Advertisement
by Ceni » Fri Aug 09, 2013 3:38 pm
by Forestigan » Fri Aug 09, 2013 4:08 pm
Ceni wrote:It only bans the discharge of ballast water in coastal waters and internal waterways. Shippers are free to do so on the open ocean.
by Sprawlville » Fri Aug 09, 2013 4:09 pm
by Ceni » Fri Aug 09, 2013 4:23 pm
Forestigan wrote: As a nation with no direct ocean access, this would eliminate or severely restrict our ability to export goods by ship.
by Forestigan » Fri Aug 09, 2013 4:29 pm
by The Eternal Kawaii » Fri Aug 09, 2013 4:57 pm
Forestigan wrote:Ceni wrote:
I suppose that not having direct ocean access would do that to you, not the resolution.
It would, in fact, not do that, but I thank you for your concern.
[OOC] My nation is based on Michigan--major shipping industry via the Great Lakes and eventually the St. Lawrence, and major invasive problems due to ballast water in those same lakes.
by Bergnovinaia » Fri Aug 09, 2013 5:42 pm
by Fennijer » Fri Aug 09, 2013 9:53 pm
by Forestigan » Fri Aug 09, 2013 9:59 pm
The Eternal Kawaii wrote:Forestigan wrote:It would, in fact, not do that, but I thank you for your concern.
[OOC] My nation is based on Michigan--major shipping industry via the Great Lakes and eventually the St. Lawrence, and major invasive problems due to ballast water in those same lakes.
As a nation with an inland waterway through which many foreign ships travel, you would be the among the most serious hurt by untreated ballast water discharges. Shouldn't you be in favor of this proposal, then?
by The Black Hat Guy » Sat Aug 10, 2013 6:09 am
Steve Jobs wrote:I say let nature be. I am against it.
by Capitalist Producers » Sat Aug 10, 2013 11:21 am
PROHIBITS the transfer of invasive species from one nation to another - member nations shall work actively to prevent the transfer of invasive species across their borders through all means necessary, except through closing national borders;
by Potted Plants United » Sat Aug 10, 2013 1:54 pm
Ceni wrote:DEFINES "invasive species" as any non-sapient species posing a serious risk of causing detrimental effects upon being introduced to a new environment;
Member nations shall treat ballast water on ocean going vessels to kill any invasive species that may be present,
Member nations shall screen imported species to determine whether such species pose a risk of becoming an invasive species or spreading disease
Member nations shall develop specialized response units to eliminate or remove invasive species from the environment;
PROHIBITS the transfer of invasive species from one nation to another
member nations shall work actively to prevent the transfer of invasive species across their borders through all means necessary except through closing national borders;
OUTLAWS practices of the shipping industry conducive to the accidental spread of invasive species, namely the discharge of ballast water in coastal waters or internal waterways and use of inadequate vessel-cleaning procedures;
Separatist Peoples wrote:"NOPENOPENOPENOPENOPENOPENOPENOPE!"
- Mr. Bell, when introduced to PPU's newest moving plant
by Slafstopia » Sat Aug 10, 2013 2:07 pm
Potted Plants United wrote:member nations shall work actively to prevent the transfer of invasive species across their borders through all means necessary except through closing national borders;
"We cannot accept the WA forbidding us from closing our national borders to imports from one or more of the other WA nations."
by Araraukar » Sat Aug 10, 2013 4:38 pm
Slafstopia wrote:As I understand it, that doesn't ban you from closing your national borders to imports from any nations, unless you're using it as a measure to stop invasive species.
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
by Riasy » Sat Aug 10, 2013 5:59 pm
Araraukar wrote:Slafstopia wrote:As I understand it, that doesn't ban you from closing your national borders to imports from any nations, unless you're using it as a measure to stop invasive species.
That's exactly the bit that makes no sense - why wouldn't you be allowed to close your borders to stop an invasive species? An extreme measure of course, but sometimes needed.
Riasy wrote:Ceni wrote:PROHIBITS the transfer of invasive species from one nation to another - member nations shall work actively to prevent the transfer of invasive species across their borders through all means necessary;
I’m deeply sorry for spotting the potential problem only after you have already submitted the resolution, but this clause troubles me. I fear that it can force member-nations to completely shut their borders to exclude any possibility that invasive species will ever be transferred across their borders. After all, member-nations are obliged by this clause to use “all means necessary” for prevention of such transfers, and such closure probably will be the most reliable way to completely prevent them.
Iljas Saparitti, Ambassador.
by Araraukar » Sat Aug 10, 2013 11:14 pm
Riasy wrote:Of course it would have been much better to completely rework it, but at least now this clause isn't outright fatal for member nations, but simply inconvenient:Ceni wrote:PROHIBITS the transfer of invasive species from one nation to another - member nations shall work actively to prevent the transfer of invasive species across their borders through all means necessary;
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
by The Oan Isles » Sun Aug 11, 2013 12:40 am
by Riasy » Sun Aug 11, 2013 4:32 am
Araraukar wrote:Riasy wrote:Of course it would have been much better to completely rework it, but at least now this clause isn't outright fatal for member nations, but simply inconvenient:
And better yet would've been "through any and all means [the member nation in question] deems necessary". As it is, it's still a flaw, and one that should and will be brought up, unless changed.
by Araraukar » Sun Aug 11, 2013 4:32 am
The Oan Isles wrote:The WA has't created any means to finance it's projects and taxation is out of the question. HQ is already such a mess and in a state of disrepair.
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
by Araraukar » Sun Aug 11, 2013 4:36 am
Riasy wrote:I don’t think that your wording would make much sense.
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
by Riasy » Sun Aug 11, 2013 4:51 am
Araraukar wrote:Riasy wrote:I don’t think that your wording would make much sense.
"Any and all means necessary" means the member nation would be allowed to do anything up to and including stopping every person on the border to search them and irradiate their belongings, closing their borders to imports from a member nation or nations known to have troubles with invasive species, or take a flamethrower at anything that moves outside of the carefully controlled border crossings.
by Araraukar » Sun Aug 11, 2013 5:10 am
Riasy wrote:And the current wording actually obliges member-nations to do all these things...
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
by Riasy » Sun Aug 11, 2013 5:30 am
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement