[PASSED] Repeal GAR#172 "International Expositions Act"

[Astrolinium]

So essentially, if the government of Kaboomlandia is having trouble trying to get a trade deal done with Country X, and Country X is hosting the "international exposition", Kaboomlandians can't go to the international exposition? Never mind that under my country's laws, they probably wouldn't be permitted to go anyway.

In a crude sort of way, yes that pretty much is what it boils down to.

No, it does not. Not even remotely. If you are in conflict -- if you are having, say, a trade war or a real war with another nation, that other nation in the interest of its own security has the right to bar your nation from entry.

[Arcanda]

Raising his eyes from his files, the delegate speaks:

"Look at the following extract:"

STIPULATES that chosen cities have the right to refuse their nomination

"Participation is not mandatory, thus no additional costs are forced down someone else's throat.On the subject of the denial of entry of an enemy nation, same as above: As the host countries change every year, there's a chance all the cultures will eventually make it through."

[Jean Pierre Trudeau]

On the subject of the denial of entry of an enemy nation, same as above: As the host countries change every year, there's a chance all the cultures will eventually make it through."[/i]

So they will "eventually" make it through. Since when is the WA in the business of denying rights conferred upon its members?

In a crude sort of way, yes that pretty much is what it boils down to.

No, it does not. Not even remotely. If you are in conflict -- if you are having, say, a trade war or a real war with another nation, that other nation in the interest of its own security has the right to bar your nation from entry.

At which point those nations should be excluded from hosting the event, but nowhere in the resolution does it say that.

[Astrolinium]

No, it does not. Not even remotely. If you are in conflict -- if you are having, say, a trade war or a real war with another nation, that other nation in the interest of its own security has the right to bar your nation from entry.

At which point those nations should be excluded from hosting the event, but nowhere in the resolution does it say that.

I don't follow your logic at all, sir.

[Jean Pierre Trudeau]

At which point those nations should be excluded from hosting the event, but nowhere in the resolution does it say that.

I don't follow your logic at all, sir.

If two nations are in a conflict, neither one of them should be permitted to host the event, thus precluding nations from being barred entry. Does your resolution mandate that? It is a WA sanctioned event is it not? Should not all members have the inherent right to participate?

[Arcanda]

On the subject of the denial of entry of an enemy nation, same as above: As the host countries change every year, there's a chance all the cultures will eventually make it through."[/i]

So they will "eventually" make it through. Since when is the WA in the business of denying rights conferred upon its members?

"Since when is the WA even in charge of promoting culture? The host nation is sovereign over its land, it's their choice whether to allow one country or not."

[The Dark Star Republic]

(bump, as this had fallen off the first page)

[The Foxfyre Islands]

"Good Afternoon my fellow Ambassadors" the Ambassador for the Foxfyre Islands Isyrion Nyxx stated has he walked to his seat, "the Foxfyre Islands will be voting FOR this resolution on the grounds of how much money WA nations will be able to save as a direct result of this repeal."

[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

We stand in strong opposition to this repeal. We like "International Expositions" ... especially when they are in other countries. We strongly object to your objections. We can't have resolutions cluttered by needless detail nor do we want future generations to be bogged down by our current ideas of how things should be. They must be reinvented anew in each generation. So if the definition of a world fair may change from one generation to the next, why not? I say it's no fair that people who design a fair can't have a fair say on what that fair should look like.

We also feel that "economic or military conflict" is intuitively obvious to a casual observer. In fact we just went to the stranger's bar and queried a few WerePenguins and they were in perfect agreement (never mind the fact that they are members of the same Tzorsland Puppet Federation that we indirectly belong to). We also note that "ideologies, cultures, or beliefs" is not the same as the notion of "nations." If you want I can easily sing "one of these things is not like the other" until you are blue in the face.

As usual I have decided not to include Brother Maynard's comments about how you are Godless Heathen Canadian Communists, who speak with floppy mouths, because ... oh darn I did include it, didn't I?

Sincerely,

(How can there be any "sin" in "sincere?")

Friar Tuck Ferguson.

[Flibbleites]

I don't follow your logic at all, sir.

If two nations are in a conflict, neither one of them should be permitted to host the event, thus precluding nations from being barred entry.

You know, big international events like this tend to have their venues chosen years in advance of when the event is actually going to happen (OOC: Just look at the Olympics). What happens if Rightnutistan signs up to host one of these Expos, and then six months before it's scheduled to start they get attacked by Leftnutistan, who plans to attend the Expo. Under your idea they're suddenly not eligible to host, and the Expo could end up with no place to be held.

Does your resolution mandate that? It is a WA sanctioned event is it not? Should not all members have the inherent right to participate?

They do, as long as they're not at war with the hosting nation. Furthermore, the hosting nation is not required to prohibit nations they're at war with from attending, just because they have the right they don't have to use it.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

[Mt Midoriyama]

I would not have gone for a total repeal of the International Expositions Act, merely a revision. Yes, there are flaws in that act, but that is why we can revise them instead of just throwing them out of the window. For that reason, and that reason only am I voting against this proposition; because it is sound in idea and nature, but lacks the means of dictating how it should be done, ergo a revision is necessary and not a repeal.

Recap:
This would have my full support (and probably everyone else's) if this was a revision of the act instead of a repeal. That one word makes a huge difference in the end.

I now realize that either the rules changed since i was last on (well over a year ago), or I misread them to begin with. With that being said, I see no reason to not vote FOR this proposal in order to revise it later in the future... maybe

[Jean Pierre Trudeau]

I would not have gone for a total repeal of the International Expositions Act, merely a revision. Yes, there are flaws in that act, but that is why we can revise them instead of just throwing them out of the window. For that reason, and that reason only am I voting against this proposition; because it is sound in idea and nature, but lacks the means of dictating how it should be done, ergo a revision is necessary and not a repeal.

Recap:
This would have my full support (and probably everyone else's) if this was a revision of the act instead of a repeal. That one word makes a huge difference in the end.

You cannot revise, nor amend resolutions. They need to be repealed, if you want to change them.

(Just so were clear here, I have no intentions of replacing this legislation)

[Damanucus]

"About damn time! I vote For!"

Stephanie Orman
Representative, Nomadic Peoples of Damanucus

[Defwa]

The Democratic Socialist Assembly continues to be split right down it's center over this repeal. I have issued my recommendation a delegate to vote for the repeal and if necessary, I intend to place the tie breaking vote in favor.

[Ainocra]

The Star Empire of Ainocra is in favor of this repeal as is the vast majority of Osiran citizens.

[Assharin]

I would kindly to know if there is the will of the Assembly to present a new resolution that solves the problems found in the previous resolution

Thank you

The Leader of the Empire of Assharin

[Murden]

Will there be a proposal to replace if repealed? You cannot point out a problem without coming up with a solution; a truly skilled GA member would be able to not only get rid of an old statue, but also replace it with something better.

[The Dark Star Republic]

Will there be a proposal to replace if repealed? You cannot point out a problem without coming up with a solution; a truly skilled GA member would be able to not only get rid of an old statue, but also replace it with something better.

"If we're getting rid of old statues, I need a new paperweight for my desk..."

~ Daisy Chinmusic
Legislative Intern

[Fyjbarrzee]

King Jaeg of The Kingdom of Fyjbarrzee steps up to the podium, "Esteemed Members of the World Assembly:

"Though Fyjbarree is a young nation, she has much to offer in the richness of its culture and heritage, which is rooted in its people. The opportunity to share our culture with the world is one that we would never pass up. An avenue such as the International Exposition of Culture gives us that opportunity to not only display our cultural wealth, but to also learn from others as well. Shutting that down would be a tremendous loss not only to Fyjbarrzee, but to the world. It would be a step backward from global understanding from all nations.

"The current Resolution at Vote indicates economic concerns over the cost of the fair. Let me point out that the original resolution did not specify a required amount of cost to spend to hold the fair. If a host nation were in economic turmoil, they could easily decline the nomination, or hold a fair that would be within their means and exemplary of their culture - not their perceived economic status. Additionally, by spreading cultural value, income from subsequent tourism is a priceless and definite outcome.

"Let's not jump ahead of ourselves and abolish a good thing. Vote no to the proposed Repeal so that we all may continue to spread our cultural wealth with each other."

[Astrolinium]

I would kindly to know if there is the will of the Assembly to present a new resolution that solves the problems found in the previous resolution

Thank you

The Leader of the Empire of Assharin

"As has been proved several times already in this very debate, Ambassador, the original resolution has no problems and the repeal is based wholly on lies. That said, if this repeal goes through -- and I intend to begin campaigning against it in earnest this weekend -- a replacement will absolutely be passed, though I doubt it'll be much different from the original."

[New England West]

As the Leader of New England West, I feel that it is the best interests for my nation to vote in favor of a repeal. That being said I believe along with many in my nation, that if new legislation were to be put in place, then we would vote in favor of that new Act. Spreading knowledge and ones culture can only be beneficial for the world as we gain more insight into this great place in which we live upon, it just has to be conducted correctly.

[Bears Armed]

"Is any nation forced to host an International Exposition?
"No, they're not."

" Is any nation forced to participate in an International Exposition?
"No, they're not."

"So, if any nation that dislikes the idea is free to ignore it anyhows, the resolution is harmless."

"'AGAINST."


Artorrios o SouthWoods,
ChairBear,
Bears Armed Mission at the World Assembly.

[Defwa]

"Is any nation forced to host an International Exposition?
"No, they're not."

" Is any nation forced to participate in an International Exposition?
"No, they're not."

"So, if any nation that dislikes the idea is free to ignore it anyhows, the resolution is harmless."

"'AGAINST."


Artorrios o SouthWoods,
ChairBear,
Bears Armed Mission at the World Assembly.

Harmless, useless, basically a waste of money then.

[The Dark Star Republic]

Harmless, useless, basically a waste of money then.

"Pretty much sums up the Defwaen delegation!

"As for the repeal, we are opposed, which doesn't matter as this will pass by a massive margin, but will gladly assist on drafting future legislation on such international cultural exchanges.

"However, we do find the word "exposition" to be unnecessarily wordy, so the repeal has some value."

~ Daisy Chinmusic
Legislative Intern

[Jean Pierre Trudeau]

" a replacement will absolutely be passed, though I doubt it'll be much different from the original."

What makes you believe the WA will pass another resolution similar to this one, when this repeal is already passing by a landslide?