[draft] Children's products safety act

[Caracasus]

Okay - this is my first go at making a proposal. I've searched the lists of WA and even the old UN proposals and haven't found anything on this yet. I feel that this is a reasonable proposal and I'd like some input.

AIM To impose a set standard of safety for children's products for sale on the international market.

RECOGNIZING The need for parents to ensure that products designed for consumption by their children are relatively safe for consumption.

FURTHER RECOGNIZING that many nations do have rigorous safety standards for their products, but noting that standards vary wildly between countries and that parents may not be aware of the safety standards that products purchased for their children were made to before purchasing a product - hence the need for a comprehensive, recognizable benchmark for safety in products.

FURTHER RECOGNIZING the impossibility of many nations to fully test and assure the safety of every product line and manufacturer on point of import, and to provide customs officials and importers with a globally recognized symbol of baseline safety standards to further allow them to pinpoint and satisfactorily inspect potential imports.

DEFINING Children's products as any product designed for the consumption of children, marketed for sale to children or parents/guardians. Including, but not limited to, toys, educational products and accessories such as prams.

DEFINING safety standards as:
(i) Being free from known toxic substances that could easily enter the body during routine use such as lead paint.
(ii) Not manufactured with material, or constructed in such a way that it is likely to cause serious physical harm to the user or others when used as intended.
(iii) Manufactured to a level of durability that requires that the product would not break into potentially lethal fragments under expected, reasonable use.
(iv) Requiring an easily recognizable quality assurance stamp to be displayed somewhere on the product, informing the purchaser that the product has met the standards above.

DEFINING for sale on the international market in this context as any product exported from its country of origin for consumption by citizens of another state.

DEFINING imposing a set.... as the formation of a body charged with the oversight and administration of safety tests and implementation of agreed upon safety standards.

REQUIRES that products manufactured for the international market for consumption by children meets the above minimum safety standards and bears the chosen visible stamp confirming that the product meets the minimum safety standards.

So... what do you think? Probably needs a bit of work.

Edits:
Altered requirement to close loophole that did not require products meeting standards, merely that they had to have a stamp REQUIRES that products manufactured for the international market for consumption by children meets the above minimum safety standards and bears the chosen visible stamp confirming that the product meets the minimum safety standards.
Changed wording on 2nd requirement so it is less ambiguous and will not ban, for example, scissors (ii) Not manufactured with material, or constructed in such a way that it is likely to cause serious physical harm to the user or others when used as intended.

Last draft - tidied up some of the language and removed age guidelines as a requirement

Changed to "manufactured using a material and with sharp edges or points capable of inflicting serious injury"

Changed to "manufactured to a level of durability that requires that the toy would not break into potentially lethal fragments under reasonable use"

REQUIRES that products manufactured for the international market for consumption by children bear a visible stamp confirming that the product meets the minimum safety standards outlined above.

FURTHER RECOGNIZING that many nations do have rigorous safety standards for their products, but noting that standards vary wildly between countries and that parents may not be aware of the safety standards that products purchased for their children were made to before purchasing a product - hence the need for a comprehensive, recognizable benchmark for safety in products

[Jarish Inyo]

No sharp edges and unbreakable? So, you've basically outlawed blocks, toy cars, doll accessories, tea sets and books. And everything breaks. There is no avoiding that.

[Caracasus]

No sharp edges and unbreakable? So, you've basically outlawed blocks, toy cars, doll accessories, tea sets and books. And everything breaks. There is no avoiding that.

The idea is sharp edges capable of cutting/puncturing human skin. The legislation also does not state unbreakable - it states that subjected to normal wear and tear the toy/piece of equipment itself would not fragment into small, possibly lethal fragments.

[Caracasus]

No sharp edges and unbreakable? So, you've basically outlawed blocks, toy cars, doll accessories, tea sets and books. And everything breaks. There is no avoiding that.

Having said that:

Changed to "manufactured using a material and with sharp edges or points capable of inflicting serious injury"

Changed to "manufactured to a level of durability that requires that the toy would not break into potentially lethal fragments under reasonable use"

Would that be better? You'd still have blocks, toy cars, doll accessories tea sets and books - none would be expected to have sharp edges or points that would inflict serious injury. Durability would also be considered as general wear and tear. Sure, you could smash a toy car with a hammer and shank someone with one of the shards, but that'd fall far outside normal wear and tear.

[Separatist Peoples]

"How is this an international issue that member states cannot handle adequately on their own?"

[Caracasus]

"How is this an international issue that member states cannot handle adequately on their own?"

It's designed to create a designated benchmark of safety for children's products. Basically it creates a stamp that means anything bearing said stamp on the international market abides by certain standards of safety.

There is nothing that would stop a nation placing more stringent levels of safety, or less stringent levels on products manufactured within their state here.

[Separatist Peoples]

"How is this an international issue that member states cannot handle adequately on their own?"

It's designed to create a designated benchmark of safety for children's products. Basically it creates a stamp that means anything bearing said stamp on the international market abides by certain standards of safety.

There is nothing that would stop a nation placing more stringent levels of safety, or less stringent levels on products manufactured within their state here.

"So it would seem. However, your micromanaging attempt isn't legal. It has no operative clause; it's a string of definitions. It violates the rule requiring resolutions actually do something."

[Caracasus]

It's designed to create a designated benchmark of safety for children's products. Basically it creates a stamp that means anything bearing said stamp on the international market abides by certain standards of safety.

There is nothing that would stop a nation placing more stringent levels of safety, or less stringent levels on products manufactured within their state here.

"So it would seem. However, your micromanaging attempt isn't legal. It has no operative clause; it's a string of definitions. It violates the rule requiring resolutions actually do something."

Indeed. As I said, this is my first shot at writing one of these. Looking for guidance really.

Maybe it'd help if I explained the point. Basically this is to avoid products aimed at or consumed by children containing dangerous toxins or being rather obviously harmful to children.

The operating clause would be:

REQUIRES that products manufactured for the international market for consumption by children bear a visible stamp confirming that the product meets the minimum safety standards outlined above.

[Separatist Peoples]

"So it would seem. However, your micromanaging attempt isn't legal. It has no operative clause; it's a string of definitions. It violates the rule requiring resolutions actually do something."

Indeed. As I said, this is my first shot at writing one of these. Looking for guidance really.

Maybe it'd help if I explained the point. Basically this is to avoid products aimed at or consumed by children containing dangerous toxins or being rather obviously harmful to children.

The operating clause would be:

REQUIRES that products manufactured for the international market for consumption by children bear a visible stamp confirming that the product meets the minimum safety standards outlined above.

"That would certainly make this legal in terms of an operative clause. I do wonder if this violates National Economic Freedoms, but the Secretariat seems to have decided against actually enforcing it long ago, so I imagine that is more of a noted curiosity than a problem. I still maintain that this is unnecessary, as different cultures and species will have different requirements, and standardizing them does nothing but micromanage the issue."

[The Dark Star Republic]

"The scope of this is a bit narrow. Why only children's products? Even given the expansive definition, that seems unnecessarily restrictive. The WA has barely any law on product safety in general. You could easily expand this to creating international standardisation in manufactured goods hazard labels.

Indeed. As I said, this is my first shot at writing one of these. Looking for guidance really.

"You can look, but you may find that you are far likelier to receive pettifoggery over tedious legalisms than actual constructive help. This isn't the best place to come if you're just looking for help in writing a proposal, really."

~ Daisy Chinmusic
Legislative Intern

[Grays Harbor]

Given the amount of products, especially toys, that are imported and exported daily, this may actually be a valid international issue. (OOC: Yeah, i said that. Try not to faint, you pack of over-zealous intfeds). I shall have to look this over carefully for some suggestions on possible improvements.

[Caracasus]

Indeed. As I said, this is my first shot at writing one of these. Looking for guidance really.

Maybe it'd help if I explained the point. Basically this is to avoid products aimed at or consumed by children containing dangerous toxins or being rather obviously harmful to children.

The operating clause would be:

REQUIRES that products manufactured for the international market for consumption by children bear a visible stamp confirming that the product meets the minimum safety standards outlined above.

"That would certainly make this legal in terms of an operative clause. I do wonder if this violates National Economic Freedoms, but the Secretariat seems to have decided against actually enforcing it long ago, so I imagine that is more of a noted curiosity than a problem. I still maintain that this is unnecessary, as different cultures and species will have different requirements, and standardizing them does nothing but micromanage the issue."

This is precisely why legislation like this is needed. It shows, by means of an easily identifiable stamp, that said product conforms to a set of safety criteria that anyone can read up on. It is completely up to individual states weather they wish to legislate within that state for anything else.

[Esalonia]

Well, let's just say that every nation has their own safety tests.

But then here we have nations who do away with safety tests.

This legislation is needed so that safety tests will be ensure to be done. A few things I would like to point out:

"sharp edges and points"

we still have blocks' corners, and Legos (childhood burns in your feet, mate?), which are very notorious. But at least in the first place they don't become lethal fragments.

And the overall thing. Some of this can apply to general goods, not just kids' products.

-Garren Pritchards, Esalonian Representative to the WA

[Caracasus]

Given the amount of products, especially toys, that are imported and exported daily, this may actually be a valid international issue. (OOC: Yeah, i said that. Try not to faint, you pack of over-zealous intfeds). I shall have to look this over carefully for some suggestions on possible improvements.

Thank you. I was wondering weather to make the production to set standards compulsory, with the stamp as a guarantee that this has been done OR to make it voluntary, with the stamp being a guarantee that the specified standards have been met.

Additionally - the standards are supposed to ensure the following. - No product designed for the consumption of children should be a) made of anything that could poison a child b) be made in such a way that it poses a serious risk of injury to a child or c) be made so poorly that it could easily be broken in such a way as to injure a child.

EG a) Toys painted in lead based paint. b) A metal action figure with razor sharp sword accessory. c) A pram or pushchair that often malfunctions and collapses.

I may leave out the age guide part. Could be too micromanagement

[Caracasus]

Well, let's just say that every nation has their own safety tests.

But then here we have nations who do away with safety tests.

This legislation is needed so that safety tests will be ensure to be done. A few things I would like to point out:

"sharp edges and points"

we still have blocks' corners, and Legos (childhood burns in your feet, mate?), which are very notorious. But at least in the first place they don't become lethal fragments.

And the overall thing. Some of this can apply to general goods, not just kids' products.

-Garren Pritchards, Esalonian Representative to the WA

Thank you. Yes - I have changed the sharp edges and points to sharp edges and points likely to cause serious physical harm. We're not talking about building blocks here.

Some of this could apply to general goods, sure - but do you want to open that can of legislative worms? It's enough trouble thinking up legislation that would mean toys don't pose a serious health risk or risk of injury to kids.

[Separatist Peoples]

This is precisely why legislation like this is needed. It shows, by means of an easily identifiable stamp, that said product conforms to a set of safety criteria that anyone can read up on. It is completely up to individual states weather they wish to legislate within that state for anything else.

"Nations would better be able to handle this by regulating their own import standards rather than have the World Assembly hold the hands of every state and tell them what is and isn't any good to buy. Then no consumer would have to do any research: unsafe items would simply not pass through Customs."

[Caracasus]

This is precisely why legislation like this is needed. It shows, by means of an easily identifiable stamp, that said product conforms to a set of safety criteria that anyone can read up on. It is completely up to individual states weather they wish to legislate within that state for anything else.

"Nations would better be able to handle this by regulating their own import standards rather than have the World Assembly hold the hands of every state and tell them what is and isn't any good to buy. Then no consumer would have to do any research: unsafe items would simply not pass through Customs."

This isn't about hand holding. It's about minimum safety standards - no customs and import control in the world is going to be able to analyse every single type of toy, pram or cot coming through its borders, and nor should it have to. By placing the responsibility on the product manufacturer to ensure that products for the international market are built to minimum safety requirements we provide a level of informed choice to the consumer and to importing nations; namely that this product meets internationally recognized safety guidelines.

Your preferred method would result in a list of government sanctioned products - the only feasible way this could work would be for the nation's government to inspect every product before allowing it to be imported. This way customers and importing companies can easily identify products that are considered safe for consumption.

[Separatist Peoples]

"Nations would better be able to handle this by regulating their own import standards rather than have the World Assembly hold the hands of every state and tell them what is and isn't any good to buy. Then no consumer would have to do any research: unsafe items would simply not pass through Customs."

This isn't about hand holding. It's about minimum safety standards - no customs and import control in the world is going to be able to analyse every single type of toy, pram or cot coming through its borders, and nor should it have to. By placing the responsibility on the product manufacturer to ensure that products for the international market are built to minimum safety requirements we provide a level of informed choice to the consumer and to importing nations; namely that this product meets internationally recognized safety guidelines.

Your preferred method would result in a list of government sanctioned products - the only feasible way this could work would be for the nation's government to inspect every product before allowing it to be imported. This way customers and importing companies can easily identify products that are considered safe for consumption.

"That is exactly the system that most states utilize, ambassador. A long laundry list of acceptable products that meet their standards for safety, based on manufacturer and nation of origin. Every type of product for importation is generally inspected prior to being allowed to import, because the alternative is to allow a potentially dangerous item be imported with no oversight. I'm sure you intended to do more investigation on how commercial importation worked before pitching this, but I well understand the time constraints that being an ambassador places on oneself."

[Caracasus]

This isn't about hand holding. It's about minimum safety standards - no customs and import control in the world is going to be able to analyse every single type of toy, pram or cot coming through its borders, and nor should it have to. By placing the responsibility on the product manufacturer to ensure that products for the international market are built to minimum safety requirements we provide a level of informed choice to the consumer and to importing nations; namely that this product meets internationally recognized safety guidelines.

Your preferred method would result in a list of government sanctioned products - the only feasible way this could work would be for the nation's government to inspect every product before allowing it to be imported. This way customers and importing companies can easily identify products that are considered safe for consumption.

"That is exactly the system that most states utilize, ambassador. A long laundry list of acceptable products that meet their standards for safety, based on manufacturer and nation of origin. Every type of product for importation is generally inspected prior to being allowed to import, because the alternative is to allow a potentially dangerous item be imported with no oversight. I'm sure you intended to do more investigation on how commercial importation worked before pitching this, but I well understand the time constraints that being an ambassador places on oneself."

The key word here being most. This legislation would be twofold - states who wished to modify their import laws whichever way would remain free to do so, states who either lack the will or infrastructure to monitor their imports to such a strenuous degree would no longer be importing dangerous products. With the burden placed on the manufacturer to ensure that products meet a set requirement in terms of safety as opposed to the purchaser/importer we can ensure that products designed for children's consumption will probably not harm or kill them without having to go through the rigmarole of ensuring that products are safe.

As I am sure you are aware ambassador, current states do not inspect every product or product line, there is not the time or available trained staff to do so. Rather they employ targeted risk assessments pinpointing products that they feel may be unsafe, weather identified by originating state or manufacturer. Such a global baseline safety requirement would work to ensure dangerous products do not slip through the net and allow government inspectors (where they exist) to target potentially dangerous products with considerably more information on hand to do so.

[Kakhovske]

DEFINING for sale on the international market in this context as any product exported from its country of origin for consumption by citizens of another state.

This legislation does not intrude into a nation's internal states of affairs, but sets a minimum stanard of quality, in the interests of safety for all people of the world, that I'm sure most nations would agree to anyway. Not having it is as impractical as all nations using their own different systems of measurement. It's worth stressing that this should only be a minimal standard, while individual nations can set their own higher standards if need be. If anything, this legislation should sweep further and set a minimum standard for quality for all imported goods, but that's too complicated to fit into one resolution.
This legislaton has my support.

[Grays Harbor]

This is precisely why legislation like this is needed. It shows, by means of an easily identifiable stamp, that said product conforms to a set of safety criteria that anyone can read up on. It is completely up to individual states weather they wish to legislate within that state for anything else.

"Nations would better be able to handle this by regulating their own import standards rather than have the World Assembly hold the hands of every state and tell them what is and isn't any good to buy. Then no consumer would have to do any research: unsafe items would simply not pass through Customs."

True, however, having an internationally recognized set of guidelines as a base would not be such a bad idea. I don't see this so much as hand-holding as I would an aid to commerce and standards, where national customs personnel and distributers would not have to deal with myriad sets of regulations and would have a standard baseline to base off of. If a particular item is imported, having a certification that it meets or exceeds a set minimum standard for that item it would help streamline the entire process by not having to research each and every example of that item as it comes through customs. The responsibility would then be on the exporter to ensure it meets those standards, and the importer would then have reasonable assurances that what they are importing does meet those standards.

[Imperium Anglorum]

"The scope of this is a bit narrow. Why only children's products? Even given the expansive definition, that seems unnecessarily restrictive. The WA has barely any law on product safety in general. You could easily expand this to creating international standardisation in manufactured goods hazard labels.

The reason why the Excellent Ambassador won't broaden their proposal, Sir, is because then, they won't be able to say 'think of the children! think of the children!'.

Okay - this is my first go at making a proposal. I've searched the lists of WA and even the old UN proposals and haven't found anything on this yet. I feel that this is a reasonable proposal and I'd like some input.

AIM To impose a set standard of safety for children's products for sale on the international market.

RECOGNIZING The need for parents to ensure that products designed for consumption by their children are relatively safe for consumption.

FURTHER RECOGNIZING that many nations do have rigorous safety standards for their products, but noting that standards vary wildly between countries and that parents may not be aware of the safety standards that products purchased for their children were made to before purchasing a product - hence the need for a comprehensive, recognizable benchmark for safety in products

DEFINING Children's products as any product designed for the consumption of children, marketed for sale to children or parents/guardians. Including, but not limited to, toys, educational products and accessories such as prams.

DEFINING safety standards as: Being free from known toxic substances that could easily enter the body during routine use such as lead paint. Not manufactured using a material and with sharp edges or points capable of inflicting serious injury. manufactured to a level of durability that requires that the product would not break into potentially lethal fragments under expected, reasonable use. Requiring a recommended age range on products discouraging sale of products with potentially dangerous components to younger children. Requiring an easily recognizable quality assurance stamp to be displayed somewhere on the product.

DEFINING for sale on the international market in this context as any product exported from its country of origin for consumption by citizens of another state.

DEFINING imposing a set.... as the formation of a body charged with the oversight and administration of safety tests and implementation of agreed upon safety standards.

REQUIRES that products manufactured for the international market for consumption by children bear a visible stamp confirming that the product meets the minimum safety standards outlined above.

I refuse to believe that the personnel at HM Customs, the personnel at stores, the companies which produce (and would need to recall these broken toys), and the customer who buys these toys are all dumb enough that they need some sort of WA mandate to tell them what they should and should not buy.

[The Northern Kingdoms]

I support this, since this sets the roof for safety.

[The Dark Star Republic]

Sir

"Who?

I refuse to believe that the personnel at HM Customs, the personnel at stores, the companies which produce (and would need to recall these broken toys), and the customer who buys these toys are all dumb enough that they need some sort of WA mandate to tell them what they should and should not buy.

"Given the utter skull-thudding vacuousness exhibited by your country's people when it comes to writing legislation, the only thing that would not surprise me is if their children are not currently cramming great handfuls of the stuff down their own throats as we speak.

"That is exactly the system that most states utilize, ambassador. A long laundry list of acceptable products that meet their standards for safety, based on manufacturer and nation of origin. Every type of product for importation is generally inspected prior to being allowed to import, because the alternative is to allow a potentially dangerous item be imported with no oversight. I'm sure you intended to do more investigation on how commercial importation worked before pitching this, but I well understand the time constraints that being an ambassador places on oneself."

"That's nice in principle, but it's not terribly realistic. Given the profusion of nations in the WA, to believe that each country can accurately taken account of all the other safety standards in the world is forbiddingly naive. A single guaranteed stamp would transcend barriers of language more conveniently."

~ Daisy Chinmusic
Legislative Intern

[Caracasus]

"The scope of this is a bit narrow. Why only children's products? Even given the expansive definition, that seems unnecessarily restrictive. The WA has barely any law on product safety in general. You could easily expand this to creating international standardisation in manufactured goods hazard labels.

The reason why the Excellent Ambassador won't broaden their proposal, Sir, is because then, they won't be able to say 'think of the children! think of the children!'.

Okay - this is my first go at making a proposal. I've searched the lists of WA and even the old UN proposals and haven't found anything on this yet. I feel that this is a reasonable proposal and I'd like some input.

AIM To impose a set standard of safety for children's products for sale on the international market.

RECOGNIZING The need for parents to ensure that products designed for consumption by their children are relatively safe for consumption.

FURTHER RECOGNIZING that many nations do have rigorous safety standards for their products, but noting that standards vary wildly between countries and that parents may not be aware of the safety standards that products purchased for their children were made to before purchasing a product - hence the need for a comprehensive, recognizable benchmark for safety in products

DEFINING Children's products as any product designed for the consumption of children, marketed for sale to children or parents/guardians. Including, but not limited to, toys, educational products and accessories such as prams.

DEFINING safety standards as: Being free from known toxic substances that could easily enter the body during routine use such as lead paint. Not manufactured using a material and with sharp edges or points capable of inflicting serious injury. manufactured to a level of durability that requires that the product would not break into potentially lethal fragments under expected, reasonable use. Requiring a recommended age range on products discouraging sale of products with potentially dangerous components to younger children. Requiring an easily recognizable quality assurance stamp to be displayed somewhere on the product.

DEFINING for sale on the international market in this context as any product exported from its country of origin for consumption by citizens of another state.

DEFINING imposing a set.... as the formation of a body charged with the oversight and administration of safety tests and implementation of agreed upon safety standards.

REQUIRES that products manufactured for the international market for consumption by children bear a visible stamp confirming that the product meets the minimum safety standards outlined above.

I refuse to believe that the personnel at HM Customs, the personnel at stores, the companies which produce (and would need to recall these broken toys), and the customer who buys these toys are all dumb enough that they need some sort of WA mandate to tell them what they should and should not buy.

Again, this is not a mandate telling people what they should or should not buy - it is a base level of safety to be placed on products, specifically those for the consumption of children, that manufacturers are required to meet to export their products to the international market. It is an attempt to give importers, customers and customs more information to make an informed choice regarding what they will purchase.