NationStates

The Security Council,

Understanding that many members of the World Assembly fail to read the contents of resolutions before voting on them,

Concerned that this may result in member states voting against their interests or for bad legislation,

Noting Knootoss passed GA#122, Read the Resolution Act, in an attempt to remedy this problem,

Realising that many member states are in noncompliance with GA#122,

Hoping that a declaration will continuously remind people to read the resolution,

Hereby declares as follows:

WA members have a duty to read and review the contents of WA resolutions before casting a vote on said resolutions.

Regional Delegates have a duty to read and review the contents of WA resolutions before giving said resolutions a stamp of approval, unless said delegate has a policy of approving exclusively on bases of author, resolution type, and targeted nation or region.

Before voting on a repeal, WA Members have a duty to read the resolution to be repealed.

Please give feedback and advice.

Unfortunately this has already been addressed by the GA: https://www.nationstates.net/page=WA_pa ... /council=1

Lenlyvit wrote:Unfortunately this has already been addressed by the GA: https://www.nationstates.net/page=WA_pa ... /council=1

It literally says that in the draft text.

Heidgaudr wrote:

Lenlyvit wrote:Unfortunately this has already been addressed by the GA: https://www.nationstates.net/page=WA_pa ... /council=1

It literally says that in the draft text.

Very well aware. I'm just saying that an additional declaration on it is unnecessary.

I didn't read this, but I'm sure it's fine. Full support.

Reventus Koth wrote:I didn't read this, but I'm sure it's fine. Full support.

Dear reader, it was not, in fact, fine.

Nobody on the right and superior mind would let themselves read an inferior GA resolution from that inferior WA.

LET THEM EAT THEIR FREAKING POTATOES!

Heidgaudr wrote:

Lenlyvit wrote:Unfortunately this has already been addressed by the GA: https://www.nationstates.net/page=WA_pa ... /council=1

It literally says that in the draft text.

Honestly, that's a great argument to pass this.

Lenlyvit wrote:

Heidgaudr wrote:It literally says that in the draft text.

Very well aware. I'm just saying that an additional declaration on it is unnecessary.

"I believe that the following, which is already included, makes clear the importance of this declaration." - Maria-Fernanda Novo, WA Ambassador for the Armed Republic of Juansonia.

Juansonia wrote:Realising that many member states are in noncompliance with GA#122

So we have GA legislation that is supposed to enforce reading resolutions. And now you think a Declaration which cannot force compliance is going to make a difference?

Against.

TL;DR.

For.

I fully support a declaration that says we don't need to read resolutions

That's what this says, right? I didn't read it

RiderSyl wrote:I fully support a declaration that says we don't need to read resolutions

That's what this says, right? I didn't read it

Thanks for the support.

Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:So we have GA legislation that is supposed to enforce reading resolutions. And now you think a Declaration which cannot force compliance is going to make a difference?

Against.

Did you even read the resolution?

"I have modified clause 2 so the declaration does not apply to most 'rubber-stamp' delegates except for when voting on a resolution." - Maria-Fernanda Novo, WA Ambassador for the Armed Republic of Juansonia.

Juansonia wrote:

Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:So we have GA legislation that is supposed to enforce reading resolutions. And now you think a Declaration which cannot force compliance is going to make a difference?

Against.

Did you even read the resolution?

I did. Kenny’s is funny. This one….. Not so much.