NationStates

This is my replacement proposal for Resolution 105, which I have a draft for repeal here. Please keep any opinions regarding the repeal of GA105 to that respective thread, and keep this thread open for making this proposal actively better.

The General Assembly,

Recognizing the recent repeal of Resolution 105, “Preparing For Disasters”,

Believing that the niche of disaster preparedness to now be notably empty, and seeking to fill it with necessary legislation,

Henceforth enacts the following into World Assembly law:

1. For the purposes of this resolution, “disaster” refers to any unintentional disturbance of the social order, especially one resulting in widespread death or destruction of property.
   
   
2. The World Assembly Disaster Bureau (WADB) is tasked with the creation, operation, and maintenance of systems designed to detect and predict disasters.
   
   
3. All individuals or organizations which are responsible for any structures or similar systems especially prone to disasters in the case of failure of said systems or reasonably likely natural event are required to apply routine maintenance to these systems, and create risk assessments as to the probability of any disasters, the scale of the disaster, and feasible ways to ensure that such disasters never come to fruition. These risk assessments shall be sent in full to the WADB.
   
   
4. Member-nations are urged to create appropriate response plans to potential disasters, and to initiate the formation of disaster response forces, which should help reduce the effect of any disasters, should they occur.
   
   
5. The creation of nationally-based systems in order to gather and disseminate information regarding imminent and ongoing disasters is strongly encouraged.
   
   
6. The WADB shall share information on imminent and ongoing disasters detected to national governments as needed, alongside recommended response and prevention plans. Outside of the information directly needed to be shared to any affected nations by a detected disaster, all information disclosed to the WADB by member-nations shall be kept confidential. In extreme cases, the WADB may request intervention by a third-party for aid to be sent to the affected nations, in coordination with the International Humanitarian Aid Coordination Committee.
   
   
7. Member-nations met with a financial burden as a result of this resolution are permitted to submit a request for aid to the WADB, which shall be evaluated and responded to promptly, with approval based on the level of demonstrable need for aid, at the discretion of the WADB. In response, the WADB may supply manpower or financial aid through the World Assembly General Fund.
   
   
8. Non-member-nations are permitted to submit information on potential or ongoing disasters to the WADB, but information submitted by non-member-nations shall be met with high levels of discretion in order to prove their accuracy. In cases where non-member-nations are at high risk, the WADB is permitted to provide information on imminent or ongoing disasters, on a discretionary basis. Non-member-nations are not permitted to receive the aid, as laid out by this resolution.
   
   
9. The WADB is instructed to research techniques and technologies to help detect, prevent, and respond to disasters. In the instance that these techniques and technologies prove useful, the WADB is instructed to make information regarding relevant research readily available to member-nations. The WADB is permitted to make a discretionary call in the case that the research undergone has produced particularly worrying or concerning results, that should be kept out of the hands of potentially malicious actors that it may reach if publicly released.
   
   
10. The WADB is instructed to work with relevant committees as necessary in order to ensure that all disaster situations are handled with the utmost efficiency and care.
    
    
11. This resolution is not to be construed as preventing or getting in the way of any prior or future legislation regarding more specific instructions or regulations on disasters.

I'm sure I missed something, so let me know.

What is the point of Article 8 if non-members cannot "receive the aid" of the WADB?

Tinhampton wrote:What is the point of Article 8 if non-members cannot "receive the aid" of the WADB?

The intention was to ensure the Assembly that non-member-nations are not barred from submitting information regarding disasters. In my initial writing, it was stated that the WADB would be able to inform vulnerable non-member-states of impending disasters, but I took that out later. I can reinsert it (probably alongside a note of it being evaluated on a case-by-case basis, at the discretion of the WADB) if that would be preferred?

"Opposed due to section 7 which has unaudited and unqualified expense being incurred by the WA. The General Fund is not a bottomless pit. Prosperous member states should be and are well able to plan for disasters, and respond to many, without needing the use of the GA's cheque book."

Bananaistan wrote:"Opposed due to section 7 which has unaudited and unqualified expense being incurred by the WA. The General Fund is not a bottomless pit. Prosperous member states should be and are well able to plan for disasters, and respond to many, without needing the use of the GA's cheque book."

Sebastion Crew, Political Instability Advisor for the Morovian Department on the World Assembly, and primary author of this proposal.
"I would agree that the General Fund is not a bottomless pit, but I think it reasonable for nations to be able to submit requests for aid, should it be necessary. You are correct that prosperous member-states should be able to plan for disasters, but not all member-states are prosperous, and they should not be punished for that disposition. As stands, the requests are processed on a case-by-case basis. If it would ease your mind, we can change it to more explicitly supply aid based on need, rather than mere want."

Morover wrote:

Tinhampton wrote:What is the point of Article 8 if non-members cannot "receive the aid" of the WADB?

The intention was to ensure the Assembly that non-member-nations are not barred from submitting information regarding disasters. In my initial writing, it was stated that the WADB would be able to inform vulnerable non-member-states of impending disasters, but I took that out later. I can reinsert it (probably alongside a note of it being evaluated on a case-by-case basis, at the discretion of the WADB) if that would be preferred?

Reasonable to allow this, I think, especially if & where those potential disasters might cause a flow of refugees into member nations.

Bears Armed wrote:

Morover wrote:The intention was to ensure the Assembly that non-member-nations are not barred from submitting information regarding disasters. In my initial writing, it was stated that the WADB would be able to inform vulnerable non-member-states of impending disasters, but I took that out later. I can reinsert it (probably alongside a note of it being evaluated on a case-by-case basis, at the discretion of the WADB) if that would be preferred?

Reasonable to allow this, I think, especially if & where those potential disasters might cause a flow of refugees into member nations.

I'll add this in the next draft, but I'm not too attached if anyone feels strongly in the other direction.

The current intention is to submit this promptly following the (presumed) passage of my repeal of 105, which will put submission at 10 August 12am EST, if my math is correct. Still accepting feedback on this.

"The WADB shall share information on imminent and ongoing disasters detected to national governments as needed, alongside recommended response and prevention plans. Outside..."

Make the above clause look like this:

"The WADB shall share information on imminent and ongoing disasters detected to national governments as needed, alongside recommended response and prevention plans, outside..."

Team Lennox wrote:

"The WADB shall share information on imminent and ongoing disasters detected to national governments as needed, alongside recommended response and prevention plans. Outside..."

Make the above clause look like this:

"The WADB shall share information on imminent and ongoing disasters detected to national governments as needed, alongside recommended response and prevention plans, outside..."

Um, why, exactly?

Morover wrote:

Team Lennox wrote:

"The WADB shall share information on imminent and ongoing disasters detected to national governments as needed, alongside recommended response and prevention plans. Outside..."

Make the above clause look like this:

"The WADB shall share information on imminent and ongoing disasters detected to national governments as needed, alongside recommended response and prevention plans, outside..."

Um, why, exactly?

Nvm

"The Politburo notes and appreciates the change in the funding section but would prefer if it were further tightened. Need is one thing - insufficient domestic resources to cover the need is another."

Bananaistan wrote:"The Politburo notes and appreciates the change in the funding section but would prefer if it were further tightened. Need is one thing - insufficient domestic resources to cover the need is another."

Darin Perise.

"I'm curious that you think this is an issue when the nation would apparently not need the aid if they can cover it themselves."

Morover wrote:

Bananaistan wrote:"The Politburo notes and appreciates the change in the funding section but would prefer if it were further tightened. Need is one thing - insufficient domestic resources to cover the need is another."

Darin Perise.

"I'm curious that you think this is an issue when the nation would apparently not need the aid if they can cover it themselves."

"The section doesn't make it clear. If there's a disaster somewhere, it's obvious that aid will be needed. But it's entirely possible that elsewhere in the jurisdiction, there will exist resources, in either public or private hands, which can provide that aid."

Bananaistan wrote:

Morover wrote:Darin Perise.

"I'm curious that you think this is an issue when the nation would apparently not need the aid if they can cover it themselves."

"The section doesn't make it clear. If there's a disaster somewhere, it's obvious that aid will be needed. But it's entirely possible that elsewhere in the jurisdiction, there will exist resources, in either public or private hands, which can provide that aid."

Darin Perise.

"Please check the new wording I've implemented to see if it suits your request. It doesn't flow as smoothly in my eye, but any perceived ambiguity should be gone if I'm correct."

All member-nations are required to apply routine maintenance to any structures or similar systems especially prone to disasters in the case of failure

OOC: Doesn't that apply to absolutely everything, given there are few/none things that can withstand, say, an asteroid strike? Secondly, privately owned structures and systems should be the primary responsibility of their owners, not the nations. And thirdly, "ALL member nations ... to ANY structures" - outside of their own borders too? What if Nation A doesn't want Nation B coming in to "apply routine maintenance" to their holy site's ruins, if Nation A's main religion forbids touching the site despite it being likely in danger of crumbling if an earthquake hits?

In clause 4, why is "It is also encouraged" needed? Encouraging and urging have the same strength, so you can just write it as "to create [stuff], and to initiate [other stuff]". Also in same clause " should they come to fruition" is odd. The plans? Disasters happen, they're not, by definition, planned.

Ran out of time to do a thorough reading of the rest today, but clause 7 should have something about the nations needing to be unable to do the stuff on their own, before asking for WA money.

Araraukar wrote:

All member-nations are required to apply routine maintenance to any structures or similar systems especially prone to disasters in the case of failure

OOC: Doesn't that apply to absolutely everything, given there are few/none things that can withstand, say, an asteroid strike? Secondly, privately owned structures and systems should be the primary responsibility of their owners, not the nations. And thirdly, "ALL member nations ... to ANY structures" - outside of their own borders too? What if Nation A doesn't want Nation B coming in to "apply routine maintenance" to their holy site's ruins, if Nation A's main religion forbids touching the site despite it being likely in danger of crumbling if an earthquake hits?

In clause 4, why is "It is also encouraged" needed? Encouraging and urging have the same strength, so you can just write it as "to create [stuff], and to initiate [other stuff]". Also in same clause " should they come to fruition" is odd. The plans? Disasters happen, they're not, by definition, planned.

Ran out of time to do a thorough reading of the rest today, but clause 7 should have something about the nations needing to be unable to do the stuff on their own, before asking for WA money.

These should be addressed - with the exception of your note on clause 7, which I feel was already covered by the wording of the clause.

Bananaistan wrote:"Opposed due to section 7 which has unaudited and unqualified expense being incurred by the WA. The General Fund is not a bottomless pit. Prosperous member states should be and are well able to plan for disasters, and respond to many, without needing the use of the GA's cheque book."

Valid point, wealthier nations should be able to shoulder most (if not all) of their costs of maintaining a disaster preparedness and response programme. All nations, irrespective of their financial position bear some level of responsibility for maintaining at least some capability.

One of the core tenets of disaster response is known as COG (Continuity of Government). These are the functions that any nation-state should undertake to maintain its own existence and functional response to carry them through the response/recovery phase of a disaster and the return of normal government services to their populations and industries.

anything that comes out of the GA's cheque book should supplement those capabilities beyond what should be within the means of a functioning government. Grants or loans to a nation-state may provide some offset to address immediate life-safety issues but it is not going to rebuild something that was destroyed by a 100 meter tall tsunami, VCI 9 volcanic eruption or an asteroid strike. Maybe it provides food to keep people from starving and vaccine doses to stop a pandemic but it is not going to pay your cellphone and internet bill. Nor will it rebuild factories (other than those providing basic subsistence requirements).

It is cold and harsh but the GA needs to triage disaster response when it is greater than any one individual nation (and some disasters will be continental or hemispheric or global).

Additionally, if the GA is going to send money it is also going to send experts to evaluate how those funds are used to maximize the benefit for the greatest number of people. Sorry, but your fearless leader is not getting a new villa out of this arrangement nor will any form of corruption or graft be tolerated. If it is even suspected then the GA will allocate funds and services; at that point the choice that the receiving nation would have is to accept or not accept assistance.

Tishers of Nyxonia
(The South Pacific)

I changed the aid clause a little, taking into account what Nyxonia said. Barring further feedback, this will be submitted immediately following the end of the voting for the repeal.

This has been submitted, following the passage of my repeal of GAR105

“We support this replacement.”

The County of Cappedore will be in full support of this resolution, and deem it a stronger upgrade from its predecessor.

The United Regions Alliance recommends voting against this resolution. https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1581932

I agree for voting for YES, and additionally include it under the defense, legal and military-political decree, in general, in this case! On some related to this political - military tamet.