[PASSED] Infectious Disease Control

[Aah]

The Schutzenphalian delegation are experiencing technical issues. They will try to return in time for the debate on this, but they will probably not be able to answer before then. Many apologies.

[Aah]

(at vote bump)

[JaMexico13]

The Republic of JaMexico13 votes against this proposal because it one, infringes on our sovereignty and two opens a door for the World Assembly to legislate our travel laws. I encourage all others to consider these two points. As they apply equally to all nations.

[Timbersong]

It is the official opinion of Timbersong that the current measure set before the General Assembly on infectious disease control would be severely damaging to a globalized economy in which we seek a more open and free exchange of ideas and people. We are concerned, particularly, that the measure obligates a responsible government's crisis management resources to prioritize relief to foreign citizens, rather than affected citizens within her borders. We would also note that in the event of an international epidemic, it is the duty of said responsible governments, to protect to interest and livelyhood of her own citizens, whether at home or abroad, by issuing appropriate travel advisories and health checks in ports of entry.

Furthermore, the measure before us would inadvertently, and severely, stall the free movement of peoples across borders as all nations take the time to debate and implement proper compliance policy and measures to create, oversee, and issue the new mandatory travel documents the measure would create. Such a radical overhaul of international travel regulations is likely to cause mass confusion, and reduce international travel for some time. We fear this places a disproportionate strain on poorer nations, and those who rely heavily on tourism or international aid.

It is for these reasons that Timbersong cannot, on good conscious, approve the Infection Disease Control Act, in its current form.

[Aah]

It's a little difficult to defend the proposal without direct textual references, but given the Schutzenphalian delegation's diplomatic clearance is still being held up, once again Ambassador U Li of the US of Aah will attempt to do so.

We are concerned, particularly, that the measure obligates a responsible government's crisis management resources to prioritize relief to foreign citizens, rather than affected citizens within her borders.

This doesn't require that such measures be "prioritised"; it's simply that other aspects of epidemic prevention have already been addressed by the WA.

We would also note that in the event of an international epidemic, it is the duty of said responsible governments, to protect to interest and livelyhood of her own citizens, whether at home or abroad, by issuing appropriate travel advisories and health checks in ports of entry.

Yes, I suppose it is, and that's something that this proposal requires - so it's unclear what you are "noting" here.

Furthermore, the measure before us would inadvertently, and severely, stall the free movement of peoples across borders as all nations take the time to debate and implement proper compliance policy and measures to create, oversee, and issue the new mandatory travel documents the measure would create.

The introduction of the new travel documents is specified to only be done at a rate that is "practical, affordable and safe"; giving any more leeway than that would be an invitation to abuse.

Such a radical overhaul of international travel regulations is likely to cause mass confusion, and reduce international travel for some time. We fear this places a disproportionate strain on poorer nations, and those who rely heavily on tourism or international aid.

The WA has placed significantly higher financial burdens on poorer nations' healthcare systems already, and it's not really a "radical overhaul" given the WA has already standardised passports.

[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

Looking at this clear international issue, we are always in favor of standards of documentation (or as we like to say "singing from the same hymnal") which would allow information to be accessed in a simple and common format. We give this our Franciscan seal of approval.

[Jimbolivar]

The People's Republic of Jimbolivar notes with disappointment that other nations place free movement of capital above the health of travelling citizens, proving that they are willing to advance greed over public safety.

Jimbolivar, as a nation which values the health and safety of all peoples, strongly supports this proposal.

[Drewlantis]

Ambassador Burgenheimer sniffs, sneezes, and then returns to face his holo-screen, clearly sick. "It is important that we recognize an international standard for protection against infectious diseases, they quickly spread, and if not contained could contaminate a poor WA ambassador." Burgenheimer gives a raspy cough. "Also, poor mismanagement could quickly degrade an already unstable situation."

[Kaboomlandia]

The Republic of JaMexico13 votes against this proposal because it one, infringes on our sovereignty and two opens a door for the World Assembly to legislate our travel laws. I encourage all others to consider these two points. As they apply equally to all nations.

The point of the travel restrictions is stated in the title. If JaMexico13 gets an Ebola epidemic or something like that, then why shouldn't the WA stop possibly infected people from spreading the disease outside your borders?

I voted in support of this.

[Sierra Lyricalia]

The Republic of JaMexico13 votes against this proposal because it one, infringes on our sovereignty

Ocean wet; film at 11.

Which is to say, all WA resolutions infringe sovereignty, by definition. The question is 1) whether that infringement improves the lives of residents of WA member nations (which this would); and 2) does it do so in a draconian or otherwise overly restrictive fashion (which this does not seem to do).

and two opens a door for the World Assembly to legislate our travel laws.

The WA already does this a fair bit. At a glance, GAR #76, #83, #91 (tangentially), #279, and #285 all have something to say about international travel; and GAR #53 does so in the very context of health concerns.

In other words, ambassador, while there may be good arguments against this resolution, these ain't it.

[Two Chaoses]

The Republic of JaMexico13 votes against this proposal because it one, infringes on our sovereignty and two opens a door for the World Assembly to legislate our travel laws. I encourage all others to consider these two points. As they apply equally to all nations.

I don't see how standardizing one particular type of travel document is "infringing on your sovereignty." You expressed a concern about travel. Would it not speed international travel and commerce by having one standardized form with all of the vaccination records, which could be read by a trained person at a glance? Two Chaoses votes Aye.

[JaMexico13]

The Republic of JaMexico13 votes against this proposal because it one, infringes on our sovereignty and two opens a door for the World Assembly to legislate our travel laws. I encourage all others to consider these two points. As they apply equally to all nations.

The point of the travel restrictions is stated in the title. If JaMexico13 gets an Ebola epidemic or something like that, then why shouldn't the WA stop possibly infected people from spreading the disease outside your borders?

I voted in support of this.

The Republic of JaMexico13 votes against this proposal because it one, infringes on our sovereignty and two opens a door for the World Assembly to legislate our travel laws. I encourage all others to consider these two points. As they apply equally to all nations.

I don't see how standardizing one particular type of travel document is "infringing on your sovereignty." You expressed a concern about travel. Would it not speed international travel and commerce by having one standardized form with all of the vaccination records, which could be read by a trained person at a glance? Two Chaoses votes Aye.

The Republic of JaMexico13 votes against this proposal because it one, infringes on our sovereignty

Ocean wet; film at 11.

Which is to say, all WA resolutions infringe sovereignty, by definition. The question is 1) whether that infringement improves the lives of residents of WA member nations (which this would); and 2) does it do so in a draconian or otherwise overly restrictive fashion (which this does not seem to do).

and two opens a door for the World Assembly to legislate our travel laws.

The WA already does this a fair bit. At a glance, GAR #76, #83, #91 (tangentially), #279, and #285 all have something to say about international travel; and GAR #53 does so in the very context of health concerns.

In other words, ambassador, while there may be good arguments against this resolution, these ain't it.

I understand completely the idea behind the proposal. I believe individual Nations should be allowed to decide who enters within their borders and by what standard. If there is an outbreak of some disease it should be dealt with on a nation by nation basis. If JaMexico13 does not perceive an outbreak as a threat it has the right to allow citizens of that nation to enter or not. It should not be decided by other nations.

Furthermore this proposal will enforce universal standards of vaccinations and medical procedures. This one infringes on the rights of every JaMexican who chooses not to vaccinate. Two it assumes that all nations have the same type of diseases. A nation that doesn't have any cases of Swine Flu shouldn't have to vaccinate every travelling citizen in order to meet "international standards".

Lastly it is of the opinion of the administration of JaMexico13 that all citizens of The North Pacific Region should be able to travel freely amongst other nations in the region. This should be done without constant check points or border controls. As this isn't a reality today, our nation and other nations support this idea. This proposal would also infringe on our rights as a region.

[Separatist Peoples]

Lastly it is of the opinion of the administration of JaMexico13 that all citizens of The North Pacific Region should be able to travel freely amongst other nations in the region. This should be done without constant check points or border controls. As this isn't a reality today, our nation and other nations support this idea. This proposal would also infringe on our rights as a region.

Bell chuckles, "Keep dreaming. The Confederate Dominion regularly keeps an office in The North Pacific to aid in our Ministerial duties to the region, and buddy, you'll never have unfettered access to that territory. You can give up on that pipe dream pronto, señor."

[Aah]

With respect, you appear confused about what the Schutzenphalian proposal does, and are making extravagant claims that simply aren't borne out by a reading of the text. But if you don't include such textual references it's very hard to build an argument.

I understand completely the idea behind the proposal. I believe individual Nations should be allowed to decide who enters within their borders and by what standard. If there is an outbreak of some disease it should be dealt with on a nation by nation basis. If JaMexico13 does not perceive an outbreak as a threat it has the right to allow citizens of that nation to enter or not. It should not be decided by other nations.

All that the proposal does is require that you promulgate a travel advisory: the ultimate decision of whether to allow someone to enter your nation or not remains your sovereign right. If you don't require certification of prophylaxis, then you can open your borders at will. All the proposal insists on is that if you do require such certification, you use a common standard.

Furthermore this proposal will enforce universal standards of vaccinations and medical procedures. This one infringes on the rights of every JaMexican who chooses not to vaccinate. Two it assumes that all nations have the same type of diseases. A nation that doesn't have any cases of Swine Flu shouldn't have to vaccinate every travelling citizen in order to meet "international standards".

What are you quoting? The phrase "international standards" doesn't even appear in the proposal text!

And the proposal absolutely does not require universal standards of vaccinations, nor even that vaccinations be given at all. You could introduce mandatory vaccinations or ban vaccinations altogether and remain perfectly in compliance. All you would need to do to comply is to use a common standard certification when vaccinations (or other forms of medical prophylaxis) are undertaken.

Lastly it is of the opinion of the administration of JaMexico13 that all citizens of The North Pacific Region should be able to travel freely amongst other nations in the region. This should be done without constant check points or border controls. As this isn't a reality today, our nation and other nations support this idea. This proposal would also infringe on our rights as a region.

How your region organizes its internal movement of persons is no business of the WA. If your region adopts an open border policy, nothing in this proposal prevents that. From experience, many nations in The North Pacific are fiercely sovereigntist and such a throwing open of borders is highly unlikely; but should you wish to pursue it, the correct forum would be the Democratic Union or other TNP-specific discussions, not the WA.

Unless you can provide some sort of textual evidence for your wild claims about what the proposal does, Ambassador U Li of the US of Aah sees no reason not to continue defending the proposal.

[Clorp]

The Commonwealth of Clorp supports this issue. Clorp is dedicated to improving the lives of
People both in its own borders and internationally. It is the opinion of the commonwealth that this resolution further supports this ideal.

[The Drewlantian Aristocracy]

"Congratulations on this so clearly passing. An impressive performance and resolution."

[Aah]

The General Assembly resolution Infectious Disease Control was passed 13,434 votes to 924, and implemented in all WA member nations.

Ambassador U Li of the US of Aah would like to pass on the thanks of the Schutzenphalian delegation to those who supported the proposal. "Ta." (Any further attempts at thanks will doubtless be censored for being too long.)

----

OOC: At the risk of gloating, this passed by 94%, narrowly beating Child Pornography Ban (93%) and Biomedical Donor Rights (92%) for the most supported resolution of all time. Why? I genuinely didn't anticipate this gaining so much support. The WA voting outcomes continue to mystify me!

[Bears Armed Mission]

Congratulations!

[Jarish Inyo]

The government of Jaresh Inyo won't be accepting an universal form. We'll just quarantine every plane and ship.

[Jean Pierre Trudeau]

The government of Jaresh Inyo won't be accepting an universal form. We'll just quarantine every plane and ship.

So flat out non-compliance then? Is it wise to flush your credibility down the toilet like that Ambassador?

[Jarish Inyo]

The government of Jaresh Inyo won't be accepting an universal form. We'll just quarantine every plane and ship.

So flat out non-compliance then? Is it wise to flush your credibility down the toilet like that Ambassador?

Actually, it's not non-compliance. There is nothing in the resolution that requires any nation to accept the UCMP. All the government of Jaresh Inyo has to do is stop issuing it's own documented evidence of medical precautions and we are in compliance with this resolution.

[Defwa]

That sounds like a lot of inconvenience for no reason.

[Normlpeople]

The General Assembly resolution Infectious Disease Control was passed 13,434 votes to 924, and implemented in all WA member nations.

Ambassador U Li of the US of Aah would like to pass on the thanks of the Schutzenphalian delegation to those who supported the proposal. "Ta." (Any further attempts at thanks will doubtless be censored for being too long.)

----

OOC: At the risk of gloating, this passed by 94%, narrowly beating Child Pornography Ban (93%) and Biomedical Donor Rights (92%) for the most supported resolution of all time. Why? I genuinely didn't anticipate this gaining so much support. The WA voting outcomes continue to mystify me!

OOC: Not to cheapen the victory, but it passed all the lemming checks. Desirable category (unlike the CPA), and a title alone that made sense to the thousands who do nothing more than read that.

IC: "Despite its uncorrected flaws which take the teeth out of it, I shall congratulate you. The minor annoyance caused by a universal form is trivial compared to the rights you have granted an individual nation."