[Defeated] Repeal "A Promotion of Basic Education"

[Glen-Rhodes]

To repeal a deeply flawed, discriminatory resolution, "A Promotion of Basic Education", authored by Sionis Prioratus and Unibot.

Repeal "A Promotion of Basic Education"

DETERMINED to secure the right of education to all persons in all nations,

REGRETTING that "A Promotion of Basic Education" carries with it considerable flaws that hamper that goal,

OBSERVING that the resolution requires that nations provide only "some sort of variation of edification", which is entirely too vague, too weak, and easily subverted by nations that do not wish to provide a decent, serious education to their populace, but instead would gladly receive funding under the guise of "educating" their citizens,

SADDENED that the resolution only requires that nations "attempt" to provide a decent education to the mentally handicapped, which is again too weak and easily subverted by nations that have no intentions of providing an education to the mentally handicapped,

DISAPPOINTED that the resolution even acknowledges this fact, but has chosen to not address it,

NOTING that the resolution only requires nations to provide an education for their citizens, leaving it acceptable for nations to deny vast numbers of non-citizen access to a decent education,

APPALLED by this outright discrimination against non-citizens, who oftentimes have fled violent and oppressive homelands in search for opportunities in a more safe, welcoming home,

EXCLAIMING that the World Assembly does not value the worth of a person based upon their citizenship status, when dealing with fundamental human rights issues, such as the right to an education,

DETERMINED that a comprehensive education resolution should not allow nations to pick and choose who is worthy and who is not worthy of having an education, through the use of arbitrary determinants of human worth, but instead should establish the right of all persons, child or adult, citizen or not, to have access to an education,

OPPOSED that the World Assembly has very little oversight on how nations use the funds given to them, leading to unlimited wasteful spending,

SEEKING to replace "A Promotion of Basic Education" with a better, more solid resolution that corrects the flaws above,

The World Assembly hereby repeals "A Promotion of Basic Education".

Dr. Bradford William Castro

Ambassador-at-Large,
Permanent Chief of Mission for World Assembly affairs,
the Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes

[Sionis Prioratus]

Hmmm... After having read this:

No, thanks.

[Unibot]

DISAPPOINTED that the resolution even acknowledges this fact, but has chosen to not address it,

We chose to not address it, because a education proposal more specific to making education more convenient and accessible for disabled or less privileged peoples seemed to be worth its own resolution, instead of muddling it with a resolution that guaranteed them the right to an education.

That is not a fault of the resolution, it strengths the resolution by keeping it focused and precise.. it was primarily about securing the right to receive an education.

If you were truly concerned for the mentally and physically disabled, you would write a resolution to secure them easy access to education, instead of repealing their right to one.

I wish you good luck in your endeavors and your secret agenda to get this resolution repealed so you can re-re-submit your flawed, "Primary Education Act".

Yours,

[Glen-Rhodes]

We chose to not address it, because a education proposal more specific to making education more convenient and accessible for disabled or less privileged peoples seemed to be worth its own resolution, instead of muddling it with a resolution that guaranteed them the right to an education.

It is not a difficult nor tremendous task to require nations to devise specialized infrastructure for the physically and mentally handicapped. The World Assembly has tackled universal civil rights, rules of war, worldwide epidemic response, copyrights, food and drug safety, and many other, vastly more complex issues within the limitations on resolution length. There was a conscience choice to not provide full protection to the physically and mentally disabled, just as there was a conscience choice to allow nations to deny non-citizens the right to an education.

If you were truly concerned for the mentally and physically disabled, you would write a resolution to secure them easy access to education, instead of repealing their right to one.

The physically disabled have no protections under "A Promotion of Basic Education". The 'protections' provided to the mentally disabled are optional. The World Assembly can and should provide solid rights to both the physically and mentally disabled, without approaching it in a piecemeal style. The World Assembly also can and should mandate education, instead of hold on to a flimsy-worded, essentially optional education 'mandate'.

While I can write up a resolution providing rights for the physically disabled, I would be in violation of duplication rules (and possibly contradiction rules) if I tried to fix the flaws in the rights of the mentally disabled by writing a resolution. For that reason, and the numerous other reasons I have outlined in the draft, the best course of action is to repeal in full the deeply damaged resolution, and then replace with a better one that addresses the rights of the physically and mentally disabled, the rights of non-citizens, and the glaring 'variation of edification' loophole.

Dr. Bradford William Castro

Ambassador-at-Large,
Permanent Chief of Mission for World Assembly affairs,
the Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes

[Unibot]

While I can write up a resolution providing rights for the physically disabled, I would be in violation of duplication rules (and possibly contradiction rules) if I tried to fix the flaws in the rights of the mentally disabled by writing a resolution. For that reason, and the numerous other reasons I have outlined in the draft, the best course of action is to repeal in full the deeply damaged resolution, and then replace with a better one that addresses the rights of the physically and mentally disabled, the rights of non-citizens, and the glaring 'variation of edification' loophole.

No.

Because I was nice enough to write...

5. Encourages further legislation on the rights and education of the mentally and physical handicapped.

[Burninati0n]

We don't have these problems with the legislation. We believe that the ambassador from Sionis Prioratus put it best; no thanks.

[Hindopia]

I would have been against this repeal if not for the fact that "A Promotion of Basic Education" only provides education to the citizens of a nation. This otherwise thorough and well written resolution would have had my full support if not for this single failing.

[Glen-Rhodes]

No.

Because I was nice enough to write...

5. Encourages further legislation on the rights and education of the mentally and physical handicapped.

It doesn't matter how much you encourage it, a resolution cannot be written on the rights of the mentally handicapped, because "A Promotion of Basic Education" already covers the rights of the mentally handicapped, in terms of education. The World Assembly cannot have one law that only requires an attempt to provide an education to the mentally handicapped, then go and pass a law that requires nations to actually provide that education. If the clause used 'ensure' rather than 'attempt' (or any other word that requires a nation to follow through), then an additional resolution could be written that expands on the specifics of the rights and duties. But as it stands, the law says that nations must only attempt. This cannot be changed through another resolution. It can only be changed by repealing the flawed one and replacing it.

I would have been against this repeal if not for the fact that "A Promotion of Basic Education" only provides education to the citizens of a nation. This otherwise thorough and well written resolution would have had my full support if not for this single failing.

This, I believe, is the most compelling reason to repeal the resolution. The Charter of Civil Rights set the standard of the World Assembly not dividing human (or, if you prefer, sapient) rights based on citizenship. Just as no person should be denied protection against discrimination because of their citizenship status, no person should be denied the right to an education because of their citizenship status.

One could even question if A Promotion of Basic Education stands up to Charter scrutiny. But legality of a resolution cannot be an argument for its repeal, unfortunately.

Dr. Bradford William Castro

Ambassador-at-Large,
Permanent Chief of Mission for World Assembly affairs,
the Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes

[Unibot]

No.

Because I was nice enough to write...

5. Encourages further legislation on the rights and education of the mentally and physical handicapped.

It doesn't matter how much you encourage it, a resolution cannot be written on the rights of the mentally handicapped, because "A Promotion of Basic Education" already covers the rights of the mentally handicapped, in terms of education. The World Assembly cannot have one law that only requires an attempt to provide an education to the mentally handicapped, then go and pass a law that requires nations to actually provide that education. If the clause used 'ensure' rather than 'attempt' (or any other word that requires a nation to follow through), then an additional resolution could be written that expands on the specifics of the rights and duties. But as it stands, the law says that nations must only attempt. This cannot be changed through another resolution. It can only be changed by repealing the flawed one and replacing it.

Dr. Bradford William Castro

Ambassador-at-Large,
Permanent Chief of Mission for World Assembly affairs,
the Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes

Err... another no. You're misinterpreting the word of the resolution. If you'd like, I could pen up "Access to Schooling for the Disabled" or something like that.

The basis of it would be that it would neither require GA#80 to be in-effect, nor guarantee the right to an education.. . it would provide or require conveniences like "ramps, railings, specialized desks, specialized buses" which would help to solidify GA#80's requirement that "member nations attempt to provide citizens of a nation the aforementioned education" -- in other words it would beef up that "attempt", so nations can't squirm their way out of it.

[Unibot]

Personally I am not inclined to force nations to provide an education to all that seek it. That was the fault of your resolution, Dr. Castro, whereas it is where GA#80 shines in the glory of compromise.

[Glen-Rhodes]

Err... another no. You're misinterpreting the word of the resolution. If you'd like, I could pen up "Access to Schooling for the Disabled" or something like that.

I am interpreting it in the worst way possible, because it is that interpretation that makes the wording poor and it is that interpretation that nations will use to avoid providing decent educations to all people. (Not that A Promotion of Basic Education requires them to educate all people, anyways.)

The basis of it would be that it would neither require GA#80 to be in-effect, nor guarantee the right to an education.. . it would provide or require conveniences like "ramps, railings, specialized desks, specialized buses" which would help to solidify GA#80's requirement that "member nations attempt to provide citizens of a nation the aforementioned education" -- in other words it would beef up that "attempt", so nations can't squirm their way out of it.

I do not wish to get into a drawn-out argument about the legal theories of World Assembly rules. Simply put, one resolution only requires an attempt. If another resolution says, "No, actually, you have to do this," then there is a contradiction between the two. I may even be wrong in the legal issue, but the substance does not change. There was a conscience decision to exclude these things, subjecting the rights of the physically and mentally disabled to the whims of a fickle World Assembly, rather than addressing them in the resolution, which is not an arduous task.

That is but one reason to repeal the resolution. Not the sole reason, and not even the most compelling. So, I would rather not focus this entire debate on that argument , whether I am right or wrong, and let the authors of the flawed resolution get away with not answering to worse aspects of their resolution. There are more arguments that deserve more focus, if you will take the time to review those.

Personally I am not inclined to force nations to provide an education to all that seek it. That was the fault of your resolution, Dr. Castro, whereas it is where GA#80 shines in the glory of compromise.

At least now we know definitely that Eduard Heir believes civil rights only apply to citizens and that nations should be free to deny decent educations to vast numbers of people.

Dr. Bradford William Castro

Ambassador-at-Large,
Permanent Chief of Mission for World Assembly affairs,
the Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes

[Unibot]

At least now we know definitely that Eduard Heir believes civil rights only apply to citizens and that nations should be free to deny decent educations to vast numbers of people.

Eduard blinked twice, "No, when did I say that? Unibot offers education to stateless people, It is just our opinion that the World Assembly should not mandate that all member nations follow suit with those principles which, while we believe are highly ethical, are also costly, and rarely beneficial to the economy or the nation of Unibot. We would understand if taxpayers in another member nation disagreed with the "education to all regardless of nationality" principle."

[Sionis Prioratus]

I wish you good luck in your endeavors and your secret agenda to get this resolution repealed so you can re-re-submit your flawed, "Primary Education Act".

We just love how this elephant in the room is being dutifully ignored by the "Doctor".

[Poree]

It is just our opinion that the World Assembly should not mandate that all member nations follow suit with those principles which, while we believe are highly ethical, are also costly, and rarely beneficial to the economy or the nation of Unibot. We would understand if taxpayers in another member nation disagreed with the "education to all regardless of nationality" principle."

Well said.

Dr. Castro, it was your failure to take serious this issue that cost you our support last time and will cost you our support this time. It is clear that Unibot is right, you are only looking to repeal the act because your ego demands it. Not because it is a bad resolution.

Might we suggest you spend your energy on some other proposal rather then fighting this fight.

[Grays Harbor]

No.

Because I was nice enough to write...

5. Encourages further legislation on the rights and education of the mentally and physical handicapped.

It doesn't matter how much you encourage it, a resolution cannot be written on the rights of the mentally handicapped, because "A Promotion of Basic Education" already covers the rights of the mentally handicapped, in terms of education. The World Assembly cannot have one law that only requires an attempt to provide an education to the mentally handicapped, then go and pass a law that requires nations to actually provide that education. If the clause used 'ensure' rather than 'attempt' (or any other word that requires a nation to follow through), then an additional resolution could be written that expands on the specifics of the rights and duties. But as it stands, the law says that nations must only attempt. This cannot be changed through another resolution. It can only be changed by repealing the flawed one and replacing it.

I would have been against this repeal if not for the fact that "A Promotion of Basic Education" only provides education to the citizens of a nation. This otherwise thorough and well written resolution would have had my full support if not for this single failing.

This, I believe, is the most compelling reason to repeal the resolution. The Charter of Civil Rights set the standard of the World Assembly not dividing human (or, if you prefer, sapient) rights based on citizenship. Just as no person should be denied protection against discrimination because of their citizenship status, no person should be denied the right to an education because of their citizenship status.

One could even question if A Promotion of Basic Education stands up to Charter scrutiny. But legality of a resolution cannot be an argument for its repeal, unfortunately.

Dr. Bradford William Castro

Ambassador-at-Large,
Permanent Chief of Mission for World Assembly affairs,
the Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes

If a person is not a citizen of a nation, and pays no taxes, then how is it their "right" to benefit by those who are citizens and who do pay taxes?

[Quadrimmina]

The Republic of Quadrimmina would like to voice their opposition to a blatant repeal of this legislation. We feel that a supplemental resolution would be better in addressing your concerns. However, if you wish to go forth with this repeal, we ask that you also include your resolution proposal for the new education proposal for our review.

We are sorry to have to vote "no thanks" for the repeal at the current state of affairs.

[Grays Harbor]

As the duly appointed representative of His Majesty's government to the General Assembly, we find ourselves in a bit of a quandry over this draft repeal. We must first state that we did not support, nor did we vote in favour of, the target of this repeal, A Promotion of Basic Education. However, we supported the alternate, Primary Education Act, even less. Further, we do not believe the draft repeal, as currently laid out, is sufficient reason for a repeal, as much as we would like to see that resolution repealed. Therefore, we cannot at this time support this measure.

[Quelesh]

With all respect to the esteemed Dr. Castro, haven't we already had this fight? More than once? I don't see what is to be gained from rehashing these arguments.

[Glen-Rhodes]

Eduard blinked twice, "No, when did I say that? Unibot offers education to stateless people, It is just our opinion that the World Assembly should not mandate that all member nations follow suit with those principles which, while we believe are highly ethical, are also costly, and rarely beneficial to the economy or the nation of Unibot. We would understand if taxpayers in another member nation disagreed with the "education to all regardless of nationality" principle."

While we should not be starting an long argument better fitting for a replacement draft, I have to respectfully disagree. The economic benefits of education are quite well known, and even your resolution says that there are significant benefits. A better education leads to innovation in academics, industry, and the marketplace. A nations of dunces is not going to be able to economically rival a nation of educated workers. The costs of delivering an education, if that education is efficient and of high quality, would be easily recouped by the economic success those students go on to bring to their nation.

If a nation would have significant problems with bringing non-citizens into their education system, the World Assembly can provide aid until that system is corrected to be able to hold the additional influx of students. We already give aid to nations who need it until they can reorganize their education system to provide for all citizens. If there was a population boom, the World Assembly would give aid to nations until they can change their system to handle the amount of new students. There is no significant difference between that and introducing non-citizen students, who are currently denied educations, into the education system.

If a person is not a citizen of a nation, and pays no taxes, then how is it their "right" to benefit by those who are citizens and who do pay taxes?

How is their "right" to benefit from nondiscrimination? How is it their "right" to assemble or express themselves? To not be forced into slavery or be trafficked?To get a divorce? How is it their "right" to maintain a private life? To be treated humanely in prison, or to not be tortured? How is it their "right" to not be held indefinitely without being charged with a crime, or to be held based on ex post facto laws?

The World Assembly doesn't differentiate between the value of a human with citizenship status and the value of a human without citizenship status. We grant all of those above rights to all individuals, not just citizens. We do not play politics with the costs of upholding fundamental human and civil rights. Simply because it might be expensive to take care of non-citizen prisoners does not mean it is reasonable or conscionable for the World Assembly to deny non-citizens that right.

As the duly appointed representative of His Majesty's government to the General Assembly, we find ourselves in a bit of a quandry over this draft repeal. We must first state that we did not support, nor did we vote in favour of, the target of this repeal, A Promotion of Basic Education. However, we supported the alternate, Primary Education Act, even less.

The Primary Education Act is not necessarily the replacement. There are other delegations that have shown interests in working with education, including the Sionis Prioratus, Unibot, and Charlotte Ryberg delegations. If this is repealed and they do not wish to take up the task, I would bring the Primary Education Act back to the table. There is nothing detestable about that. Let's remember that Pres. Heir introduced A Promotion of Basic Education because he felt the other available proposals weren't adequate.

However, it is clear that significant changes ought to be made. I have never been opposed outright to changing the language, so long as there is a serious debate about it, and not political grandstanding and obstruction. Ambassador Mongkha, from Urgench, can attest to that fact that I have already once offered up everything for revision, when the original veered too far for his tastes. (If there is question why I would cater to his opinions, it is because he genuinely participated in the debate.) I only require that (a) it mandates nations provide an education to all persons and (b) it provides financial assistance to struggling nations.

Further, we do not believe the draft repeal, as currently laid out, is sufficient reason for a repeal, as much as we would like to see that resolution repealed. Therefore, we cannot at this time support this measure.

So, you do believe there are reasons to repeal A Promotion of Basic Education. I'm curious what your objections to the resolution are.

Dr. Bradford William Castro

Ambassador-at-Large,
Permanent Chief of Mission for World Assembly affairs,
the Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes

[Glen-Rhodes]

Updated to highlight the more prominent arguments. Also, submitted for a test run. It's a long shot, but one that I am willing to try to achieve.

Dr. Bradford William Castro

Ambassador-at-Large,
Permanent Chief of Mission for World Assembly affairs,
the Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes

[Quadrimmina]

It is important to note that a nation's citizens pay taxes in order to attend school. To then bring in a non-citizen and give them equal footing compared to a citizen with taxpayer money is a different matter, especially when the school system is poorly funded and can barely handle those who pay to go to school.

[Sionis Prioratus]

Let us see how far this personal vendetta will go.

[Glen-Rhodes]

It is important to note that a nation's citizens pay taxes in order to attend school. To then bring in a non-citizen and give them equal footing compared to a citizen with taxpayer money is a different matter, especially when the school system is poorly funded and can barely handle those who pay to go to school.

It is equally important to remember that, unless a nation only taxes on income, and requires some form of citizenship validation to collect those taxes, the idea that non-citizens don't pay taxes is a little light-weight. Many nations have a system of sales taxes, which are completely indiscriminate when it comes to citizenship status. Furthermore, many nations employ payroll taxes, which non-citizens do pay. Non-citizens also contribute to a corporate tax system, where the corporation often spreads the cost of the tax among consumers and employees.

In most cases, it is nearly impossible to completely evade taxes, at least in nations with serious tax laws and enforcement agencies. If a nation is particularly struggling with making it possible for non-citizens to pay their fair share, they can employ tax systems that use independent identification numbers (tax ID numbers that do not depend on citizenship). In fact, this is a common system used for non-citizens that have assets in nations other than the one they reside in.

The burden of paying for a school system is not at the fault of non-citizen students. Oftentimes, it is at the fault of an unhealthy economy. The World Assembly has long provided sources of aid for its mandates. "A Promotion of Basic Education" provides aid to nations that have trouble supporting education system. Although, the World Assembly has no oversight over this funding, which means we cannot truly tell if nations are using those funds for legitimate purposes. A decent education resolution would involve an oversight mechanism.

Dr. Bradford William Castro

Ambassador-at-Large,
Permanent Chief of Mission for World Assembly affairs,
the Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes

[Sionis Prioratus]

"A Promotion of Basic Education" provides aid to nations that have trouble supporting education system. Although, the World Assembly has no oversight over this funding, which means we cannot truly tell if nations are using those funds for legitimate purposes. A decent education resolution would involve an oversight mechanism.

You, as always, are simply being your usual flat-out shameless liar:

From "A Promotion of Basic Education":

4. Declares that the WA General Accounting Office (GAO) shall allocate and provide funds at the request of any nation for the purposes of complying to this legislation and providing quality education, so long as the recipient nation:

(a) Uses the donation(s) exclusively to provide a basic education to citizens of their nation;
(b) Is deemed to be genuinely unable to economically support the requirements of basic education based on this document;

[Glen-Rhodes]

4. Declares that the WA General Accounting Office (GAO) shall allocate and provide funds at the request of any nation for the purposes of complying to this legislation and providing quality education, so long as the recipient nation:

(a) Uses the donation(s) exclusively to provide a basic education to citizens of their nation;
(b) Is deemed to be genuinely unable to economically support the requirements of basic education based on this document;

The only stipulation is that the donations(s) are used "exclusively to provide a basis education", however it leaves the determining of what that use actually is to the nations themselves. A nation could use the aid simply for purposes that do not benefit their students. A rather corrupt government could pad the pocketbooks of their headmasters and headmistresses, or of their education ministers, under the guise that it's required spending for providing an education.

The World Assembly, through the General Account Office or otherwise, cannot audit their spending or monitor it in an way. It can only determine if the nation genuinely is unable to economically support their students. The most corrupt nations, which are often to poorest, will receive the largest aid packages. Imagine billion-dollar packages being sent to a nation, but that nation having no accountability to spend that money on books, building improvements, buses, etc.

The oversight issue did not appear out of my arse. The Kawaiin delegation first brought the issue to our attention.

Dr. Bradford William Castro

Ambassador-at-Large,
Permanent Chief of Mission for World Assembly affairs,
the Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes