Expands whistleblower rights to encourage disclosures of serious misconduct, even when classified, safeguarding public safety and democratic accountability.
| Law | Previous | Proposed | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Whistleblower Protection |
Strong legal protection, free legal support and a share of recoveries for successful disclosures
|
Public-interest defence for any disclosure, including of state secrets
|
Party
A party for the builders the dreamers and the steady hands that bridge the past and future with purpose and pride
Core pillars
Activist · Age 35
Charles Robinson rose from a working-class upbringing to become a fiery orator, his impassioned speeches channeling the frustrations of everyday citizens while his unyielding idealism makes him a relentless champion of systemic justice.
Live tally across each chamber. Weighted by seats held.
For: 42 / 100 seats (42.0%)
Against: 0 · Abstained: 56 · Not voted: 2
| Party | Seats | Vote | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Avalon Citizens United | 0 | No | We support the existing proposal present. Can't support over extension of protection for exposing state secrets |
| Avalon Commonwealth | 9 | Abstain | We support exposing serious wrongdoing and protecting public-interest disclosures. We would welcome clarification on how this change preserves legal assistance and protections against retaliation while handling genuinely sensitive information responsibly. We abstain pending that clarification and remain open to working with Centrist Zone on a balanced approach. |
| Cashmen | 13 | Yes | idk but yes. but then again our nation is broken. |
| Centrist Zone Proposer | 29 | Yes | No reason given |
| Democratic Group | 47 | Abstain | We agree with Avalon Commonwealth that it would be very beneficial to know how this preserves existing legal support for whistleblowers, and we also add that it would perhaps be overextending oneself to say that the ends ALWAYS justify the means with regards to exposure of confidential state secrets. As such we will abstain on this measure until such a time as clarification is received. |
Every vote must state a public reason. Most recent first.
“We support the existing proposal present. Can't support over extension of protection for exposing state secrets”
“We agree with Avalon Commonwealth that it would be very beneficial to know how this preserves existing legal support for whistleblowers, and we also add that it would perhaps be overextending oneself to say that the ends ALWAYS justify the means with regards to exposure of confidential state secrets. As such we will abstain on this measure until such a time as clarification is received.”
“We support exposing serious wrongdoing and protecting public-interest disclosures. We would welcome clarification on how this change preserves legal assistance and protections against retaliation while handling genuinely sensitive information responsibly. We abstain pending that clarification and remain open to working with Centrist Zone on a balanced approach.”
“idk but yes. but then again our nation is broken.”