(In Queue): International Postal Union

[Unibotian WASC Mission]

3.) The right of each nation to determine which items may or may not be transmitted through that nation's postal system; including but not limited to hazardous or illegal materials.

I agree with the Gobbannean Ambassador, this clause is quite toothless, other than that, the revised version which Lord Tyvok offered is quite an admirable piece of legislation.

To amend this clause, I would suggest allowing nations to limit the mailing of physically hazardous material (more severely hazardous than a paper cut, hopefully), and not to worry about illegal materials, which can be recovered by force once they are recieved.

[Gobbannium]

3.) The right of each nation to determine which items may or may not be transmitted through that nation's postal system; including but not limited to hazardous or illegal materials.

I agree with the Gobbannean Ambassador, this clause is quite toothless, other than that, the revised version which Lord Tyvok offered is quite an admirable piece of legislation.

We apologise for being unclear; we don't consider this toothless of itself, we consider that it defangs everything else.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

3.) The right of each nation to determine which items may or may not be transmitted through that nation's postal system; including but not limited to hazardous or illegal materials.

I agree with the Gobbannean Ambassador, this clause is quite toothless, other than that, the revised version which Lord Tyvok offered is quite an admirable piece of legislation.

To amend this clause, I would suggested allowing nations to limit the mailing of physically hazardous material (more severely hazardous than a paper cut, hopefully), and not to worry about illegal materials, which can be recovered by force once they are recieved.

It is indeed impossible to detect all mail items upon arrival, but member states should be allowed to prevent hazardous materials from being posted in the first place, from their system, as well.

[Unibotian WASC Mission]

3.) The right of each nation to determine which items may or may not be transmitted through that nation's postal system; including but not limited to hazardous or illegal materials.

I agree with the Gobbannean Ambassador, this clause is quite toothless, other than that, the revised version which Lord Tyvok offered is quite an admirable piece of legislation.

We apologise for being unclear; we don't consider this toothless of itself, we consider that it defangs everything else.

*nods*

Yep. Thats a better way to word it, ambassador. *picking a popcorn kernel from his teeth*

[Krioval]

Let's see here...

THE WORLD ASSEMBLY POSTAL UNION
Category: Free Trade
A resolution to reduce barriers to free trade and commerce.
Strength: Mild

The World Assembly,

Noting the diversity of national postal systems,

Working to eliminate inefficiencies in international postal delivery,

Creates the World Assembly Postal Union (WAPU), to coordinate postal deliveries between World Assembly member states,

Defines freedom of transit, for the purpose of this legislation, as the obligation for postal administrations to transport postal items passed on to them in transit by another WAPU postal administration, without discriminating between domestic and international postal items,

Defines hostilities, for the purpose of this legislation, to include war, territorial dispute, trade embargo, or refusal to recognize a nation's current government,

Defines hazardous materials as any chemical or biological agent that could cause illness, injury, or death in a postal worker during routine transit,

Guarantees the following:

1.) Freedom of transit for postal items throughout all WA member states, except where specifically limited elsewhere in this legislation,
2.) Member states currently involved in hostilities shall be under no obligation to carry mail addressed to or sent from nations engaged in hostilities with them, except where mandated by international law,
3.) The right of each nation to determine procedures for handling hazardous materials in postal administrations under that nation's jurisdiction,
4.) The right of each postal administration to collect a reasonable fee for its handling of postal materials,

Encourages the development of fair common standards and the use of technology in postal delivery, including fee schedules and the proper handling of hazardous materials.

Calls for monitoring and updating effective technical cooperation to meet the needs of postal customers.

From the last draft, the following has changed:

• Definitions have been put before the "Creates..." clause
• "Hostilities" has been defined
• "Hazardous materials" has been defined
• Part "1.)" has been modified to refer to later exceptions
• Part "3.)" now refers only to hazardous materials
• Added part "4.)" to indicate that freedom of transit still requires standard compensation (OOC: UPU Convention has about ten pages detailing compensation, so I couldn't include the whole thing /OOC)
• Modified "Encourages..." thread to include fee schedules

The problem with some of this proposal is that it cannot possibly be detailed enough to deal with everything, especially monetary issues. It defines "freedom of transit" to require similar treatment of domestic and foreign packages, and that would include the fee to transport them within a postal administration - otherwise it would be "discriminatory". Many nations, including the Imperial Chiefdom, use an annual reconciliation process to assess the fees due either to Krioval or its trading partners for any imbalance in international postal deliveries. I am unsure as to whether "postal administration" needs to be defined; I don't want to bloat the proposal with a hundred definitions.

Does this address some of the more pressing issues? The only one that I am really concerned about is the treatment of goods that are illegal but not hazardous in a given nation. I left mention of this off of the proposal since Krioval has few articles that fall under that category, and also because such issues are handled by customs officials and local law enforcement rather than the postal system.

As always, I defer to the Ambassador from Grays Harbor, as the role of the Imperial Chiefdom is properly to assist, rather than dictate, the writing.

[Lord] Ambassador Darvek Tyvok
Imperial Chiefdom of Krioval

[Unibot]

Defines hazardous materials as any chemical or biological agent that could cause illness, injury, or death in a postal worker during routine transit,

Lord Tyvok, what about a mail bomb? That's all I'm really worried about, having just settled a small crisis in Unibot with mailbox bombings.

Yours
Commander Zhildigio

[Snrubenahs]

Defines hazardous materials as any chemical or biological agent that could cause illness, injury, or death in a postal worker during routine transit,

Lord Tyvok, what about a mail bomb? That's all I'm really worried about, having just settled a small crisis in Unibot with mailbox bombings.

Yours
Commander Zhildigio

I have concerns about this as well. Also, the definition of "free" is still open to interpretation in the bill. A better wording would refer to "unhindered transport" instead of "no cost" or any other sort of "free." Some nations censor mail (especially to prisoners of war), while others might interpret this as an abridgement of a "free" mail delivery service.

[Glen-Rhodes]

Lord Brikkel may not have been in this chamber long enough to realise that advice from Dr Castro concerning meanings should be roundly ignored, since Dr Castro is invariably wrong on the subject.

Old dog, old tricks. I may not be the nicest diplomat in the General Assembly, but my objections are quite clear. The poor writing of a proposal leads to numerous interpretations of what the mandates actually are, and instead of attempting to clarify the language, the Ambassador from Grays Harbor chose to argue and offer interpretations that he seemed to think should have been obvious to any reader.

I understand postal treaties. Glen-Rhodes belongs to numerous postal treaties. I understand what 'freedom of transit' is. But the proposal did not offer a clear definition; it did not establish any difference between freedom of transit and right of passage, so I played to that and raised appropriate objections, which fell upon deaf ears.

Now, I wish to move on to what should actually be discussed here, and that is Lord Tyvok's version of the proposal, which is abundantly more clear, but still has some problems for Glen-Rhodes.

The first being that 'freedom of transit' could still be better defined. It should make clear the procedures for intermediate postal administrations (IPA) and end postal administrations (EPA). Meaning, IPA are obligated to either deliver the postal items to the EPA, or to another IPA. Currently, the language is still granting foreign postal administrations a right to conduct business within the borders of Glen-Rhodes, if they would so choose; of course, I'm being theoretical here, but the problem still exists. Specifically, an IPA has an obligation to transport a postal item. A particularly belligerent nation (or corporation) could use this to invade and usurp domestic postal services, in the most extreme of cases. The definition should read something along the lines of:

Defines freedom of transit, for the purpose of this legislation, as the obligation for postal administrations in an intermediate role to transport postal items, passed on to them in transit by another WAPU postal administration, to a proper WAPU postal administration, without discriminating between domestic and international postal items, ensuring that the postal items are delivered to the correct WAPU postal administration of the addressees,

It is bloated, but the idea should still get across.

Second, I would feel much more comfortable, but not guaranteed to be completely committed, if the following definition was altered as such:

Defines hostilities, for the purpose of this legislation, to include war, territorial or trade dispute, trade embargo, or refusal to recognize a nation's current government,

I must also object to the removal of the following clause and respectfully request it be re-added to any submitted version:

3.) The right of each nation to determine which items may or may not be transmitted through that nation's postal system; including but not limited to hazardous or illegal materials.

While Prince Rhodri may consider it 'defanging', which postal items are proper to be delivered along public roadways, airways, railways, and to public and private buildings, including personal households, is a matter of national security and, if I dare say, national sovereignty.

But this all begs the question: Why should the World Assembly be forcing its 11,770 member nations into a postal treaty, when such treaties have traditionally been voluntary and subject to regional issues?

[float=left]Dr. Bradford William Castro

Ambassador-at-Large,
Permanent Chief of Mission for World Assembly affairs,
the Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes[/float][float=right][/float]

[Snrubenahs]

Lord Brikkel may not have been in this chamber long enough to realise that advice from Dr Castro concerning meanings should be roundly ignored, since Dr Castro is invariably wrong on the subject.

Old dog, old tricks. I may not be the nicest diplomat in the General Assembly, but my objections are quite clear. The poor writing of a proposal leads to numerous interpretations of what the mandates actually are, and instead of attempting to clarify the language, the Ambassador from Grays Harbor chose to argue and offer interpretations that he seemed to think should have been obvious to any reader.

I understand postal treaties. Glen-Rhodes belongs to numerous postal treaties. I understand what 'freedom of transit' is. But the proposal did not offer a clear definition; it did not establish any difference between freedom of transit and right of passage, so I played to that and raised appropriate objections, which fell upon deaf ears.

Now, I wish to move on to what should actually be discussed here, and that is Lord Tyvok's version of the proposal, which is abundantly more clear, but still has some problems for Glen-Rhodes.

The first being that 'freedom of transit' could still be better defined. It should make clear the procedures for intermediate postal administrations (IPA) and end postal administrations (EPA). Meaning, IPA are obligated to either deliver the postal items to the EPA, or to another IPA. Currently, the language is still granting foreign postal administrations a right to conduct business within the borders of Glen-Rhodes, if they would so choose; of course, I'm being theoretical here, but the problem still exists. Specifically, an IPA has an obligation to transport a postal item. A particularly belligerent nation (or corporation) could use this to invade and usurp domestic postal services, in the most extreme of cases. The definition should read something along the lines of:

Defines freedom of transit, for the purpose of this legislation, as the obligation for postal administrations in an intermediate role to transport postal items, passed on to them in transit by another WAPU postal administration, to a proper WAPU postal administration, without discriminating between domestic and international postal items, ensuring that the postal items are delivered to the correct WAPU postal administration of the addressees,

It is bloated, but the idea should still get across.

Second, I would feel much more comfortable, but not guaranteed to be completely committed, if the following definition was altered as such:

Defines hostilities, for the purpose of this legislation, to include war, territorial or trade dispute, trade embargo, or refusal to recognize a nation's current government,

I must also object to the removal of the following clause and respectfully request it be re-added to any submitted version:

3.) The right of each nation to determine which items may or may not be transmitted through that nation's postal system; including but not limited to hazardous or illegal materials.

While Prince Rhodri may consider it 'defanging', which postal items are proper to be delivered along public roadways, airways, railways, and to public and private buildings, including personal households, is a matter of national security and, if I dare say, national sovereignty.

But this all begs the question: Why should the World Assembly be forcing its 11,770 member nations into a postal treaty, when such treaties have traditionally been voluntary and subject to regional issues?

[float=left]Dr. Bradford William Castro

Ambassador-at-Large,
Permanent Chief of Mission for World Assembly affairs,
the Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes[/float][float=right][/float]

I agree with Dr. Castro on the clarity of language in a bill. Without a distinction between the nuances of words, the world would turn into utter chaos. As to the rest of his yammering, well...I got kind of bored and stopped listening. He tends to go on for a bit.

[Grays Harbor]

"Please, let me know when we are finished with the bickering", Brikkel said calmly, "So we may resubmit as we had the previous withdrawn. As it stands now, we are happy with our proposal as expanded and modified by Lord Tyvok of Krioval. When the rest of my esteemed colleagues are also happy, we will resubmit." And he sat back down and returned to his crossword puzzle. "Ni fydd rhai yn hapus ni waeth pa mor neu beth, felly pam ydw i'n poeni dros hyn?" He muttered to himself.

[Krioval]

Also, the definition of "free" is still open to interpretation in the bill. A better wording would refer to "unhindered transport" instead of "no cost" or any other sort of "free." Some nations censor mail (especially to prisoners of war), while others might interpret this as an abridgement of a "free" mail delivery service.

Hence the inclusion of part "4.)" - which guarantees the rights of each postal administration to collect appropriate fees.

[Lord] Ambassador Darvek Tyvok
Imperial Chiefdom of Krioval

[Krioval]

Lord Tyvok, what about a mail bomb? That's all I'm really worried about, having just settled a small crisis in Unibot with mailbox bombings.

Yours
Commander Zhildigio

I would think, Commander, that a mail bomb would qualify as a hazardous material under the definition used. Further, it is customary for the Imperial Chiefdom to inspect packages arriving from nations that do not routinely screen for materials considered hazardous in Krioval. Nothing in this proposal would prevent customs or law enforcement from doing so.

[Lord] Ambassador Darvek Tyvok
Imperial Chiefdom of Krioval

[Grays Harbor]

Lord Tyvok, what about a mail bomb? That's all I'm really worried about, having just settled a small crisis in Unibot with mailbox bombings.

Yours
Commander Zhildigio

I would think, Commander, that a mail bomb would qualify as a hazardous material under the definition used. Further, it is customary for the Imperial Chiefdom to inspect packages arriving from nations that do not routinely screen for materials considered hazardous in Krioval. Nothing in this proposal would prevent customs or law enforcement from doing so.

[Lord] Ambassador Darvek Tyvok
Imperial Chiefdom of Krioval

"Also", Brikkel said from behind his newspaper, "The WA requests brevity in these proposals, and has a 3500 word limit, which I doubt would permit even abbreviations for each and every prohibited or illegal from every nation. I believe we may well need to suffice to trust each nation to determine what is and is not illegal or prohibited."

[Grays Harbor]

"Are we ready to resubmit yet?" Brikkel mumbled from behind his morning paper while munching a chicken biscuit and taking a sip of coffee.

[Snrubenahs]

"Are we ready to resubmit yet?" Brikkel mumbled from behind his morning paper while munching a chicken biscuit and taking a sip of coffee.

It looks good enough to me now.

[Grays Harbor]

"Perhaps we shall wait for the stamp of approval from Dr Castro. By all the Saints we do not wish to be characterized as 'arrogant and presumptuous' again, no, that would never do." Brikkel muttered from behind his morning paper, taking another cup of coffee from the tray of the waiter, "Efallai ei rhagorol asyn ar ei brecwast.", Putting the paper down for a moment, "At least I didn't try to add a section with my idea that the WA should have their own independent WA Postal Service to send diplomatic letters, and provide stamps for collectors and such." And went back to reading the athletics reporting.

[Gobbannium]

One small point; should this resolution deal with the subject of the privacy of mail in transit? Perhaps an additional short clause might be in order to forbid opening mail except for the purpose of dealing with hazardous materials. To pacify the paranoid totalitarian anti-terrorists, an additional get-out of "except as other international legislation permits" might be needed.

[Grays Harbor]

One small point; should this resolution deal with the subject of the privacy of mail in transit? Perhaps an additional short clause might be in order to forbid opening mail except for the purpose of dealing with hazardous materials. To pacify the paranoid totalitarian anti-terrorists, an additional get-out of "except as other international legislation permits" might be needed.

We believe that particular can of worms might be best left to the individual nations to decide. However, I have been wrong before, so I may well be again. We shall wait a second opinion on this. Perhaps a third as well.

[Serrland]

I think the matter of privacy in international mail is worthy of discussion, but it should probably be a whole different resolution, methinks.

[Gobbannium]

One small point; should this resolution deal with the subject of the privacy of mail in transit? Perhaps an additional short clause might be in order to forbid opening mail except for the purpose of dealing with hazardous materials. To pacify the paranoid totalitarian anti-terrorists, an additional get-out of "except as other international legislation permits" might be needed.

We believe that particular can of worms might be best left to the individual nations to decide.

We would disagree mildly, but only in so far as we think this a suitable subject for legislation. It might well be better left to another resolution, however; we merely thought that nations might like the assurance that their mail was not going to be opened while in the hands of another nation's postal service.

[Grays Harbor]

One small point; should this resolution deal with the subject of the privacy of mail in transit? Perhaps an additional short clause might be in order to forbid opening mail except for the purpose of dealing with hazardous materials. To pacify the paranoid totalitarian anti-terrorists, an additional get-out of "except as other international legislation permits" might be needed.

We believe that particular can of worms might be best left to the individual nations to decide.

We would disagree mildly, but only in so far as we think this a suitable subject for legislation. It might well be better left to another resolution, however; we merely thought that nations might like the assurance that their mail was not going to be opened while in the hands of another nation's postal service.

We can understand the concern you may have over that particular issue. I do believe, however, that it is an issue best left for the nations to decide, or at the very least, a different resolution altogether. Perhaps one to do with overall privacy rights as far as the international scope goes?


Don't ask, I'm not sure what I just said either.

[Glen-Rhodes]

"Are we ready to resubmit yet?" Brikkel mumbled from behind his morning paper while munching a chicken biscuit and taking a sip of coffee.

Is Ambassador Brikkel going to respond to my comments on Lord Tyvok's most recent version, or should I be directing my questions and concerns to the Krioval delegation?

At the very least, this proposal isn't ready to submit without clarification of language. To have any chance of my delegation's votes, the omitted clause aforementioned would need to be written back in.

[float=left]Dr. Bradford William Castro

Ambassador-at-Large,
Permanent Chief of Mission for World Assembly affairs,
the Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes[/float][float=right][/float]







(OOC: Which version would you be submitting? There are at least three different proposals in this thread. Might want to update the OP.)

[Grays Harbor]

(OOC: Which version would you be submitting? There are at least three different proposals in this thread. Might want to update the OP.)

OOC - The last one is the one we favour

[Grays Harbor]

Is Ambassador Brikkel going to respond to my comments on Lord Tyvok's most recent version, or should I be directing my questions and concerns to the Krioval delegation?

At the very least, this proposal isn't ready to submit without clarification of language. To have any chance of my delegation's votes, the omitted clause aforementioned would need to be written back in.

[float=left]Dr. Bradford William Castro

Ambassador-at-Large,
Permanent Chief of Mission for World Assembly affairs,
the Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes[/float][float=right][/float]

"The initial brief (the OP) has been updated and circulated to the General Assembly. Your concerns have been addressed, and clause 3 has been reworded to include elements of the earlier version of Clause 3, which was favoured by you. We trust this meets with your approval." Brikkel then returned to the cache of "sliders" he had acquired from the passing waitress.

[Grays Harbor]

OOC - This will not be resubmitted until after the upcoming 4 day weekend, so there is still a few more days to quibble over the wording of debate this proposal.