[PASSED] On Multilateral Trade Talks

[Neldaria]

A draft to repeal this Resolution (and make way for a better replacement) has been introduced here: viewtopic.php?f=9&t=202970

[Lysandrion]

"I suppose the talks would oficially start once every member nation has appointed its delegate or delegates to them, although member governments would be actually still be in compliance with the resolution if they postpone that appointment until just before the tenth anniversary of its passage, or actually at that tenth anniversary if it comes around before every member has got around to complying...
"Unofficially, of course, those delegates could start negotiating with each other as soon as any of them meet each other here... just as some of diplomats here have already been doing, anyhows, without any need for this resolution on the first paw."

This is exactly what I thought. However, supposing that the clause 2 is as follows:

Mandates that the World Assembly Trade Commission provide any financial or logistical assistance that is reasonably required to host these negotiations;

- we could assume that it is the WATC who is responsible for calling the talks, hosting them, preventing fistfights etc. However, this is a broadening interpretation - and the general practice should rather not allow granting international institutions any competences which are not directly mentioned in the written law.

[Glen-Rhodes]

However, this is a broadening interpretation - and the general practice should rather not allow granting international institutions any competences which are not directly mentioned in the written law.

General practice is that creating committees isn't a detailed process, and complaints about how there's no start date or explicit mention of who in particular 'calls a debate' are totally ignorant of how the UN and the WA have operated for more than 10 years.

[Louisistan]

Charles Maier, Second Secretary to the Assistant to the Deputy Ambassador takes a sip of Whisky. Oh, is this still being discussed?

[Lysandrion]

However, this is a broadening interpretation - and the general practice should rather not allow granting international institutions any competences which are not directly mentioned in the written law.

General practice is that creating committees isn't a detailed process, and complaints about how there's no start date or explicit mention of who in particular 'calls a debate' are totally ignorant of how the UN and the WA have operated for more than 10 years.

Oh my - I am so ashamed . Actually things like the date of annual sessions or the subject empowered to call the meetings aren't really "details" - simply basic regulations. Nobody expects the complete procedure. Of course, we can shift the responsibility for such "details" completely onto WA Compliance Commission, though it seems somehow... reliable and professional to think about such simple and basic things - it is just a few additional words in a proposal. And think of those poor, anonymous heroes struggling right now behind their desks, trying to bring some sense to this resolution .

[Auralia]

General practice is that creating committees isn't a detailed process, and complaints about how there's no start date or explicit mention of who in particular 'calls a debate' are totally ignorant of how the UN and the WA have operated for more than 10 years.

Oh my - I am so ashamed . Actually things like the date of annual sessions or the subject empowered to call the meetings aren't really "details" - simply basic regulations. Nobody expects the complete procedure. Of course, we can shift the responsibility for such "details" completely onto WA Compliance Commission, though it seems somehow... reliable and professional to think about such simple and basic things - it is just a few additional words in a proposal. And think of those poor, anonymous heroes struggling right now behind their desks, trying to bring some sense to this resolution .

Do you understand what the word "logistics" means? Is it not clear that by granting the WATC the mandate to provide any and all logistical assistance necessary for the conferences, I have granted it the ability to set the date of such conferences?

Have you actually looked through any of the existing WA resolutions to see if any make reference to specific dates?

Have you considered the fact that fixed dates might be a bad idea, since nations may not use the same calendars or the dates might need to be moved? Mightn't the best way to approach the situation be to delegate the responsibility to a WA committee, which can take these factors into account?

[Glen-Rhodes]

Actually things like the date of annual sessions or the subject empowered to call the meetings aren't really "details" - simply basic regulations.

Please cite a single resolution that goes into those kinds of details. I realize this may take some time on your part, given that you have probably not read very many of the existing resolutions, let alone all of them.

[The Dourian Embassy]

*snip*

Given the sheer number of states, is it feasible to bring them all together on one day? Lets forget the basic fact of numbers, out of 16,000 possible persons, how many will be celebrating some religious holiday on whatever date is chosen?

This resolution shouldn't go into details like the date and time and host, this resolution shouldn't exist at all.

[Lysandrion]

Have you actually looked through any of the existing WA resolutions to see if any make reference to specific dates?

I have looked through some, which generally established only permanent committees, which ex definitione don't need any specified dates of sessions, as they operate continuously - not once in ten years.

Have you considered the fact that fixed dates might be a bad idea, since nations may not use the same calendars or the dates might need to be moved?

Actually, I think I could give some examples of the organisations which do not find it a problem (for further information, see the Agenda section - and yes, its members do have different calendars).

Please cite a single resolution that goes into those kinds of details

Oh, please consider it a proposal of the law as it should stand .

I realize this may take some time on your part, given that you have probably not read very many of the existing resolutions, let alone all of them.

Oh my my, in this sophisticated way you suggest that I do not read the WA resolutions? I feel so uncomfortable with your effort to make the whole thing personal .

Actually it is quite amusing to see this unexpectable frustration among the proponents of a successful proposal caused simply by a single nation playing plain dumb . We all know that a responsible representative of a responsible government would never behave like this during any seroius negotiations, don't we ? Well, I guess what I do now is nothing compared to what my nation's delegate will have to endure during the first session under the new resolution, when some protectionist or radical national sovereigntist grabs the microphone . Should any member of our diplomatic staff suffer from nervous breakdown while performing duties imposed by this resolution, my government will certainly sue its author .