[PASSED] Repeal "On Genetically Modified Foods"

[Araraukar]

Sadly, it has become necessary to remind our fellow delegates that this is not a referendum on GM foods themselves or their labeling as such.

OOC: One of the repeal arguments is the labeling, so I think it's entirely valid to bring up in comments. A "referendum on GM foods" would mean a pile-up of people talking about nothing else, much what happened on the target resolution's debate thread. The comments on this thread? Nowhere close.

(I know it's bad form to post on same thread with main and puppet nation, but as this comment is purely OOC, I couldn't be arsed to change accounts just for this.)

[Frustrated Franciscans]

The Organic Vegan Commune of Frustrated Franciscans
Official Delegation to the World Assembly
“We praise You, Lord, for Sister Death!”
Friar John Sanders, OFM Ambassador and WA representative
Friar Tuck Ferguson, OFM Assistant Ambassador
Brother Maynard, TOR Keeper of the Holy Hand-grenade

While we as a nation do not particularly care for genetically modified foods (but we are vegan, we don't particularly care for a lot of different foods), we agree with the flaws on the resolution presented here and have approved the repeal. In doing so we also agree with the current majority in our region of Catholic. Have a nice day.

[Jean Pierre Trudeau]

UNITED FEDERATION OF CANADA



IMPERIAL MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

At the behest of Prime Minister Chester B. Pearson, we are pleased to cast our vote of AYE. This resolution was a travesty, and never should have passed by this Assembly in the first place. We are glad to see that yet another resolution of absolutely no international relevance will be stricken, and dearly hope the trend continues.

Regards,

[Philimbesi]

My esteemed colleagues I rise to cast my vote in the affirmative for this measure. It is the opinion of the USP that GMO's are not an international issue in the first place, and we will always support the removal of superfluous legislation.

Nigel S Youlkin
USP Ambassador the WA.

[Sierra Lyricalia]

...It is the opinion of the USP that GMO's are not an international issue in the first place...

One regulation's flaws do not mean that its subject isn't an international issue. If your virulent-ass tumor-barley blows its seeds across our borders and starts inter-pollinating and breeding with our nice clean wholesome beer grains, that's for damn sure an international issue.

Not that GMOs are per se harmful or unhealthy... but there's absolutely both room and necessity for international protections for consumers, subsistence farmers, and heritage/prestige seed growers (and oh yeah, the environment also). The target resolution doesn't do it particularly well, but a better replacement can and should fill that role.

[Separatist Peoples]

If your virulent-ass tumor-barley blows its seeds across our borders and starts inter-pollinating and breeding with our nice clean wholesome beer grains, that's for damn sure an international issue.

"I demand photographic evidence of this species." Bell laughs hysterically, nearly falling out of his chair with mirth.

[Aah]

We don't think it was ever the Schutzenphalian delegation's intentions to say that GM was not an international issue. The repeal is purely a technical one: that the definitions used are flawed and the requirements ill-considered. The WA has regulated V-GURT, for example, and has required general food labeling standards; the WA also previously, though not currently, legislated on patenting biological materials. Clearly there is scope for international law on GM: it was just not found in this resolution.

It is unlikely the US of Aah will be able to address the Assembly again before the close of voting but, failing the most seismic shift in voting, that will see the repeal pass. We would like to pass on the thanks of the Schutzenphalian delegation to those who commented on the draft, supported for the proposal, and voted for the motion.

[Mundiferrum]

...It is the opinion of the USP that GMO's are not an international issue in the first place...

One regulation's flaws do not mean that its subject isn't an international issue. If your virulent-ass tumor-barley blows its seeds across our borders and starts inter-pollinating and breeding with our nice clean wholesome beer grains, that's for damn sure an international issue.

Not that GMOs are per se harmful or unhealthy... but there's absolutely both room and necessity for international protections for consumers, subsistence farmers, and heritage/prestige seed growers (and oh yeah, the environment also). The target resolution doesn't do it particularly well, but a better replacement can and should fill that role.

Don't we have a resolution on invasive species already? And if there isn't (no there isn't), I'd think a resolution that targeted the 'problem' of GMOs would much better work via that framework, than one that targeted their consumption.

[Araraukar]

Don't we have a resolution on invasive species already? And if there isn't (no there isn't)

I'd beg to differ. We have GA#259 Stopping Invasive Species in the books.

[Mundiferrum]

Don't we have a resolution on invasive species already? And if there isn't (no there isn't)

I'd beg to differ. We have GA#259 Stopping Invasive Species in the books.

Ah, missed that.

[Imperium Anglorum]

Congratulations on the passage of the bill, Schutzenphalia and West Ruhntuhnkuhnland.