This is the parliamentary question time for questions to the Defence Minister.

Members of the Commons may question the Defence Minister on any issue relating to his department. Each member is limited to one question per week.

This House recognises Inevitable as the Defence Minister, and requests that he answers all questions posed to him.

This House recognises Commoncold0 as the Shadow Defence Minister, and as such grants him the right to ask six questions per week.

The government may only be asked to answer one question at a time - no new questions may be submitted until the previous one has been answered. If the government does not answer, action may be taken by the speaker of the commons.

I therefore open this session with the following question:

Will the Defence Minister please tell us of his department's aims for this session of parliament?...

Our departments activities for this term are tied very closely to the Ministy of Foreign Affairs, therefore I think it prudent to briefly mention them.

We will be focussing on passive defences to employ against the Assym threat.

I am currently in the act of drafting legislation to help in that. It should be revealed within a couple of days.

I thank the secretary for his answer and open this session to the house...

The recent budget has seen an increase in the defence budget, but can the minister tell us how this will be spent?

On improving the technologies available to our military.

So the government has no intention of spending money on civil defence?

Simply putting money into Defence won't help much. If defence orientated legislation needs funding then of course, it will be funded through the defence budget, but other than that, no.

Point of order! :tophat:

That did not answer my question, which was about civil defence, not general defence spending!

You mean like the NEA legislation that you've rendered inactive?

Point of Order! :tophat:

As a minister of state you are required by the constitution to answer questions submitted to you in parliament, not to make sneery references about discredited legislation. Answer my question!

I already did.

Strangely enough Civil defence falls under the heading of "defence".

Very well, so you will not be investing in defence at all except in the forms of weapons research? I see, you could have been clearer with your answer.


Now, I'll let Cieran ask a question before he starts crying.

As you may be aware, my constituency is the closest in Ostentia to Assym, and hence most likely to be attacked. There is much fear in Valaxia that we may be invaded as a kind of "starting point" in order to launch an attack on the rest of Ostentia. What is going on specifically in relation to Valaxian issues here, this being of importance, as I said, due to it likely bearing the brunt of any invasion...

Mr. Cieran, are you forgetting about the esteemed Northern Isles? I certainly hope you're not.

Anyway, we're hoping to re-establish the NEA legislation, which was previously suspended after the Coup.

To prevent any animosity, I am recommending that it be rebranded as the BEA.

Regardless, the NEA legislation does contains contigencies for all of Ostentia, including Valaxia.

[OOC Note] The Northern Isles are not closer to Assym. Assym is in the North-East, the Northern Isles are North-west[/OOC]...