing Greens, the Communists Worker's Party and the Llianes Initiative). In Adenport, the Congregationist also backed heavily but due to the success of the M.A they could continue govern - but with dramatically reduced power, influence and Counsels of the Congregationists, totally in opposite of their ambition to take the Mayorship. In Lastrage, the Congregationists backed so much so it lost its status as Official Opposition to Other Opposition in favor of the Moderate Assembly and also became smaller than the Communist Worker's Party.

The elections was a disaster for the Congregationists. Even if the polls had predicted a slight decrease in support for the party, nobody expected the crisis to be in such an extent. Already at the election night, President Montgomery and General Chairman Conaway met to discuss the crisis management of the severe and unprecedented crisis. Chairman Conaway feared that it could pour gas on fire to the incumbent factional conflicts and damage the party's unity, ability to get its legislative agenda through as well as governing the Country. President Montgomery ment that Chairman Conaway had to take real, efficient and clear measures which acknowledged the crisis elections and took it seriously. The same night, Chairman Conaway made a public announcement declaring that he was deeply saddened by the result and felt for all of those Congregationists around who'd lost their seats or offices due to the poor result.

The week after when the Chancellors of each respective Canton had signed and sealed the result, Chairman Conaway met with as well the General Leadership of the Party, the G.A Caucus, the National Executive Board and the Conference of Cantonal Leaders to discuss and anchor his proposals of change. 

Chairman Conaway blamed the local patriotic trend in IFI which'd culminated with the Financial Crisis as the reason why Congregationists voters abandoned their party in favor of the Imperial Federation Party. He also ment that the Financial Crisis impact on the communities and people in the working areas of Lastrage, Giugliano in Carrara and Cathedra as well as in Sarteni Pauley (as a folk fielder) damaged the party as they hadn't any clear answers on cantonal level.

He proposed to appoint an Investigate Panel under the General Chairmanship relating to the electoral defeats to get more clear answers to the results and to propose clear measures of Change. He also declared that he were going to meet the Conference of Cantonal Leaders more often to discuss and anchor national policy matters as well as urging the National Executive to hire more staff and personel (at the National Headquarters) specialized in local campaign and policy production.

However it disappointed many officials, especially the Cantonal Leaders who wanted dramatical change in the party's structure, policy and organization. Even though the Conference were split between Conservatives, Social Humanists and Centrist - they united in their demand of change which in all means had to reduce the power of the General Chairmanship and the National Party Officials. The Social Humanist Leaders however ment that the reason why they lost was that many of these Cities and Cantons were traditional progressive-socialist spots which just turned their back at the Socialist Party in the last General Election, as a result of the disaster management of the Financial Crisis. They ment that the voters demanded more progressive stands and results in social issues - and saw the Congregationists People's Government as a block for such a development. 

The Conservative Leaders however ment that the reason was because of that the People's Government had taken such a progressive and Social Humanist stand in traditional issues appealing to conservatives as immigration, LGBTQ-issues, gender equality, abortion and social welfare. They ment that this abandoned the traditional base: Conservative voters who instead stayed home or went to local parties. They also ment that the rising suport of the Imperial Federation Party was a sign of a rising nationalist and patriotic power which should be met with more nationalist and conservative policy stances. All of these factions at the Cantonal Leaders Conference however united in one staunch: it was the People's Government and the National level of the Party to blame for the disaster results.

The Cantonal Leaders demanded that the General Chairmans powers to veto or oust the Leaders of the affiliated, Cantonal equalitivants to the Congregationists must be abolished. They ment it undermined the Leadership of the Cantonal Leaders, and in addition compromised the integrity of the fundaments of local members in convention deciding for their leadership. They also ment that the Cantonal affiliations must receive much larger powers over the National Policies and Directions of the Party. They demanded that each affiliation should receive a fixed seat in all Working Panels of Policy and in addition have veto over General Policy Changes or Programmes, 

Chairman Conaway refused and ment that such conclusions was hasted. Instead, he wanted to wait for the Investigative Panel. The Cantonal Leaders ment that they wanted representation in such a Panel where Conaway instead ment that such must be independent from the Cantonal affiliations to secure neutral and objective conclusions. This created another conflict between the Cantonal and the State level.

At the same time, anger and frustration of the results increased in the General Assembly Caucus. The Congregationist State Deputies in the Cities concerned and the Senators of the Nation at IFI and in Sarteni Paeuley feared that this would be an increasing trend of disdain leading to potential defeat in 2015. The Conservative faction were furious and ment that this was a clear result of the Social Humanist, progressive stands which the party had made in social and rights affairs: angering and abandoning the base. The Social Humanist however ment that this was a result of the failure of the People's Government to deliver these progressive results in social and rights affairs issues. They ment that Conservative Councilors obstructed the legislative progress in the Council of Ministers leading that issues, regarding for example same sex-adoptions, were slowed down.

The 25th of February, the Conservative faction convened at the Education and Culture Department and the 27th of February, the Social Humanist met over an informal pizza-mingle at the G.A Office of Leader Dll'Streggia. The Conservatives ment that they now had a unique and important momentum of shock (over the unexpected crisis elections), which they'd to use to call a Deputies Leadership spill. The Social Humanists however also thought of a Leadership spill but in the Senate, as as a result of the ''clear messenger from the People of this State that the era of Ultraconservatism and Nationalism has been abandoned at the garbage dump of the history with the end of the WW2, now is the time for Social Progressivism and Humanism to govern our Realms''. Even though Senate Leader, Councilor Hessburger-Therninger had stayed out of the faction battle, he was in many social issues a Conservative and the Social Humanists believed that as a result of the elections - they needed clear and progressive Social Humanist leaderships in boths Chambers of the General Assembly. Especially as constitutional changes must be made in the Senate.

FIRST STEPS

At the General Conseil the 2nd of March 2012, the Socialists taunted the Congregationists over their electoral defeats. However, it was also the first time Congregationists Deputies questioned their Leadership at a Conseil. As well Conservative State Deputies Steve Laungcher and David Toscany - as the Social Humanist Deputies Richard d'Cancio and Sergio Simons questioned Chairman Conaway publicly and asked for change in policy and organizational direction as a result of the elections. Afterwards, Chairman Conaway reacted with fury and scolded them privately for daring to question his authority as Chairman of the People's Government. He commanded Caucus Chair, Councilor Bill Kadenza to suspend them from the Caucus Meeting during the entire next month and issued formal warnings to the Deputies. He also directed the Deputies Leader, Dll'Straggia to take appropriate measures to punish them for ''contributing to internal party chaos, division and conflicts'' in accordance to the long-standing tradition not to publicly question officials from the same party. 

Dll'Straggia decided to issue additional warnings to all four of Laungcher, Toscany, d'Cancio and Simons but only decided to withdraw the Committee Memberships of Laungcher and Toscany - the Conservative Deputies. He motivated it with that the criticism from thus during the Conseil was ''in a totally different dimension: much more personal, much more political and much more apparent - clearly, furiously and explicitly questioning the General Chairmans leadership in policy and governance'' as he ment that the Social Humanist Deputies had more ''blurry and general remarks''. Laungcher who also was Congregationist Manager on the New Enterprise Loan Affairs Subcommittee got that position withdrawn.

This actions created an internal revolt in the party as it was seen as clearly partial as Dll'Straggia was one of the leading Social Humanist and created massive internal criticism and fury. At the Congregationist pre-meeting of the Council of Ministers, Councilors Brinckerman, Conway and Montgomery was furious and demanded that Chairman Conaway intervened and ''stopped this impartial, divisive and unobjective decision of madness''. Chairman Conaway responded with even though he didn't agree with ''the specifics and each and every detail of the decision by the Deputies Leader'' - Leader Dll'Streggia was sovereign to make his decisions and to proceed with suitable consequences for the ''serious, damaging and unprecedented aggression shown by several State Deputies during today General Conseil''. The Councilors ment that this was rubbish as the General Chair was superior to the Deputies Leader and ment that this was the reason why it was so urgent of calling a Deputies Leadership spill. Chairman Conaway responded that he had no intention to ''furthermore divide, split and damage this party as some Conservatives seems to think is the best thing of heaven and God given'' which made the Conservative Councilors even more angry. 

Social Humanist Councilors Rohne, Sinclair and Martínez however called for the ''a united Leadership in the General Assembly being able to work on a united legislative agenda, supporting the Executive and the General Chair - regardless of which Chamber is needed''. They therefore called for the General Chairman to consider a Senate Leadership spill to make ''the composition of the Leading Congregationist Senators more compatible with the policy direction of the Executive thus preventing obstructing and internal party chaos''. Senate Leaders Hessburger-Therninger responded that he of course would leave the room ''if the agenda of this meeting was internal party politics instead of the needs of this Nation and it's People'' but that he didn't comply at all with the reality description of the Councilors. The Conservative Councilors, without knowledge of that the Social Humanists plan took Hessburger-Therninger in direct defence calling the proposal ''slander and lies to defame one of the most honorable and loyal Senators and Congregationists''. Chairman Conaway intervened and said that he did not have any ''problems of cooperation with the Senate Leadership aswell as I don't have any cooperation problems with the Deputies Leadership'' and that the issue of eventual Leadership Ballots was ''totally and unquestionable settled'' as he was the man calling Leadership spills and had no intention of doing so.

During the following week, the information of that an eventual Senate Leadership spill was in ballot spread through rumors and in the media. 

The 10th of March, the General Assembly Caucus of the Congregationists convened under the chairmanship of Councilor Kadenza. The Caucus meeting became an open playground for the unrest and collected criticism of the Deputies and Senators. The Conservative factioneers called out the Deputies Leadership for it's ''partial and Social Humanist-favorizing decisions in the Committee membership assignments and bias i penalties''. The Social Humanists responded with that ''the Ultraconservative, brown muddy Gestapo-Agents sitting in this room maybe should look for other parties if their core purpose of their political legacy is creating divison and chaos in the Congregationists - because that not everybody thinks that the Nationalist, Ultraconservatism is the right path forward.'' 

The Social Humanist also scolded the Senate leadership for it's ''incompetence and incapability or managing the legislative work needed to support the Executives proposal relating issues which doesn't comply with their brown blue Ultraconservatism - for example the Same-Sex Custodianship Bill, the Undocumented Immigrant's Protection and Welfare Bill, the Healthcare Protection Insurance Bill and the Constitutional Writing to enable Same-Sex Parents and Guardians.

In the contrary, the Conservatives called out the Social Humanists ''born-to-rule mentality'' and the Deputies Leaderships ''structural and discriminatory oppression of dissidents'' which made the Social Humanist members of the Caucus call the Conservatives for ''using Neonazi vocabulary and rhetorics against fine Leaders of our party, in spite of themselves''. This made Chairman Kadenza erupt the discussion and declare the ''State of the Caucus'' so infected, shameful and misbehaved that he closed the Caucus Meeting and informed the Caucus of that ''consequences will come after this shameful and pitiful scar in the otherwise proud history of the Congregationists Party'' and that the meeting was ''probably the worst I even in my entire life has experienced''.

The 11th of March, Chairman Kadenza had a phone conference with the abroad Chairman Conaway together with Leader Dll'Streggia and Leader Hessburger-Therninger. Chairman Conaway were furious and declared that ''for once sake - now must some real penalties be displayed for this destruction of our party to set an example''. Leader Dll'Streggia reenforced his willing to ''abolish all extreme-Conservative associations internally in the party''  and to warn the most Conservative of all State Deputies, Senators and even Councilors of State. Leader Hessburger-Therninger was more skeptical and called for a ''firm and strong response by the only character in our party who seems to enjoy a significant authority over all Members of the Caucus - the Chairman of the People's Government.

Chairman Conaway was however at an foreign visit tour in Oceania and couldn't return before the next month. He however promised to record a video which the Caucus could display at their next meeting and asked the Leaders to ''put all of the focus, efforts and work on the State Budget'' who's process was in the finalizing. 

This however gave time for the factions to rally. The 12th of March, the Social Humanist factioneers met over an informal coffee in a Conference Room at the Adenport Stock Exchange and the 13th of March, the Conservative faction rallied at a meeting in the Hall of Justice.

The members of each factions declared that the time of talk and reconciliation now was over, the time of action had come. The Social Humanist demanded to proceed with their demand of an Senate Leadership spill to ''settle the issue'' and many of the Social Humanist Councilors of State also reaffirmed that if the Chairman refused to call such a, they would outa declare their ''intentions of a mass-resignation at a suitable time table''. In the Hall of Justice, the Conservatives - more organized than ever, begun creating an secret petition to call a Deputies Leadership spill. The list begun circulating around the General Assembly and two days later, the Adenport Herald got it.

The 15th of March, the Adenport Herald published an extensive investigative article with the news of that Social Humanist factioneers tried out Leader Hessburger-Therninger and the Senate Leadership - as well as the Conservative factioneers wanted out the Deputies Leadership. The news created a shockwave in the entire Angalicanian political community with seriously worried Cantonal Leaders calling Chairman Conaway (in Papua New Guinea), Permanent Secretary Catarane and President Montgomery of the National Executive. The news declared the clear coup-attempts and showed the flaws of the major, Governing party to the Angalicanian public. Socialist politicians immediately went out in social media and newspapers taunting the Congregationists ''incapability of governing - barely because of their obsession about themselves and their incompetence of policy, governance and connecting with the needs of real angalicanians''. 

By 08.45, Deputy Chairman of the People's Government and Chief of the Treasury Amelia Charleton (A) called the Chairman of the People's Government, Matthew Conaway, and demanded an total explanation of the situation. Conaway had cancelled a planned meeting with the Angalicanian Ambassador to P.N.G and a round-table with local business leaders to manage the situation. Charleton and Conaway agreed that an extra-meeting of the Executive Committee of the Council of Ministers had to be convened during the day with Deputy Chairman Charleton as presiding officer.

Directly subsequently, a call for convention were issued to all Members of the Executive Committee and by afternoon, Deputy Chairman Charleton chaired the meeting. The M.A members of the Committee were furious because of the ''Congregationists incapability of pushing internal conflicts and uprising aside which now has damaged the integrity and view of governance-capability of the whole of the People's Government''. After several meeting with Leadership teams in the different chamber of the General Assembly and other constellations, Charleton and several other M.A officers openly criticized the Congregationists in the media for not letting internal party matters aside. 

At the same night, Chairman Conaway called up Charleton and expressed his deep dissatisfaction of the actions of the Moderate Assembly. Deputy Chairman Charleton responded with the need of ''explicit comments of distance from the MA'' as they didn't comply with this internal chaos at all, and that the Congregationists should'd informed their Coalition Partner of the crisis and chaos they were going through. Chairman Conaway called it ''ridiculous'' and ''hypocritical from a Party General Chair who's very occupancy of that office is a product of just internal conflicts and ballots''. Deputy Chairman Charleton repeated her call for ''information, just a little bit, in this time of internal party crisis in the Congregationists Party'' as it affected the whole of the People's Governments operation, especially in the crucial time of production of the State Budget.

The 16th of March, several Conservative and Social Humanist State Deputies but also Senators of the Nation appeared in different news shows and media occasions commenting the events in the party. The comments were blend and general, ''look, we're an party with high ceilings open for debate and discussions. We share the same visions, dreams and ambitions for our very great Nation and it's People but in the practical proposals on how we're going to proceed to achieve thus, we're just having some different approaches. By caucusing together, we could make that approaches more concrete which makes the legislative process better and more reflecting on the vaster parts of the Angalicanian public who shares different of opinions and approached in policy matters. This is the fine part of democracy and a fine part of our party who's open for debate and discussions in sharp contrast to the Socialist Party where the politburo and it's General Secretary, Comrade Bretziac decides everything from scratch to decision''. 

However, many of the interviews wasn't reported to each respective Leadership. Leader Dll'Streggia took Chairman Conaways wish for ''some real penalties'' as a command and decided to punish the Social Humanist State Deputies who'd committed these actions. Leader Dll'Streggia decided to withdraw all Committee memberships and Managerships from seven (7) of the State Deputies who'd participated in the media events, all of them Conservative or Conservativet-leaning. Leader Dll'Streggia also decided to ''freeze'' their benefits and support services in forms of all (or most) of their staffers, constituent services and office money. He also issued formal warnings to them and recommended Caucus Chairman Kadenza to shut them off from Caucus Meetings.

The morning afterwards, the 17th of March, the suspended Deputies wrote an article in the Soyeschilla Daily Mail where they called their ''total and complete lack of confidence in the current Deputies Leadership'' as they saw the actions as totally ''unjustified, biased and unneutral'' as similar actions wasn't taken at all towards the Social Humanist Deputies who'd appeared in the media. Chairman Conaway called Dll'Streggia to express his concerns of the fact that the actions only applied to the ''more Conservative-leaning State Deputies'' as it would ''create a reason for the Conservative mob to rally over something''. Leader Dll'Streggia responded for the first time with some irritation and declared that he only tried enforce the willing of the General Chairman, who'd earlier called for ''the same types of penalties for disloyal Members of the Caucus''. After a heated exchange, he threatened to resign because of the ''double-punishment'' he thought Chairman Conaway put him through. 

In a solomon try of heal the up-rised tensions, Chairman Conaway called Chairman Kadenza, President Montgomery, Leader Dll'Streggia and Leader Hessburger-Therninger at a meeting (as he were overseas) the day after, the 18th of March. He said that the ''internal conflicts is hurting our ability to Govern and cooperate with the MA''. As he were overseas for some time on, he believed that the leadership had to be strengthened. Therefore, he had decided that Leader Dll'Streggia as Second Chairman would be declared ''acting General Chairman'' with the possibility of exercising all of the powers granted the General Chairmanship, until he returned. Earlier, Chairman Conaway had avoided this as he thought that is would prevent the conflict of getting more infected. Now, he thought that the lack of present leadership worsened the situation and that a clearer leadership would ''settle this situation, at least a bit''. This would later on've been seen as a massive mistake.

President Montgomery interjected heavily and called it ''tons of oil and gas on wildfires'', as Leader Dll'Streggia in many ways were subject of the conflicts arising. She called for another settlement to be done, with the factional constellations and Cantonal Affiliates getting more powers instead. Leader Dll'Streggia called her ''clearly biased and totally lost in this soup, we all know that you'r a die-hard brown muddy Conservative Sigrid so don't try to pretend that you'r doing something else that trying to maximize the powers of your mob rather than solving this Conservative faction-created situation''. President Montgomery called his remarks ''black on white why this man is unsuitable of exercising this powers''. Leader Hessburger-Therninger did also share som skepticism over the solution and said the ''the whole of the situation will probably not get better until you'r back in the Palace Mr Chairman, designing some form of extramarital solution is very unlikely of helping out the situation at all''. Chairman Kadenza however was cautiously positive and thought that ''even if this solution won't make things dramatically better, it could still be a tool of ensure that things doesn't evolve furthermore worse'' and that ''after all, it's not so very controversial that the Second Chair resumes the powers of the General Chair when he's incapable of exercising them himself''.

Chairman Conaway said that he heard the objections but after all found the solution ''being the least bad''. He referred to the comments of Chairman Kadenza that it either wasn't especially controversial or unusual of a deputy to resume to powers of an official, when overseas or incapable of exercising it's duties. The same thing were done in the Council of Ministers where Deputy Chairman Charleton presided and in the pre-meeting, where Leader Hessburger-Therninger as Deputy to Preside, led the meetings. The same afternoon, information went out in the Caucus and in the Party as a whole of the arrangement which sparked happiness in the Social Humanist faction, and pure fury and anger in the Conservative who saw it as ''the ultimate cementation of the Social Humanist faction in power of the party''.

22nd of March, the finalizing budget preparations were going to be made in the Council of Ministers Committee on Budget. Before the finalizing negotiations, the Congregationist Councilors held a pre-meeting on the topic of the budget were they aimed to go through their final prioritations. The meeting were co-chaired by Councilor Hessburger-Therninger (as Deputy to Preside) and Councilor Rohne as the Deputy Chief of the Treasury; and the Congregationists Lead on Finance and Economy. The meeting however became chaotic as Councilor Rohne together with a branch of Social Humanist Councilors (most notable Permanent Secretary Catarane, Councilor Sinclair and Councilor Martínez) had already come up with a proposed white paper on their policy prioritations in the State Budget negotiations with the MA. They ''were somewhat open to single amendments on details in the specifics'' but thought that the financial policy had to be governed by ''consistency, uniformity and long-term perspectives'' where a ''overall approach on the major red lines'' was key in the pressured economic time the country went through.  As the paper were put out on the sitting meeting, many Councilors became extremely irritated over the noninclusive process and ''nonexistence of time even to read the document in question''. 

After a short and hasty reading of the white paper, the Conservative Congregationists noted that in the proposed white paper, the Congregationist would be ''open in negotiations'' to State funding of abortion clinics and NGO:s advocating for the right to abortion, if the MA required so as an ''acceptable negotiation loss''. The white paper also included writing about that cuts to public welfare, health and education should apply generally to the public, and not to specific groups of people's as for example newcomers and undocumented immigrants. This was policy issues this the Conservatives strongly objected to and issues that hadn't been discussed at all in the earlier budget discussions. Now, they'd arrived with the point of the finalization of the budget, not the scratch-writing of it and to u-turn so rapidly on key issues, which the Conservatives wanted discussed internally before, was deeply troubling to them.

The Social Humanist Councilors lashed out on the Conservative Councilors ''last-minute interjections with their brown muddy, nationalist ideology'' which they only saw as an example of their ''fatal and constant unpreparedness and incapability of doing their job''. This was insults which the Social Humanists 

The 25th of March in 2012, the Conservative Senate falang of the Congregationist Caucus informed then Congregationist Senate Leader Robert Hessburger-Therninger from the Canton of Azali Zamber that they intended to vote against the proposed State Budget.

Llianes, Mt.Levrain, Roseport and Vecchio Harbor