[PASSED] Pesticide Regulations

[Araraukar]

Okay, new version, which tries to address some of the points raised.

OOC: New Dukaine, please, please don't change the coding on this. Just quote this post and copy off everything inside the box code. Then spoiler the current draft in the first post and post that in its stead. If you include the box code, it'll make it look neater. And yes, neatness can actually affect whether something is supported and/or passes or not.

Pesticide Regulations

Category: Environmental
Area of Effect: Agriculture

The World Assembly,

APPLAUDING previous efforts at enviromental protection,

RECOGNIZING that in many member nations farmers need to rely on chemical pesticides to keep their crops healthy,

CONCERNED of the effects that pesticides may have on the environment and inhabitants of the member nations, such as contamination of waterways, soil and groundwater, as well as unintended harm to non-target organisms,

UNDERSTANDING that like all pollution, pesticide run-off does not respect national boundaries,

HEREBY

1. Extends the mandate of the World Assembly Science Program (WASP) to monitor the use of pesticides in the member nations, their unintentional environmental effects, as well as disseminate information on how to best avoid environmental contamination,

2. Defines "chemical pesticide" as a chemical designed to prevent or kill pathogens and non-sapient pests, and which is used to protect crops or other intentionally grown organisms,

3. Establishes these regulations on chemical pesticides used and produced in the member nations:

1. All pesticide ingredients can only be ones that are permitted for the intended use by the nation where the product is used,
   
2. The ingredients must be listed on the label of the pesticide, which must also contain instructions for safe handling and use,
   
3. No false advertising or unsubstantiated claims are allowed on the label,
   
4. The producer of the pesticide must include its name and contact information on the label,

4. Requires that when using chemical pesticides at or near the border of another nation, the member nations must take all reasonable precautions to avoid cross-border contamination; and in the case of an accident, contact the neighbouring nation's relevant officials,

5. Encourages member nations to research and use more environmentally-friendly pesticides as well as non-chemical forms of pest control, if such are not already in use,

6. Reaffirms that the use of pesticides as chemical weapons does not fall under the domain of this resolution.

Co-Authored by Araraukar

[Araraukar]

You haven't addressed any of my concerns raised here.

OOC: Pedaling as fast as I can! With a cowriter who's turning out to be more of a dead weight hindrance - sorry, ND, but you are - and making me wonder if I don't already pretty much own this draft myself, considering all the rewriting I've done...

New Dukaine, please stop editing the proposal reactively. The changes I list in this post are included in the version I posted above.

Yippee, more WA bureaucrats wandering around the countryside poking their nose in where it's not wanted!

Since that is the main reason for their existence, probably. Although, mind you, there's nothing in this proposal to stop you from using the Kennyites' option to dealing with gnomes...

The inclusion of the phrase "farmed organisms" seems very significant. I'm sure there are conceivable circumstances where someone might wish to use pesticides to protect "unfarmed" organisms.

Changed that to "crops or other intentionally grown organisms" - I'm aware that pesticides can be in some instances be used to protect natural, "wild" organisms, but for the sake of the Area of Effect, this one focuses on ones that sapient creatures are intentionally growing.

Eh, would one be correct in saying that active + inert ingredients = all ingredients? If so, why not just say all ingredients?

Changed.

Info is an abbreviation. Please use the full word.

Done.

Also, the sentence just doesn't roll off the tongue.

I changed a word, but if you have better suggestions, I'm all ears.

In any case, why is this information necessary?

...so that if something goes wrong, your people will know who to blame?

Seriously, accountability. Do I actually need to spell it out or do you think it's the reasonable realization from reading the clause?

This is far too open ended, one could theoretically use only completely safe pesticides and yet still have to use more of them even if it's not needed while still researching.

Changed.

And the infamous military exemption rears it head again. Why? Does the government supplied safety equipment turn chemical pesticides into unicorn farts?

OOC: Like IA pointed out it's so that this doesn't trip over the existing chemical weapons resolution.

I don't see how pesticide regulations are an international issue that require international cooperation. The only thing which I would see on the subject that requires international regulation would be something like the discharge of pesticides into international waters and some kind of regulation on that front, but I can't think of anything else. I will therefore ask the author to give cohesive and convincing argumentation to why this is an international issue.

It now has some added clauses (a preamble one and the new clause 4) that hopefully address that.

But here's the clincher: why is it the case that we need international action to solve this problem?

To assure that everyone's on the same page, basically. (And to prevent your neighbour from poisoning your tomatoes - or whatever you like to eat - with something that your government has banned as being worse than WMDs. )

(OOC: This basically already happens in real life, but I'm too lazy to see if there's any international deals on the issue, or if it's just nations making their corporations to do it separately.)

[Ryanvillle]

I would have to oppose this. The idea of having people monitor pesticide use isn't bad, I 'd support that, but I don't think that the use of pesticides should be internationally regulated.

[New Dukaine]

I would have to oppose this. The idea of having people monitor pesticide use isn't bad, I 'd support that, but I don't think that the use of pesticides should be internationally regulated.

As the author, i see your point. A lot of people are complaining about "why do we NEED international regulations?" To quote my coauthor Araraukar

To assure that everyone's on the same page, basically. (And to prevent your neighbour from poisoning your tomatoes - or whatever you like to eat - with something that your government has banned as being worse than WMDs. )

There is why

Edit: &€@% broken tags!

[Araraukar]

A lot of people are complaining about "why do we NEED international regulations?"

OOC: To be fair, everyone always asks that about every single new proposal.

[Imperium Anglorum]

To assure that everyone's on the same page, basically. (And to prevent your neighbour from poisoning your tomatoes - or whatever you like to eat - with something that your government has banned as being worse than WMDs. )

Okay. Recognising that this is Aru's response, this proposal does significantly more than that. And furthermore, I wouldn't really say that is much of a reason. That is rather a reason to solidify usage requirements to prevent run-off or something. Furthermore, for a nation to do that, it would also have to poison its own crops (unless it is actually dropping pesticides in our nation alone, which would probably be an act of war), so that won't happen.

[Araraukar]

Furthermore, for a nation to do that, it would also have to poison its own crops (unless it is actually dropping pesticides in our nation alone, which would probably be an act of war), so that won't happen.

Unless whatever you were growing was a pest or weed to whatever they're growing.

[New Dukaine]

Bump!!!

I want to submit this. I already have an API Telegram ready for this ready for this.

[Impireacht]

Loryn Marchan: "This is reasonable, and our government already monitors pesticide usage, but environmental concerns should be left to the nation holding the land... this just isn't of international concern, and there is no need for this agreement. Opposed."

[Imperium Anglorum]

Loryn Marchan: "This is reasonable, and our government already monitors pesticide usage, but environmental concerns should be left to the nation holding the land... this just isn't of international concern, and there is no need for this agreement. Opposed."

Parsons: We concur.

[Araraukar]

Bump!!!

I want to submit this. I already have an API Telegram ready for this ready for this.

OOC: *facepalm* We talked about this, didn't we? I'll try to work on a new draft...

RL has been... not good recently. Nothing massively alarming, but it has made me not very interested in fictional lawmaking. Sorry.

[New Dukaine]

Bump!!!

I want to submit this. I already have an API Telegram ready for this ready for this.

OOC: *facepalm* We talked about this, didn't we? I'll try to work on a new draft...

RL has been... not good recently. Nothing massively alarming, but it has made me not very interested in fictional lawmaking. Sorry.

Yes, I know we did, but I literally shelved this for 3 weeks. It's past that time now.

And OOC: I am also kinda busy in RL. Today is B-Day, and school.

[New Dukaine]

Loryn Marchan: "This is reasonable, and our government already monitors pesticide usage, but environmental concerns should be left to the nation holding the land... this just isn't of international concern, and there is no need for this agreement. Opposed."

But some other nations don't, and that's the whole fucking reason I wrote this up.

Also, Some people say it is a blocker too, and that's why some people support it too. I will not submit this anytime soon RN, but I will take some more opinions and questions.

Edit: OOC: I am not going to edit this reactively, thank you

[Araraukar]

New one, now with FAQ!

New Dukaine, please include the FAQ in the first post too. Just quote this post and copypaste it on the top of the first post, then remove the quote code and spoiler the previous draft. If you need help with that, let me know and I'll TG it to you with the code.

Pesticide Regulations

Category: Environmental
Area of Effect: Agriculture

The World Assembly,

APPLAUDING previous efforts at enviromental protection,

RECOGNIZING that in many member nations farmers need to rely on chemical pesticides to keep their crops healthy,

CONCERNED of the effects that pesticides may have on the environment and the inhabitants of the member nations, such as contamination of waterways, soil and groundwater, as well as unintended harm to non-target organisms,

UNDERSTANDING that like all pollution, pesticide run-off does not respect national boundaries,

HEREBY

1. Extends the mandate of the World Assembly Science Program (WASP) to monitor the use of pesticides in the member nations, their unintentional environmental effects, as well as disseminate information on how to best avoid environmental contamination,

2. Defines "chemical pesticide" as a chemical designed to prevent or kill pathogens and non-sapient pests, and which is used to protect crops or other intentionally grown organisms,

3. Establishes these regulations on chemical pesticides used and produced in the member nations:

1. All pesticide ingredients can only be ones that are permitted for the intended use by the nation where the product is used,
   
2. The ingredients must be listed on the label of the pesticide, which must also contain instructions for safe handling and use,
   
3. No false advertising or unsubstantiated claims are allowed on the label,
   
4. The producer of the pesticide must include its name and contact information on the label,

4. Requires that the users of chemical pesticides must act to prevent pesticide runoff with preventative measures, including but not limited to buffer zones, selective application and avoidance of adverse weather conditions likely to increase unintentional spreading of the pesticide,

5. Also requires that should an accident involving pesticides happen at or near the border of another nation, the member nation must contact the neighbouring nation's relevant officials, and offer assistance with possible clean-up measures,

6. Encourages member nations to research and use more environmentally-friendly pesticides as well as non-chemical forms of pest control, if these are not already in use,

7. Reaffirms that the use of pesticides as chemical weapons does not fall under the domain of this resolution.

Co-Authored by Araraukar

What does all this mean?

Why involve WASP?

We didn't want to add yet another committee, but did want an impartial way of both recording and spreading information on the hazards of pesticide use as well as how to avoid said hazards.

"Intentionally grown organisms", isn't that unnecessarily complicated wording?

We had "farmed organisms", until someone pointed out that pesticides are also used to protect organisms (that word is used so that it encompasses plants, animals, fungi and micro-organisms) that aren't farmed, such as destroying invasive species to protect native ecosystems.

What's with the micromanagement?

This is basically an attempt to close some loopholes, but also a way to add requirements similar to those of the real life world.

"Adverse weather conditions"? You mean you can't use pesticides if it's windy or rainy?

If it's very windy and you spray a field from an airplane, it's very likely that the pesticide won't land on the field at all. Or that if it's very rainy, whatever you spray or spread will be washed away. In both cases using the pesticide won't help the farmer at all. We hope that a reasonable nation would read this clause reasonably rather than go "But it rains in the spring, now we can't use pesticides, OMG!"

Why should we care what happens to some other nation, especially if it's not a WA nation?

Well if it's your fault that their soil, air or water is now polluted with pesticides, you definitely should be held responsible. There's also a loophole we're closing, where a nation might "accidentally" spread something right at the border just to cause trouble.

I can't think of a question other than "why have this clause at all?"

Again we're echoing what's happening in the real life world, where more environmentally friendly pesticides and non-chemical pest control - such as using natural predators of pest species, planting plants nearby that the pest species prefers over the crop plants, using predatory animal replicas to deter the smarter pests, and so on - are on the rise, since the more traditional chemical pesticides cause both environmental and health hazards. The bit about "if these are not already at use" means that if you're using those measures already, you won't have to waste money trying to research them.

Why the military exception?

There is an existing chemical weapons resolution, and many pesticides have, over the course of human history, been used in war as chemical weapons. Trying to legislate on that use would fall foul of the previous resolution, which would make this proposal illegal.

If you have additional questions, we're happy to try and reply them!

[New Dukaine]

-snip-

Thank you so much.

[Excidium Planetis]

New one, now with FAQ!

OOC:
I knew it would catch on!

IC:
"This looks fairly good. Anything co-authored by a non-member nation is suspicious, though." Schultz shifts her eyes to Ms. Leveret, pointing two of her fingers at her eyes and then at the Ambassador from Araraukar.

[Imperium Anglorum]

Parsons: I don't like the weather clause. Farmers aren't idiots. They won't hit up the crop duster when a hurricane is raging.

[New Dukaine]

Parsons: I don't like the weather clause. Farmers aren't idiots. They won't hit up the crop duster when a hurricane is raging.

"Oh I have seen many farmers that do that at home in The Duke."

Pama turns around seeing a farmer spraying a pesticide in a storm

"See?"

[Separatist Peoples]

Parsons: I don't like the weather clause. Farmers aren't idiots. They won't hit up the crop duster when a hurricane is raging.

"Oh I have seen many farmers that do that at home in The Duke."

Pama turns around seeing a farmer spraying a pesticide in a storm

"See?"

"Sounds like a domestic issue."

[Araraukar]

New one, now with FAQ!

OOC: I knew it would catch on!

OOC: FAQs in proposals are nothing new, but they've been rarer for the past year or two.

Parsons: I don't like the weather clause. Farmers aren't idiots.

You'd be surprised... But technically that clause might be included in the "instructions for safe handling and use" requirement on labeling.

"Sounds like a domestic issue."

Like human rights when applied only to each nation's own citizens? Or discrimination? Or food and drug standards? Healthcare standards and availability? Basic welfare of your own citizens? Or legal rights? The micromanagement in those resolutions goes well into the "domestic issue" level.

OOC: Million edits because damnit typofingers!

[Grande Republic of Arcadia]

"Citizens of certain member states are GMOs!"

oh no this is gonna happen! https://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=Aw ... &fr2=12642

Attack of the killer tomatoes!!!!!!!

[Potted Plants United]

"Citizens of certain member states are GMOs!"

Attack of the killer tomatoes!!!!!!!

A large potted plant in a big plantpot with wheels suddenly comes to life, revealing a large leaf curled up to form a cone, from which a somewhat hissing voice can be heard:

"Our selves certainly fall into the category of "genetically modified organisms", as we can consciously control our gene expression, and multiply, reduce, insert of remove genes as we see fit. However, we can assure you that our selves do not attack sapient beings, nor do we have tomatoes as you know them, among our selves."

[New Dukaine]

Attack of the killer tomatoes!!!!!!!

A large potted plant in a big plantpot with wheels suddenly comes to life, revealing a large leaf curled up to form a cone, from which a somewhat hissing voice can be heard:

"Our selves certainly fall into the category of "genetically modified organisms", as we can consciously control our gene expression, and multiply, reduce, insert of remove genes as we see fit. However, we can assure you that our selves do not attack sapient beings, nor do we have tomatoes as you know them, among our selves."

Pama walks over and waters the plant a little bit*

There. I saw a dark spot on you yesterday

OOC: sorry, i had to do it

[Araraukar]

Pama walks over and waters the plant a little bit*

There. I saw a dark spot on you yesterday

OOC: sorry, i had to do it

OOC: They don't get diseases, but the gesture would still be appreciated.

[The Puddle Jumping Wads of Wrapper]

Pama walks over and waters the plant a little bit*

There. I saw a dark spot on you yesterday

OOC: sorry, i had to do it

OOC: They don't get diseases, but the gesture would still be appreciated.

OOC: At least he didn't pee on you.

ARI: Hmmm, yes, this has our support. A couple of extremely minor grammar quibbles, the UNDERSTANDING clause needs a comma after the word "that", and we'd make "the member nations" in numbered clause 1 simply "member nations". (Ari whispers.) Ah. Another suggestion, for the subclauses under numbered clause 3, we'd prefer the use of letters instead of numbers. In this way, when we refer to "numbered clause 3" it's clear which clause we are referring to.