NATION

PASSWORD

[PASSED] Right to Adequate Sanitation

A carefully preserved record of the most notable World Assembly debates.
User avatar
Elke and Elba
Minister
 
Posts: 2760
Founded: Aug 24, 2009
Civil Rights Lovefest

[PASSED] Right to Adequate Sanitation

Postby Elke and Elba » Mon Jan 13, 2014 6:36 am

No time now, but I'm going to put a working title this time. Interestingly, a cursory check into the archives brought about only one which dealt with sanitation per se, and only regarding policy formulation -.-. (GA#97)

What's my point of doing this, you might ask. Well, although the WA seeks very hard to secure clean water, sanitation should come hand in hand. Without sanitation, diseases spread easily and very quickly. Not to mention, it pollutes the clean water and food the WA brings so hard to bring to people, too, well because without sanitation they'd be eating the stuff that has been polluted by themselves?

SUBMISSION VERSION
Right to Adequate Sanitation

The World Assembly,

UNDERSTANDING that sanitation is vital to the health and well-being of all people, and that when neglected, is a detriment to human life and may result in widespread outbreaks of disease,

BELIEVING that it is the duty of both member nations and the World Assembly to see that measures towards ensuring adequate sanitation are achieved,

FURTHER BELIEVING that it is a right of all people to equitable access to sanitation,

Hereby,

EXPANDS the mandate of the World Health Authority (WHA) to include the following:
a) Directing all appropriate funds towards investigating the causes of poor sanitation in member nations, researching solutions, and utilizing all appropriate resources to assist member nations in dealing with poor sanitary conditions and the consequences thereof,
b) Sharing all research and relevant information with member nations in an effort to mitigate the causes of poor sanitation,
c) Advising member nations based on the aforementioned research measures,
d) Funding and directing education measures, in coordination with the governments of member nations and other relevant institutions that promote improving sanitation;

REQUIRES that member nations shall take all measures practical, reasonable and necessary in providing a safe level of sanitation for their inhabitants, including but not limited to, constructing adequate solid waste management systems and ensuring access to public sanitation facilities;

MANDATES that all member nations must freely provide educational material on the importance of sanitation;

ENCOURAGES member nations to work cooperatively with both one another and non-member nations to improve regional access to sanitation, the quality of sanitation, and other objectives regarding improved sanitation;

REQUESTS that member nations offer incentives for innovations and solutions to solve sanitation problems, and;

STRONGLY URGES member nations to set prices for publicly sponsored sanitation operations in such a manner so as to make them as affordable as feasible.

This resolution includes significant contributions made by Sciongrad.


Edit after passing of resolution: thanks to all who have made this possible! ;)
Last edited by Elke and Elba on Fri Mar 14, 2014 9:04 am, edited 9 times in total.
Represented permanently at the World Assembly by Benjamin Olafsen, and on an ad-hoc basis by Alethea Norrland and rarely Gaia Pao and Gabriel Dzichpol.
OOCly retired from the GA/SC for something called 'real life'.
Author of GA#288 and SC#148.
Ratateague wrote:NationStates seems to hate the Geneva Convention. I've lost count in how many times someone has tried to introduce something like it. Why they don't like it is a mystery to me. Probably a lot of jingoist wingnuts.
Ardchoille wrote:When you consider that (violet) once changed the colour of the whole game for one player ... you can understand how seriously NS takes its players.

User avatar
Elke and Elba
Minister
 
Posts: 2760
Founded: Aug 24, 2009
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Elke and Elba » Mon Jan 13, 2014 6:39 am

Reserved. Category: Social Justice. Strength: Mild

I see DSR's comment and I get a bit jittery. I should brainstorm first. :)

-

Pre-pre-pre-pre-draft

Right to Sanitation

Understanding that sanitation is the provision for the safe disposal of human waste;

Acknowledging the right to sanitation as an integral component of human rights;

Concerned that the lack of sanitation would cause the spread of diseases originating from such waste;

Appalled that many of these diseases spread due to the lack of sanitation are preventable in nature;

Further appalled that the World Assembly has not come to sought legislation on the matter;

The World Assembly,

Establishes the World Assembly Bureau for Sanitation (WABS) as an international body to advise member nations regarding sanitation issues;

Instructs WABS to provide advice on sanitation for the member nations on a case-by-case basis as the situation in each member nation will vary from each another;

Mandates that all member nations provide and invest in an adequate level of sanitation for all of its citizens;

Further mandates that all member nations must educate its citizens on the importance of sanitation and promote habits that seeks to improve sanitation;

Requests that member nations incentivise in programmes promoting innovations and solutions to solve the sanitation problems, and;

Clarifies that member nations can charge its citizens for the services mandated by the provisions of this resolution, provided that this amount is affordable to the majority of its citizens, and that financial assistance must be provided where necessary to ensure that citizens have equitable access to sanitation.


Right to Sanitation

Understanding that sanitation is the provision for the safe disposal of human waste;

Acknowledging the right to sanitation as an integral component of human rights;

Concerned that the lack of sanitation would cause the spread of diseases originating from such waste;

Appalled that many of these diseases spread due to the lack of sanitation are preventable in nature;

The World Assembly,

Instructs that the World Health Authority (WHA) provide advice on sanitation for the member nations on a case-by-case basis as the situation in each member nation will vary from each another;

Demands that the World Health Authority to collect and process information, and research into sanitation practices in areas with sudden outbreak of disease due to inadequate sanitation;

Further demands that the WHA issue recommendations for these areas in order to prevent repeated outbreaks of disease due to inadequate sanitation;


Mandates that all member nations provide and invest in an adequate level of sanitation for all of its citizens;

Further mandates that all member nations must educate its citizens on the importance of sanitation and promote habits that seeks to improve sanitation;

Requests that member nations incentivise in programmes promoting innovations and solutions to solve the sanitation problems, and;

Clarifies that member nations can charge its citizens for the services mandated by the provisions of this resolution, provided that this amount is affordable to the majority of its citizens, and that financial assistance must be provided where necessary to ensure that citizens have equitable access to sanitation.


Right to Adequate Sanitation
The World Assembly,

Understanding that sanitation is the provision for the safe disposal of urine or excrement;

Acknowledging equal access to sanitation as a basic right;

Concerned that the lack of sanitation may promote the spread of disease;

Recognises the right to sanitation as a fundamental and basic human right;

Expands the mandate of the World Health Authority (WHA) to include the following:
a. Directing all appropriate funds towards investigating the causes of poor sanitation in member nations, researching solutions, and utilizing all appropriate resources to assist member nations in dealing with poor sanitary conditions and the consequences thereof
b. Sharing all research and and relevant information with member nations in an effort to mitigate the causes of consequences of poor sanitation;

Demands that member nations implement suitable solutions recommended by WHA in accordance with the above clause to prevent future outbreaks;

Mandates that all member nations shall take all measures, practical and necessary, in providing a safe level of sanitation for their inhabitants;

Further mandates that all member nations must freely provide educational material on the importance of sanitation and promote habits that improve sanitation;

Requests that member nations offer incentives for innovations and solutions to solve sanitation problems, and;

Clarifies that member nations are strongly urged to set prices for publicly sponsored sanitation operations in such a manner so as to make them as affordable and equitably accessible as is feasible.


I'm removing co-authorship for the moment because as the draft shifts along, co-authorship might shift between hands as ideas get changed along. I think it's best to award co-authorship only when it is ready for submission.
Last edited by Elke and Elba on Wed Jan 15, 2014 4:15 am, edited 9 times in total.
Represented permanently at the World Assembly by Benjamin Olafsen, and on an ad-hoc basis by Alethea Norrland and rarely Gaia Pao and Gabriel Dzichpol.
OOCly retired from the GA/SC for something called 'real life'.
Author of GA#288 and SC#148.
Ratateague wrote:NationStates seems to hate the Geneva Convention. I've lost count in how many times someone has tried to introduce something like it. Why they don't like it is a mystery to me. Probably a lot of jingoist wingnuts.
Ardchoille wrote:When you consider that (violet) once changed the colour of the whole game for one player ... you can understand how seriously NS takes its players.

User avatar
The Dark Star Republic
Senator
 
Posts: 4339
Founded: Oct 19, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby The Dark Star Republic » Mon Jan 13, 2014 6:40 am

"I agree that a right to sanitation would be something useful, but the Right to Housing failure showed there wasn't a great appetite among WA voters for social rights, so it would need to be packaged carefully.

"We look forward to seeing more on this."

OOC: Some of my friends were quite involved in World Toilet Day, so this is a matter I'm pleased to see being taken up, though I do think it'll be tricky to get right.
Last edited by The Dark Star Republic on Mon Jan 13, 2014 6:43 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Elke and Elba
Minister
 
Posts: 2760
Founded: Aug 24, 2009
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Elke and Elba » Mon Jan 13, 2014 7:49 am

It's too simple that I'm worried, DSR.

OOC: Given that the guy who proposed World Toilet Day was from my RL country, I think I do have the inherent need to bring this to NS WA too :P
Represented permanently at the World Assembly by Benjamin Olafsen, and on an ad-hoc basis by Alethea Norrland and rarely Gaia Pao and Gabriel Dzichpol.
OOCly retired from the GA/SC for something called 'real life'.
Author of GA#288 and SC#148.
Ratateague wrote:NationStates seems to hate the Geneva Convention. I've lost count in how many times someone has tried to introduce something like it. Why they don't like it is a mystery to me. Probably a lot of jingoist wingnuts.
Ardchoille wrote:When you consider that (violet) once changed the colour of the whole game for one player ... you can understand how seriously NS takes its players.

User avatar
Bananaistan
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2340
Founded: Apr 20, 2012
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bananaistan » Mon Jan 13, 2014 7:58 am

The government of Bananaistan feels that this is an admirable aspiration but does not feel that it could support any resolution in its area. Particularly if any such resolution creates an obligation for member states to provide a system of sanitation for all its citizens. We feel that people who choose to live in remote areas cannot expect the rest of society, at great expense, to provide their system of sanitation, IE if a person chooses to live up the side of a mountain where public utilities are not already available, don't come looking to the government to do it for you.
Delegation of the People's Republic of Bananaistan to the World Assembly
Head of delegation and the Permanent Representative: Comrade Ambassador Theodorus "Ted" Hornwood
General Assistant and Head of Security: Comrade Watchman Brian of Tarth
There was the Pope and John F. Kennedy and Jack Charlton and the three of them were staring me in the face.

User avatar
The Dark Star Republic
Senator
 
Posts: 4339
Founded: Oct 19, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby The Dark Star Republic » Mon Jan 13, 2014 8:09 am

"If you're going to use a committee for this, I would think using the existing one - the World Health Authority - might be preferable. The WHA is well established, and is already used in reference to Quality in Health Services, among other resolutions.

"I also feel a useful function in this would be to collect and process information. For example, if a particular area is having a bacterial infection outbreak, it would be worth the WHA researching the sanitation practices of that area and issuing recommendations.

"I think you can also tone down on the 'appalled' preamble a touch."

~ Ambassador to the WA Inky Fungschlammer

User avatar
Elke and Elba
Minister
 
Posts: 2760
Founded: Aug 24, 2009
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Elke and Elba » Mon Jan 13, 2014 8:11 am

Bananaistan wrote:The government of Bananaistan feels that this is an admirable aspiration but does not feel that it could support any resolution in its area. Particularly if any such resolution creates an obligation for member states to provide a system of sanitation for all its citizens. We feel that people who choose to live in remote areas cannot expect the rest of society, at great expense, to provide their system of sanitation, IE if a person chooses to live up the side of a mountain where public utilities are not already available, don't come looking to the government to do it for you.


EnE must say that this draft is meant for creative compliance in the most creative way. As the govt, you need not ship gold gilded toilets to the other side of the mountain, you probably just need to get them to dig their own shitholes... errr... latrines. :) That's is the reason for some arbitrary wording and "adequate sanitation".

OOC: I'm serious. We are talking about providing basic sanitation, not stuff that we in the first world use. No fancy toilets and bidets etc. :)

To DSR: Point noted! ;)
Represented permanently at the World Assembly by Benjamin Olafsen, and on an ad-hoc basis by Alethea Norrland and rarely Gaia Pao and Gabriel Dzichpol.
OOCly retired from the GA/SC for something called 'real life'.
Author of GA#288 and SC#148.
Ratateague wrote:NationStates seems to hate the Geneva Convention. I've lost count in how many times someone has tried to introduce something like it. Why they don't like it is a mystery to me. Probably a lot of jingoist wingnuts.
Ardchoille wrote:When you consider that (violet) once changed the colour of the whole game for one player ... you can understand how seriously NS takes its players.

User avatar
Elke and Elba
Minister
 
Posts: 2760
Founded: Aug 24, 2009
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Elke and Elba » Mon Jan 13, 2014 8:22 am

Updated to draft 2 as per recommendations suggest by DSR.

*puts DSR on the possible list for co-authoring :) *
Represented permanently at the World Assembly by Benjamin Olafsen, and on an ad-hoc basis by Alethea Norrland and rarely Gaia Pao and Gabriel Dzichpol.
OOCly retired from the GA/SC for something called 'real life'.
Author of GA#288 and SC#148.
Ratateague wrote:NationStates seems to hate the Geneva Convention. I've lost count in how many times someone has tried to introduce something like it. Why they don't like it is a mystery to me. Probably a lot of jingoist wingnuts.
Ardchoille wrote:When you consider that (violet) once changed the colour of the whole game for one player ... you can understand how seriously NS takes its players.

User avatar
Bananaistan
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2340
Founded: Apr 20, 2012
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bananaistan » Mon Jan 13, 2014 9:13 am

Elke and Elba wrote:EnE must say that this draft is meant for creative compliance in the most creative way. As the govt, you need not ship gold gilded toilets to the other side of the mountain, you probably just need to get them to dig their own shitholes... errr... latrines. :) That's is the reason for some arbitrary wording and "adequate sanitation".

OOC: I'm serious. We are talking about providing basic sanitation, not stuff that we in the first world use. No fancy toilets and bidets etc. :)


Ah, we feel that discussing a weak resolution, the provisions of which can easily be avoided by creative compliance, is a poor use of general assembly time.

Nonetheless, we would still discuss the current proposal. We cannot speak to the standards of public health and pollution control standards enforced by other member states, but we can speak to the standards in place in Bananaistan.

There are numerous and ponderous standards in place to prevent any threat to the public health and local water supply regarding how wastewater and sewage are dealt with for any private dwelling which is not connected to a public sewer system. “Adequate sanitation” in Bananaistan is already set at a very high level and the owner of the one off house on the side of the mountain needs to comply with this high standard, generally at a fairly hefty cost, to prevent any possibility of contamination of the local water table or compromise to the standard of the local environment.

If the above proposal passed in its current form, we would need to make significant changes to our laws.

On the one hand we could still allow these one off builds and either reduce the current wastewater standards at a possibly significant cost to the environment or we keep the same standards and subsidise these one off builds at a great cost to the exchequer. On the other hand we could ban new one off builds where there is no existing public sewer system.

None of these options would be acceptable. We still wish to protect the environment, we don’t wish to burden the exchequer with undue additional costs and we don’t wish to restrict people’s right to build on their own land save that such building cannot be detrimental to the quality of the local environment.
Delegation of the People's Republic of Bananaistan to the World Assembly
Head of delegation and the Permanent Representative: Comrade Ambassador Theodorus "Ted" Hornwood
General Assistant and Head of Security: Comrade Watchman Brian of Tarth
There was the Pope and John F. Kennedy and Jack Charlton and the three of them were staring me in the face.

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 14505
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Mon Jan 13, 2014 9:18 am

Well...I can't see this being a serious issue to comply with in developed nations, which the WA seems to have abound. I wonder, though, how much trouble this would cause for undeveloped nations, where the lack of technology, poverty, and extreme geography would make this difficult to implement and enforce for a poorer nation, even with WA funds. (OOC: Nepal springs to mind)

I realize my observations are entirely unhelpful, and I have no solution to offer, regrettably. It is a point I feel worth considering though.

His Worshipfulness Lord GA Secretariat,
Authority on All Existence,
Globalist Dog,
Dark Psychic Vampire, and
Chief Populist Elitist!


User avatar
Elke and Elba
Minister
 
Posts: 2760
Founded: Aug 24, 2009
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Elke and Elba » Mon Jan 13, 2014 9:33 am

Separatist Peoples wrote:Well...I can't see this being a serious issue to comply with in developed nations, which the WA seems to have abound. I wonder, though, how much trouble this would cause for undeveloped nations, where the lack of technology, poverty, and extreme geography would make this difficult to implement and enforce for a poorer nation, even with WA funds. (OOC: Nepal springs to mind)

I realize my observations are entirely unhelpful, and I have no solution to offer, regrettably. It is a point I feel worth considering though.


"Well, we do have some under and undeveloped countries... This is when 'Clean Water Act' springs to mind. Not a need for developed countries, but we can't leave the under/undeveloped countries behind."

I'm sure digging a hole in the ground would be much easier than sending water every now and then...

Ambassador Norrland wonders if everyone has used a toilet so much, one fails to understand what a "latrine" is.
Represented permanently at the World Assembly by Benjamin Olafsen, and on an ad-hoc basis by Alethea Norrland and rarely Gaia Pao and Gabriel Dzichpol.
OOCly retired from the GA/SC for something called 'real life'.
Author of GA#288 and SC#148.
Ratateague wrote:NationStates seems to hate the Geneva Convention. I've lost count in how many times someone has tried to introduce something like it. Why they don't like it is a mystery to me. Probably a lot of jingoist wingnuts.
Ardchoille wrote:When you consider that (violet) once changed the colour of the whole game for one player ... you can understand how seriously NS takes its players.

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 14505
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Mon Jan 13, 2014 9:47 am

Elke and Elba wrote:
Separatist Peoples wrote:Well...I can't see this being a serious issue to comply with in developed nations, which the WA seems to have abound. I wonder, though, how much trouble this would cause for undeveloped nations, where the lack of technology, poverty, and extreme geography would make this difficult to implement and enforce for a poorer nation, even with WA funds. (OOC: Nepal springs to mind)

I realize my observations are entirely unhelpful, and I have no solution to offer, regrettably. It is a point I feel worth considering though.


"Well, we do have some under and undeveloped countries... This is when 'Clean Water Act' springs to mind. Not a need for developed countries, but we can't leave the under/undeveloped countries behind."

I'm sure digging a hole in the ground would be much easier than sending water every now and then...

Ambassador Norrland wonders if everyone has used a toilet so much, one fails to understand what a "latrine" is.


I'm very much aware of what a latrine is :p. My point of contension is that, for example, in some nations (OOC: Nepal), one "wipes" with one's hand and a bucket of hopefully fresh water. While the fecal material is now mostly secured underground, there is still the issue of the small amounts that are either suspended in water on on one's hand that are going to cause a sanitation issue. Its not just the final resting place of the waste that is the issue.

Now, that might be entirely unavoidable, but we have another problem with storing fecal materiel underground. It doesn't decompose. It stays fecal materiel, and stays just as unsanitary as when it was fresh. because the proper bacteria doesn't get enough oxygen to break the materiel down, creating just as serious a sanitation issue. Unfortunately, the best way to deal with it is piping it out, since exposing the material to the air would create just as large an issue.

As I said before, potentially unavoidable with this legislation, and certainly not seriously helpful. I seem to be struggling with articulating my concern here...

Perhaps tasking the WHA with issuing teams to high-risk areas to offer consultation and education directly to the people would be a way to mitigate the issue? As currently written, this lays a lot on the national government, which, if it is undeveloped, might not be able to handle such a thing with extra funding alone, or even suffer from a crippling lack of education itself.

His Worshipfulness Lord GA Secretariat,
Authority on All Existence,
Globalist Dog,
Dark Psychic Vampire, and
Chief Populist Elitist!


User avatar
Elke and Elba
Minister
 
Posts: 2760
Founded: Aug 24, 2009
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Elke and Elba » Mon Jan 13, 2014 9:58 am

Separatist Peoples wrote:Now, that might be entirely unavoidable, but we have another problem with storing fecal materiel underground. It doesn't decompose. It stays fecal materiel, and stays just as unsanitary as when it was fresh. because the proper bacteria doesn't get enough oxygen to break the materiel down, creating just as serious a sanitation issue. Unfortunately, the best way to deal with it is piping it out, since exposing the material to the air would create just as large an issue.

As I said before, potentially unavoidable with this legislation, and certainly not seriously helpful. I seem to be struggling with articulating my concern here...

Perhaps tasking the WHA with issuing teams to high-risk areas to offer consultation and education directly to the people would be a way to mitigate the issue? As currently written, this lays a lot on the national government, which, if it is undeveloped, might not be able to handle such a thing with extra funding alone, or even suffer from a crippling lack of education itself.


Good points. I will revisit them and update the clauses when time permits.

Regards,
EnE
Represented permanently at the World Assembly by Benjamin Olafsen, and on an ad-hoc basis by Alethea Norrland and rarely Gaia Pao and Gabriel Dzichpol.
OOCly retired from the GA/SC for something called 'real life'.
Author of GA#288 and SC#148.
Ratateague wrote:NationStates seems to hate the Geneva Convention. I've lost count in how many times someone has tried to introduce something like it. Why they don't like it is a mystery to me. Probably a lot of jingoist wingnuts.
Ardchoille wrote:When you consider that (violet) once changed the colour of the whole game for one player ... you can understand how seriously NS takes its players.

User avatar
Eireann Fae
Minister
 
Posts: 3422
Founded: Oct 15, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Eireann Fae » Mon Jan 13, 2014 4:03 pm

"The concept has our support, but we are still going over the text of the draft. Expect further comments shortly."

"Shortly" in game-time. It could actually be 13-15 hours before I get around to it :-)

User avatar
Eireann Fae
Minister
 
Posts: 3422
Founded: Oct 15, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Eireann Fae » Tue Jan 14, 2014 6:03 am

"Here you go, Ambassador Norrland," says Rowan, handing across a pair of documents. "While we agree with the category of Social Justice, we believe this proposal may merely be of mild strength. Its effects are quite narrow, and it consists entirely of what most reasonable nations ought to be doing, anyway. We doubt there is enough of an issue with the strength here to make it illegal, though."

Right to Adequate Sanitation

Understanding that sanitation is the provision for the safe disposal of urine or excrement;

Acknowledging equal access to sanitation as a basic right;

Concerned that the lack of sanitation may promote the spread of disease;

The World Assembly,

Tasks the World Health Authority (WHA) with providing advice on sanitation for Member Nations suitable to their individual needs;

Instructs the WHA to help member nations investigate the causes of, and solutions to, outbreak of disease resulting from poor sanitation practices;

Demands that Member Nations implement suitable solutions recommended by the WHA in accordance with the above clause to prevent future outbreaks;

Mandates that all Member Nations strive to provide a safe level of sanitation for all of its inhabitants;

Further mandates that all Member Nations must freely provide educational material on the importance of sanitation and promote habits that improve sanitation;

Requests that Member Nations offer incentives for innovations and solutions to solve sanitation problems, and;

Clarifies that Member Nations may charge their citizens for the services mandated by the provisions of this resolution, provided that this amount is affordable to the majority of their inhabitants and that financial assistance must be provided where necessary to ensure that people have equitable access to sanitation.


Right to Adequate Sanitation
We checked - it fits ☺

Understanding that sanitation is the provision for the safe disposal of human wasteurine or excrement;
'Feces' would work for the latter term as well, but we should be concerned with the waste of more species than Humans.

Acknowledging the rightequal access to sanitation as an integral component of human basic rights;
Again stripping some anthrocentricism; also, we prefer brevity in resolutions we support.

Concerned that the lack of sanitation would causemay promote the spread of diseases originating from such waste;
The spread of disease is not a surety, and again, brevity ☺

Appalled that many of these diseases spread due to the lack of sanitation are preventable in nature;
We think the preceding preambulatory clause makes this case well enough without this line needing to spell things out any further.

The World Assembly,

Instructs thatTasks the World Health Authority (WHA) with provideing advice on sanitation for the member nations on a case-by-case basis as the situation in each member nation will vary from each anothersuitable to their individual needs;
Just did a bit of cleaning here. We think it would read much better this way.

Demands that the World Health Authority to collect and process information, and research into sanitation practices in areas with sudden outbreak of disease due to inadequate sanitation;
Instructs the WHA to help member nations investigate the causes of, and solutions to, outbreak of disease resulting from poor sanitation practices;
First of all, the WHA is a WA organisation, not a belligerent nation - you do not need to 'demand' things from them, only instruct or ask them to. Also, we still like brevity ☺

Further demands that the WHA issue recommendations for these areas in order to prevent repeated outbreaks of disease due to inadequate sanitation;
Demands that Member Nations implement suitable solutions recommended by the WHA in accordance with the above clause to prevent future outbreaks;
The wording here is a bit clumsy and may need some more work, but we do want to make the point that the onus should be on the nations to implement the safeguards here, not the WHA. The WHA should play an advisory role in emergencies only, not set policy for member nations.

Mandates that all member nations provide and invest in an adequatestrive to provide a safe level of sanitation for all of its citizensinhabitants;
Our attempt to clean this clause up a bit. Also, sanitation should be provided for everybody in the nation, not just those deemed 'citizens'.

Further mandates that all member nations must educate its citizensfreely provide educational material on the importance of sanitation and promote habits that seeks to improve sanitation;
Again, we would prefer the information be available to everybody in the nation, not just 'citizens' that go to school (or however your idea of 'educating its citizens' was to be implemented). The second strike is just for the sake of brevity ☺

Requests that member nations incentivise in programmes promotingoffer incentives for innovations and solutions to solve the sanitation problems, and;

Clarifies that member nations canmay charge itstheir citizens for the services mandated by the provisions of this resolution, provided that this amount is affordable to the majority of its citizenstheir inhabitants, and that financial assistance must be provided where necessary to ensure that citizenspeople have equitable access to sanitation.
Minor grammatical changes.

Also, please note that we recommending capitalising 'Member Nations' throughout the draft, as I have done in the 'clean' version also provided.


(OOC: Hah, 14 hours precisely :-)
Last edited by Eireann Fae on Tue Jan 14, 2014 6:04 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Elke and Elba
Minister
 
Posts: 2760
Founded: Aug 24, 2009
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Elke and Elba » Tue Jan 14, 2014 7:03 am

Ambassador Norrland is happy :)

Hah, 1 hour later, exactly.

P.S. You've been added as co-submitter too. The changes are so great EnE has to acknowledge this.

EDIT: This draft is ready for submission. We hope to submit within 48 hours' time, unless great objections are made as this resolution should be kept as simple as possible not to run into NatSov's wrath, too. DSR makes a good point about that regarding the Right to Housing situation.
Last edited by Elke and Elba on Tue Jan 14, 2014 7:07 am, edited 3 times in total.
Represented permanently at the World Assembly by Benjamin Olafsen, and on an ad-hoc basis by Alethea Norrland and rarely Gaia Pao and Gabriel Dzichpol.
OOCly retired from the GA/SC for something called 'real life'.
Author of GA#288 and SC#148.
Ratateague wrote:NationStates seems to hate the Geneva Convention. I've lost count in how many times someone has tried to introduce something like it. Why they don't like it is a mystery to me. Probably a lot of jingoist wingnuts.
Ardchoille wrote:When you consider that (violet) once changed the colour of the whole game for one player ... you can understand how seriously NS takes its players.

User avatar
Bananaistan
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2340
Founded: Apr 20, 2012
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bananaistan » Tue Jan 14, 2014 8:25 am

Clarifies that Member Nations may charge their citizens for the services mandated by the provisions of this resolution, provided that this amount is affordable to the majority of their inhabitants and that financial assistance must be provided where necessary to ensure that people have equitable access to sanitation.


The government of Bananaistan feels that its concerns were somewhat addressed in the new draft but we are concerned that the bolded part of the above clause will still place an undue burden on the exchequer in the case of one off builds without access to a public sewer system. We feel that these people always have the option of living somewhere where there is a public sewer system which is provided free of charge and is funded by general taxation. In the case of people who cannot afford to provide their own accommodation, assistance is already provided by our local authorities and generally in accommodation which does have access to a public sewer system.

As it stands, we will not support the resolution. It represents too much interference in our sanitation, public housing, environmental, and planning policies.

Nonetheless, we would point out that the above clause refers separately to "their citizens", "their inhabitants" and "people". Perhaps each should be replaced by simply "inhabitants".
Last edited by Bananaistan on Tue Jan 14, 2014 8:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
Delegation of the People's Republic of Bananaistan to the World Assembly
Head of delegation and the Permanent Representative: Comrade Ambassador Theodorus "Ted" Hornwood
General Assistant and Head of Security: Comrade Watchman Brian of Tarth
There was the Pope and John F. Kennedy and Jack Charlton and the three of them were staring me in the face.

User avatar
Elke and Elba
Minister
 
Posts: 2760
Founded: Aug 24, 2009
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Elke and Elba » Tue Jan 14, 2014 8:50 am

Bananaistan wrote:
The government of Bananaistan feels that its concerns were somewhat addressed in the new draft but we are concerned that the bolded part of the above clause will still place an undue burden on the exchequer in the case of one off builds without access to a public sewer system. We feel that these people always have the option of living somewhere where there is a public sewer system which is provided free of charge and is funded by general taxation. In the case of people who cannot afford to provide their own accommodation, assistance is already provided by our local authorities and generally in accommodation which does have access to a public sewer system.


That's great. However, do note not all countries have the same policies as yours, and it might be even more prohibitive to move people rather than install simple latrines and septic tanks in more far flung areas. OOC: To use a RL example, you can't expect people in Waziristan to move to Islamabad just because of a few toilets, can you?

As mentioned by EF, there is a reason why this is downgraded to a mild since it will most likely /not/ affect socially-progressive, economically-stable countries like yours.


Bananaistan wrote:As it stands, we will not support the resolution. It represents too much interference in our sanitation, public housing, environmental, and planning policies.


We regret that the Bananamen has chosen to take this course of action. However, we respect this decision made by your government.

Bananaistan wrote:Nonetheless, we would point out that the above clause refers separately to "their citizens", "their inhabitants" and "people". Perhaps each should be replaced by simply "inhabitants".


Yup, we agree. Changes made as per your suggestion. Thank you.
Last edited by Elke and Elba on Tue Jan 14, 2014 8:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
Represented permanently at the World Assembly by Benjamin Olafsen, and on an ad-hoc basis by Alethea Norrland and rarely Gaia Pao and Gabriel Dzichpol.
OOCly retired from the GA/SC for something called 'real life'.
Author of GA#288 and SC#148.
Ratateague wrote:NationStates seems to hate the Geneva Convention. I've lost count in how many times someone has tried to introduce something like it. Why they don't like it is a mystery to me. Probably a lot of jingoist wingnuts.
Ardchoille wrote:When you consider that (violet) once changed the colour of the whole game for one player ... you can understand how seriously NS takes its players.

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 14505
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Tue Jan 14, 2014 8:54 am

Elke and Elba wrote:Ambassador Norrland is happy :)

Hah, 1 hour later, exactly.

P.S. You've been added as co-submitter too. The changes are so great EnE has to acknowledge this.

EDIT: This draft is ready for submission. We hope to submit within 48 hours' time, unless great objections are made as this resolution should be kept as simple as possible not to run into NatSov's wrath, too. DSR makes a good point about that regarding the Right to Housing situation.


So soon, ambassador? I'm surprised. You seem like you would know the old credo "Writing a resolution is a marathon, not a sprint" better then most. While I admit that this is well written in its current form, there are a lot of debate hall regulars that haven't managed to drop in to comment yet. The Mousebumples delegate, in particular, springs to mind, since they she is something of an expert on bio-medically-themed proposals.

His Worshipfulness Lord GA Secretariat,
Authority on All Existence,
Globalist Dog,
Dark Psychic Vampire, and
Chief Populist Elitist!


User avatar
Bananaistan
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2340
Founded: Apr 20, 2012
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bananaistan » Tue Jan 14, 2014 10:22 am

Elke and Elba wrote:That's great. However, do note not all countries have the same policies as yours, and it might be even more prohibitive to move people rather than install simple latrines and septic tanks in more far flung areas. OOC: To use a RL example, you can't expect people in Waziristan to move to Islamabad just because of a few toilets, can you?

As mentioned by EF, there is a reason why this is downgraded to a mild since it will most likely /not/ affect socially-progressive, economically-stable countries like yours.


Well I have outlined just how it would affect a socially-progressive, economically-stable countries like ours.

Rather than speak in generalities about every country, I spoke about the implications in our country. If people wish to live in far flung areas they must be responsible for their own sanitation, at their own expense and to the high standard already required. Or they can live in less far flung areas where the state provides these services already, free of charge. If we wish to continue to allow people the freedom to live in far flung areas, as we do, this legislation would require us to subsidise their wastewater systems.

Requiring us to install sanitation facilities for all inhabitants at society’s expense regardless of where they live is the central issue the government of Bananaistan has with this resolution. I would like someone to explain to me why people who live off the beaten track should be subsidised in this fashion.

OOC: If the inhabitants of Waziristan expect to provided with toilets at society’s expense, then yes, I’d tell them to move to Islamabad where toilets are already provided at society’s expense.
Delegation of the People's Republic of Bananaistan to the World Assembly
Head of delegation and the Permanent Representative: Comrade Ambassador Theodorus "Ted" Hornwood
General Assistant and Head of Security: Comrade Watchman Brian of Tarth
There was the Pope and John F. Kennedy and Jack Charlton and the three of them were staring me in the face.

User avatar
Sciongrad
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 3015
Founded: Mar 11, 2012
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Sciongrad » Tue Jan 14, 2014 10:02 pm

I think improving sanitation among member nations, especially developing ones, is a worthwhile goal and so my delegation will be watching this one carefully. We have a few suggestions however:

First of all, the title is misleading. This doesn't necessarily confer any new rights to anyone. This seeks to use the WA as a means of addressing a problem. Perhaps the WA Sanitation Initiative? The title is not an immediate issue worth addressing, however.

Next, I feel as if "[t]he World Assembly," belongs at the beginning, as the resolution (at least this is how I've interpreted it) is supposed to read as a statement. "The General Assembly, understanding so and so problem, hereby mandates x, recommends y, and prohibits z." I suppose it technically makes sense now and I may be being nitpicky, so I won't be bother much if you keep your current style.

I feel as if clarifying the WHA clauses and making them the locus of your resolution may be the best way to go. For example,

The World Health Authority shall have its mandate expanded to include the following:

a. Directing all appropriate funds towards investigating the causes of poor sanitation in member nations, researching solutions, and utilizing all appropriate resources to assist member nations in dealing with poor sanitary conditions and the consequences thereof,
b. Sharing all research and and relevant information with member nations in an effort to mitigate the causes of consequences of poor sanitation,


The mandates clause should read "[m]andates that all Member Nations strive to provide a safe level of sanitation for all of their inhabitants;" Also, the unnecessary capitalization of member nations could also be done away with. I don't know if I like the vagueness of this clause either. Perhaps "member nations shall take all measures practical and necessary in providing a safe level of sanitation for their inhabitants;"

I don't see the requests clause as being effective or necessary, so I would suggest eliminating it altogether.

Regarding your concern with free education material - I don't think a educational sanitation initiative will cripple any economies, and the WHA, in my suggested expanded capacity, should be able to pick up the slack if a member nation truly cannot afford the expense.

I'm uncomfortable with the final clause. Perhaps just urging member nations to make sanitary services affordable, rather than the bizarre construct of having member nations set a price that a majority of people can afford. I don't necessarily think that's feasible, and if member nations are forced to implement the sanitary measures suggested by the WHA anyway, it wouldn't be logical for them to make the prices too high for most people to afford. Poor sanitation is not something any government really wants, especially if they've paid for improvements already. Therefore, I'd make the clause read something along the lines of "member nations are strongly urged to set prices for publicly sponsored sanitation operations in such a manner so as to make them as affordable and equitably accessible as is feasible."

Also, Eireann Fae is your co-author, not your co-submitter. They're not submitting anything with you, you're the only one submitting anything.

EDIT:
This draft is ready for submission. We hope to submit within 48 hours' time...


This is absolutely not ready to be submitted. It's been up for less than two days. Leave this to ferment for a few weeks until you're given the vibe by other ambassadors that it's time to submit it. Don't be so hasty, drafting is the fun part and it's a useful tool that you should use to its fullest potential. Don't brush it off just to get a resolution to vote, because no one likes having their resolution repealed for something that would have otherwise been preventable.
Last edited by Sciongrad on Tue Jan 14, 2014 10:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Natalia Santos, Plenipotentiary and Permanent Scionite Representative to the World Assembly


Ideological Bulwark #271


User avatar
Elke and Elba
Minister
 
Posts: 2760
Founded: Aug 24, 2009
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Elke and Elba » Wed Jan 15, 2014 4:01 am

Ahh, two people responded to the "I'll send it in within 48 hours". That's great - I don't like half-baked drafts too and I just decided to make a statement by falsely declaring that because there has been quite a lot of half-baked draft so to speak, going in. The New Molsonian resolution comes into mind; and a few of the Sakashian ones too. :palm:

So to SP and Sciongrad, don't worry :P

To Sciongrad: good points esp. towards the end of the post. I will be updating it soon. I hope to pass this and the Radiowaves one before the end of March.

EDIT: I must disagree that drafting is fun. It is not. Especially when your draft gets pushed down and no delegate reads it - happens far too often. I find delegates of the sort you are talking in fact of a rare breed.

OOC: Why the hell would anyone spend so much time /reading/ another person's work AND pondering over it when it has no impact on his real life? No one is ever going to do that in a course of a few weeks for just one draft.
Last edited by Elke and Elba on Wed Jan 15, 2014 4:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
Represented permanently at the World Assembly by Benjamin Olafsen, and on an ad-hoc basis by Alethea Norrland and rarely Gaia Pao and Gabriel Dzichpol.
OOCly retired from the GA/SC for something called 'real life'.
Author of GA#288 and SC#148.
Ratateague wrote:NationStates seems to hate the Geneva Convention. I've lost count in how many times someone has tried to introduce something like it. Why they don't like it is a mystery to me. Probably a lot of jingoist wingnuts.
Ardchoille wrote:When you consider that (violet) once changed the colour of the whole game for one player ... you can understand how seriously NS takes its players.

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 14505
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Wed Jan 15, 2014 8:30 am

Elke and Elba wrote:EDIT: I must disagree that drafting is fun. It is not. Especially when your draft gets pushed down and no delegate reads it - happens far too often. I find delegates of the sort you are talking in fact of a rare breed.

This is an unusual phenomenon that I haven't seen happen before to the degree it has happened in the last few months. I wonder if the regulars here have gotten lazy, or if it really is much more fun to dogpile a bad resolution then assist in drafting a new one. I, myself, seem to be guilty of it, but I couldn't tell you why...

OOC: Why the hell would anyone spend so much time /reading/ another person's work AND pondering over it when it has no impact on his real life? No one is ever going to do that in a course of a few weeks for just one draft.


OOC: Because its fun for some of us. Sad, I know, but true. Its a great mental exercise to divert one from a particularly frustrating problem at work or school. :p

His Worshipfulness Lord GA Secretariat,
Authority on All Existence,
Globalist Dog,
Dark Psychic Vampire, and
Chief Populist Elitist!


User avatar
Sciongrad
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 3015
Founded: Mar 11, 2012
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Sciongrad » Fri Jan 17, 2014 10:25 pm

Elke and Elba wrote:OOC: Why the hell would anyone spend so much time /reading/ another person's work AND pondering over it when it has no impact on his real life? No one is ever going to do that in a course of a few weeks for just one draft.


OOC: That's the nature of this part of the game. This has been the way it has worked in the past, and although lately it isn't always the case, a major part of the GA is spending time critiquing the work of other players.
Natalia Santos, Plenipotentiary and Permanent Scionite Representative to the World Assembly


Ideological Bulwark #271


User avatar
Elke and Elba
Minister
 
Posts: 2760
Founded: Aug 24, 2009
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Elke and Elba » Fri Jan 17, 2014 10:46 pm

Sciongrad wrote:
Elke and Elba wrote:OOC: Why the hell would anyone spend so much time /reading/ another person's work AND pondering over it when it has no impact on his real life? No one is ever going to do that in a course of a few weeks for just one draft.


OOC: That's the nature of this part of the game. This has been the way it has worked in the past, and although lately it isn't always the case, a major part of the GA is spending time critiquing the work of other players.


OOC: That is /if/ the proposal stays at the top of the board. ^_^ I never heard of anyone going back to the same thread errr 2 weeks later. I'm sorry to spoil your augmented reality, but proposals don't seem to stay for 2 weeks before being submitted, except for the rare few.
Represented permanently at the World Assembly by Benjamin Olafsen, and on an ad-hoc basis by Alethea Norrland and rarely Gaia Pao and Gabriel Dzichpol.
OOCly retired from the GA/SC for something called 'real life'.
Author of GA#288 and SC#148.
Ratateague wrote:NationStates seems to hate the Geneva Convention. I've lost count in how many times someone has tried to introduce something like it. Why they don't like it is a mystery to me. Probably a lot of jingoist wingnuts.
Ardchoille wrote:When you consider that (violet) once changed the colour of the whole game for one player ... you can understand how seriously NS takes its players.

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to WA Archives

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads