NationStates

Defwa wrote:

Chester Pearson wrote:
Well whoopty fucking doo for you. Just because you are a bunch of tree-huggers, that does not mean the rest of us need to be. Stop trying to impose your beliefs upon the rest of us. You are worse than those bible-thumpers from Christian Democrats, or Auralia....

Oh [insert pet name ending in Y (chesty?)]

If this passes, and Prime Minister Layston vetoes it, do we get put on your embargo list too?

Chester Pearson wrote:

Defwa wrote:Oh [insert pet name ending in Y (chesty?)]

If this passes, and Prime Minister Layston vetoes it, do we get put on your embargo list too?

Well, not quite embargo but yes. But this will pass when Defwa conquers the continent on horseback

Chester Pearson wrote:

Hakio wrote:As we have embraced alternative and clean fuel sources we wish to see the same regulations be imposed on the World Assembly so they may reap the benefits as well.

Well whoopty fucking doo for you. Just because you are a bunch of tree-huggers, that does not mean the rest of us need to be. Stop trying to impose your beliefs upon the rest of us. You are worse than those bible-thumpers from Christian Democrats, or Auralia....

Well we'll see who will end up trash talking when this finally comes up to vote. Until then, I bid good day to you sir.

Hakio wrote:

Chester Pearson wrote:
Well whoopty fucking doo for you. Just because you are a bunch of tree-huggers, that does not mean the rest of us need to be. Stop trying to impose your beliefs upon the rest of us. You are worse than those bible-thumpers from Christian Democrats, or Auralia....

Well we'll see who will end up trash talking when this finally comes up to vote. Until then, I bid good day to you sir.

OOC: Sorry but that's going to bite you in the ass. This resolution honestly sucks

AGAINST

This has to be one of the worst proposals I've seen in a while.

1. Manmade killer earthquakes are an urban myth. This proposal is alarmist and anti-scientific.

2. I'm not sure why this proposal is concerned with the safety of military equipment ("materiel property").

3. The prohibition on fracking within 50 miles of "incorporated cities, towns, or communities" is arbitrary and non-scientific.

4. Section 3 can easily be circumvented by revoking the charters of "incorporated cities, towns, or communities."

5. Section 5 authorizes member states to penalize corporations for pollution but not other sorts of companies, such as LLCs.

I hope nations are smart enough to vote against this; and, if not, I will propose a repeal.

You cannot trust corporations, energy companies being one of them. Give them an inch and they will take a mile. For those against this measure, feel free to explain your viewpoint to those who have lost access to fresh drinking water due to such negligence with this practice.

Yay.

Cerlor wrote:You cannot trust corporations, energy companies being one of them. Give them an inch and they will take a mile. For those against this measure, feel free to explain your viewpoint to those who have lost access to fresh drinking water due to such negligence with this practice.

Yay.

And this has happened, where, exactly?
Restrictions under the Transboundary Water Use acts would ensure that harmful effluent is not discharged into other countries.

Cerlor wrote:You cannot trust corporations, energy companies being one of them.

So you don't trust "incorporated cities, towns, or communities"?

(Yes, the electorates & governments of those are 'corporations'...)

Cerlor wrote:You cannot trust corporations, energy companies being one of them. Give them an inch and they will take a mile. For those against this measure, feel free to explain your viewpoint to those who have lost access to fresh drinking water due to such negligence with this practice.

Yay.

"It would seem that you have a regulation issue in your nation. I would suggest that if you are that wary of the private sector, then nationalize these evil corporations you fear so much. Existing resolution already provides protection for contamination of water, and given the authors clear lack of knowledge on the subject, they wrote a feel-good piece that we shall quite easily bypass should this joke come to pass."

Turning to the delegate from Christian Democrats, she continued "As you have brought up the repeal, with a stronger argument than I would have thought of, know you have my support should it be needed. Can we expect a pre-emptive draft?"

Christian Democrats wrote:AGAINST

This has to be one of the worst proposals I've seen in a while.

1. Manmade killer earthquakes are an urban myth. This proposal is alarmist and anti-scientific.

Yep.

2. I'm not sure why this proposal is concerned with the safety of military equipment ("materiel property").

I did not know that "materiel property" referred to military equipment. Although I think that issue is more of a spelling error (it was probably supposed to be "material property").

3. The prohibition on fracking within 50 miles of "incorporated cities, towns, or communities" is arbitrary and non-scientific.

Super-yep. If we had to follow that rule by the Mundiferri standard of miles, we'd probably never be able to frack at all. Of course, we could always change the standard to, say, "one mile=the radius of a hydrogen atom", or something like that.

4. Section 3 can easily be circumvented by revoking the charters of "incorporated cities, towns, or communities."

If this passes, we plan to exploit this loopyhole.

5. Section 5 authorizes member states to penalize corporations for pollution but not other sorts of companies, such as LLCs.

Triple yep.

Yeah, I agree that fracking should be regulated, but definitely not with the methods outlined in this proposal. Hence, Mundiferrum votes AGAINST, and if this passes, then we're going to vote FOR the repeal effort.
An important note: No one on the FOR side seems to have addressed these issues yet, which is kind of annoying. Especially with regards to the arbitrary-measure issue: from what source did they determine "50 miles" to be best, and exactly WHAT standard of mile are they using? [OOC: Or does this assembly have an international agreement on what a mile is? I believe there are no resolutions outlining international measures for stuff like this). And why the heck do they have that much focus on corporations? Here in Mundiferrum, corporations handling fracking are entirely nonexistent: everything's nationalized. Does this mean we're immune from said penalties?

"Materiel" is a term that refers to military equipment, yes.
Hence the phrase, "anti-materiel", and large-calibre rifles and other weapon systems designed to carry out the role of "anti-materiel".

Mundiferrum wrote:[OOC: Or does this assembly have an international agreement on what a mile is? I believe there are no resolutions outlining international measures for stuff like this).

OOC: GA resolution #88 ‘WA Numeration and Units Act’ established an International Measurements Institute which members can, and probably should, consult for guidance on converting any measurements in unfamiliar-to-them units that are used into equivalent values in units from their own systems.

We the Puddle Jumping Wads of Wrapper have voted against this proposal. While we generally vote in favor of many pro-environmental resolutions, this one has far too many issues as noted above.

The incorporation of towns etc hasn't been explained at all, as we mentioned above. As far as we know, it is a foreign concept to us, there is no such thing in Bananaistan. We have 49 counties, 5 of whom are effectively cities. The 5 cities have unitary local government authorities: City Corporations. The remaining 44 counties have county councils and there are many towns & cities in these counties with their own Urban District Councils. None of these councils and corporations have charters or any such thing and are all organised according to legislation enacted by the National Parliament. So are they all, some or none incorporated???

Anyway, we have voted against due to this severely ill-defined term as well as the "50 mile" limit which is ridiculously arbitrary and is also ill-defined.

Bears Armed Mission wrote:

Mundiferrum wrote:[OOC: Or does this assembly have an international agreement on what a mile is? I believe there are no resolutions outlining international measures for stuff like this).

OOC: GA resolution #88 ‘WA Numeration and Units Act’ established an International Measurements Institute which members can, and probably should, consult for guidance on converting any measurements in unfamiliar-to-them units that are used into equivalent values in units from their own systems.

Well, I completely missed that. I should probably consult the gnomes there for what this resolution means by "50 miles".

But really, from which region of their large intestine did they pull out the "50 miles" thing? Any guesses?

Imperializt Russia wrote:"Materiel" is a term that refers to military equipment, yes.
Hence the phrase, "anti-materiel", and large-calibre rifles and other weapon systems designed to carry out the role of "anti-materiel".

Ah, neat. So that's why getting a job in the military department of Mundiferrum is said to be kind of confusing. Or maybe it's just because of all the other stupidity that goes on in there.

Hakio wrote:

Chester Pearson wrote:
Well whoopty fucking doo for you. Just because you are a bunch of tree-huggers, that does not mean the rest of us need to be. Stop trying to impose your beliefs upon the rest of us. You are worse than those bible-thumpers from Christian Democrats, or Auralia....

Well we'll see who will end up trash talking when this finally comes up to vote. Until then, I bid good day to you sir.

You were saying?

It warms my cockels when a shiity resolution comes charging out of the gates to vote and dies right there at the gate. Maybe the author will actually listen next time? I have my doubts....

"This is very poorly written. Unfortunately for the author, many of the issues present in the draft could have been easily be resolved if they had some patience instead of rushing this into quorum. Oh well, perhaps this can be a lesson to them."

As the author of the previous attempt to regulate hydraulic fracturing, through the Fracking Protocol, it gives me great pleasure to vote against this proposal.

Whilst I may agree with the opponents of our own attempt to introduce legislation in this area, given technical grounds over definitions and procedures, the current proposal is woefully lacking in both content and capability. We remain assured that our own attempt to legislate in this area was more refined, and besmirch this risible resolution presently at vote.

I would encourage all Member States to vote AGAINST this proposal.

Given that this seems to do nothing more than single out those nations that are technologically advanced enough to employ this technique and then create red tape for them the Star Empire of Ainocra stands opposed to this measure.

After having read the well thought out and logical opinions of the right honorable members of the World Assembly, I must now alter my previous stance. I had been prepared to vote for this proposal. I can only hope that more thought and more precision goes into the next attempt to get a proposal of this sort put through.

I look forward to seeing a proposal of this nature again in the near future. I would be deeply pleased to be able to endorse a proposal regulating fracking on behalf of the people of Nabta Playa.

I read through all 4 pages in this thread and, despite the large disapproval of the authorship, don't see any compelling evidence for me not to support this resolution.

Other than weird RP clauses (I'm sure you can work that out yourselves with your overly active imaginations), there is little reason to subscribe to the notion that this is poorly written in any way. Just because it's industry, whatever side you are on here, does not mean that it shouldn't go without scrutiny, which is what this resolution calls for. CD, you live in your own world, so I won't address the fact that you believe humans cannot shift tectonic plates (do you even believe in those?).

It seems a lot of the vitriol stems from a clouded hated of "tree-huggers", but here, and in the real world, you would likely do well to look at the objective facts of the situation and realise that environmentalists are only a small part of this system.

I will vote FOR, and unless I read something sensible against this proposal before the time expires, this is how my vote shall remain. The naysayers really did this to themselves.

The Delegation of the Oppressed Peoples of Jakieland believes that this Resolution will benefit all Communist states even if they don't rely on mining. The Delegation of he Oppressed Peoples of Jakieland fully supports this Resolution

OOC: I apologize for not being more active in the debate/discussion period. I've been dealing with kidney problems that have left me quite sick over the last few weeks. Hopefully the next time a proposal hits, it'll be a more productive outing.

OOC: Hate to speak ill of the ill, but incorporating... any of the other ambassadors suggestions might help in the future.

Chester Pearson wrote:You do realize 90% of said fracking fluid is actually sand correct?

Once again, we have a resolution that fails to comprehend the technicalities behind hydraulic fracturing.

Opposed....

What does the makeup of 90% of the fracking fluid have to do with the issue? Does that somehow negate the hundreds of chemicals that are "proprietary" that makes up part of the other 10%? Does it mean that natural gas and fracking fluids aren't at risk of contaminating ground water deposits? Does that negate the tens of thousands of people who may be sick or whose wells or house tap water is now unsafe for use? Does that negate the fact that sick people who may have been poisoned by these chemicals are not allowed to know what the chemicals are, which makes it impossible to medically determine both what is making them sick and how to properly treat it?

You pulled a random, completely unrelated factoid from the internet, accused the WA of lacking a technical understanding of the issue while yourself displaying no rebuttal to the points within the resolution, and expect to be taken seriously?

California Prime votes in favor!