[PASSED] Landfill Regulation Act

[Cretox State]

OOC: Tentatively moving to last call. Might submit at some point next week.

[Honeydewistania]

"This still seems like an unnecessary overreach. While supportive of environmental resolutions, this is excessive micromanagement. Against."

[Cretox State]

"This still seems like an unnecessary overreach. While supportive of environmental resolutions, this is excessive micromanagement. Against."

"Which parts specifically constitute unnecessary overreach?"

[Imperium Anglorum]

You could block grant it so that there is a per employee subside fall-off.

[Honeydewistania]

"This still seems like an unnecessary overreach. While supportive of environmental resolutions, this is excessive micromanagement. Against."

"Which parts specifically constitute unnecessary overreach?"

"The premise. Regulating rubbish tips doesn’t seem like a good idea, I think a better idea would be regulating the disposal of non-compostable, non-recyclable non-hazardous waste. (not sure if any are in place though, might wanna check.) I think SWLs are worth promoting as a place to dumb rubbish, as there are far worse ways to do so."

[Cretox State]

"Which parts specifically constitute unnecessary overreach?"

"The premise. Regulating rubbish tips doesn’t seem like a good idea, I think a better idea would be regulating the disposal of non-compostable, non-recyclable non-hazardous waste. (not sure if any are in place though, might wanna check.) I think SWLs are worth promoting as a place to dumb rubbish, as there are far worse ways to do so."

"How does it look now?"

[Honeydewistania]

"It still reads as a resolution discouraging landfills. Member nations will take one look and decide not to blow their money (especially poor nations) on building safe landfills and decide to incinerate everything instead. Or was that your goal?"

[Cretox State]

"It still reads as a resolution discouraging landfills. Member nations will take one look and decide not to blow their money (especially poor nations) on building safe landfills and decide to incinerate everything instead. Or was that your goal?"

OOC: You do understand that landfills make money, right?

[Honeydewistania]

"It still reads as a resolution discouraging landfills. Member nations will take one look and decide not to blow their money (especially poor nations) on building safe landfills and decide to incinerate everything instead. Or was that your goal?"

OOC: You do understand that landfills make money, right?

(Are those privately owned or provided by the government?)

[Cretox State]

OOC: You do understand that landfills make money, right?

(Are those privately owned or provided by the government?)

OOC: The proposal applies to both. Regardless, I would hardly call regulations already in place throughout the real world a substantially onerous strain on member nations' economies.

[Honeydewistania]

(Are those privately owned or provided by the government?)

OOC: The proposal applies to both. Regardless, I would hardly call regulations already in place throughout the real world a substantially onerous strain on member nations' economies.

However, people will take a look at incineration and landfills. One costs more than the other. So... burn everything!

[Cretox State]

OOC: The proposal applies to both. Regardless, I would hardly call regulations already in place throughout the real world a substantially onerous strain on member nations' economies.

However, people will take a look at incineration and landfills. One costs more than the other. So... burn everything!

OOC: Incinerator plants themselves cost money, and need to be built. Why is it that landfills subject to even more stringent regulations than what's in this proposal are so prevalent in the real world?

Edit: Incinerators and landfills are both more expensive than the obvious alternative, which is recycling.

[Honeydewistania]

However, people will take a look at incineration and landfills. One costs more than the other. So... burn everything!

OOC: Incinerator plants themselves cost money, and need to be built. Why is it that landfills subject to even more stringent regulations than what's in this proposal are so prevalent in the real world?

Because you don't have capitalist death traps like Honeydewistania in the scene

Anyways I'll give tentative support.

[Cretox State]

OOC: Since the proposal now includes provisions dealing with nonhazardous waste dumping in general, I changed the category to Regulation | Safety.

[Araraukar]

IC and OOC as marked.

Nonhazardous Waste Disposal Act

IC: "Except it's not. It's about landfill regulations. Barring the title, you have a total of three mentions of "disposal" in the active clauses and only one of them is about actually disposing something, and that one is about disposing treated leachate! Meanwhile, you have ten or eleven mentions of "landfill". Call it what it is, to avoid being labeled a liar and a weasel; "Landfill Regulations" works just fine."

Category: Regulation
Area of effect: Safety

OOC: No. It's about environmental protection so it belongs in the Environmental category. Why do you keep seesawing about this?

Understanding the importance of landfills in providing a cost-effective method for the disposal of non-compostable and non-recyclable solid waste,

Concerned by the potential environmental and health hazards of solid waste landfills, and

Wishing to provide a regulatory framework for the safe operation of solid waste landfills to mitigate such hazards, and the general disposal of nonhazardous solid waste, hereby:

IC: "Further proof that this is about protecting the environment - and thus, indirectly, people's health - from environmental hazards of landfills, not about waste disposal."

OOC: The addition after the word "and" in the last one doesn't really work grammatically. You need to add verbs to it or leave out the nonsense about general disposal of anything, as the active clauses have nothing to do with that to begin with.

a "solid waste landfill" (SWL) as an artificially constructed site that receives nonhazardous solid waste for the purposes of long-term or permanent storage; and

IC: "Why do you insist on creating loopholes after a perfectly working solution already existed? Not all landfills are "artificially constructed sites" - the requirements listed below can exist naturally as well."

OOC: Also the new definition makes it sound like it had to have been made specifically for the purpose of being a landfill, instead of using, say, an old quarry. Go back to "area".

Prohibits the construction of SWLs in ecologically important areas or areas whose characteristics could reasonably be expected to interfere with the environmentally safe operation of a SWL;

IC: "Exactly what do you count in that latter category? I know Araraukarian authorities would consider that to be any landfill built and operated by anyone but them - anywhere in the multiverse."

OOC: Instead of the bolded, I suggest "or where their normal operations would cause significant danger to the wellbeing of the nearest permanent residents", as that way you don't need to specify plague rodents or toxic fumes or just bad smells or anything like that. The "significant danger to wellbeing" could also be literal danger in the form of heavy traffic posing a danger to children or whatever you want to think of. But specifying "permanent" is important so that you won't have disgruntled people setting up a tent next to a landfill they don't like, and then demand its closure as it's not healthy for them to stay there.

Forbids the long-term storage or disposal of nonhazardous solid waste in a manner that poses a significant threat to the surrounding environment or groundwater;

IC: "Where does the "disposal" come from? What does it even mean? Aren't you supposed to be storing it at these landfills? If not, then why are you bothering with this whole proposal to begin with? Stick to your main topic, the landfill regulations, and don't put in wordings like that, which create loopholes big enough to allow bypassing the other content entirely."

OOC: I'd make it read "in a manner or a location where it can pose". Just a minor fix that - with the removal of the "disposal" - will close loopholes rather than create more of them.

include effective physical barriers designed to protect the surrounding environment and groundwater from leachate;

IC: "But trash flying in the wind is completely fine? I'd suggest rewording this so that you're protecting the environment from the waste itself as well as the leachate. You might also put elsewhere in the proposal an encouragement about ways to reduce rainwater getting into the waste. But make it an encouragement only, and let nations worry about how they do that."

OOC: Just remember that waste doesn't crawl into wells or groundwater on its own.

include effective systems for the collection and removal of leachate for treatment and environmentally safe disposal; and

IC: "This is the only clause where disposal as an action makes sense. Though I wonder about the wisdom of including the word "effective", because surely even an ineffective system is better than no system at all?"

OOC: Could just remove the word "effective", because then you're mandaing that leachate is collected and treated, period.

are operated in such a way that minimizes their environmental footprint;

IC: "And we're back in the vague preamble territory again. Why? "Environmental footprint" is a terminally vague concept to begin with, and besides, part of the whole point of landfills is to concentrate all the problems into a small area where they can be dealt with. You speak of environmental hazards in the preamble. Use that wording here too. Creates a sense of consistency too."

ensure the regular testing of any groundwater well that could reasonably be affected by leachate or other waste materials originating from a SWL;

IC: "I understand that other nations are lacking in environmental education as part of the basic education, but I should hope that someone bringing an environmental legislation to this place would understand to be concerned about groundwater and other aquatic environments in general, not specifically wells. I would suggest rewording this to simply require "regular testing of groundwater and other aquatic environments that could be reasonablly affected" and so forth. That way you're also accounting for surface waters, where the groundwater may end up in."

OOC: Also, you still have Cthulhu spawn crawling into wells, there. Leachate definition already includes particles. It doesn't say how small the particles must be to count. So strike out the "other waste materials" entirely.

take reasonable measures to protect the surrounding environment after the closing of a SWL;

IC: ""After closing"? What, for the day? You're already requiring all kinds of ways to protect the surrounding environment, whether the landfill is closed or not. Why "after closing" is a special case?"

OOC: What she said, basically. Landfills don't stop being monitored and worked on - when necessary - after they've stopped taking in refuge and have been covered with soil and possibly even built over. None of your clauses (except maybe 4.c.) specify the things must still be accepting more waste. If anything, I would suggest adding a clarifying clause, as a separate main clause of its own, that says something about how the regulations stay in effect even for landfills that no longer receive new waste material. That way nations will know they're not off the hook with a "out of sight, out of mind" attitude.

establish, where none already exist, and utilize effective systems for the environmentally safe pre-disposal collection of nonhazardous solid waste not intended for recycling or composting in accordance with their economic capabilities; and

OOC: This is so convoluted/confusing that I'm not even touching it in IC. I get what you're trying to do, but it's such a casual sideswipe at such a complex issue that you're really better off leaving that out entirely. Otherwise it would function as a repeal hook just so that particular topic can be better addressed by a new resolution, basically doing away with your resolution just to get rid of a duplication issue.

establish, if such does not already exist, an agency or similar organization with the responsibility of inspecting and regulating SWLs in accordance with this resolution, implementing additional measures related to the operation of SWLs, and reviewing complaints regarding the operation of particular SWLs;

OOC: Just to avoid the prevalent issue of "creating committees and giving them unlimited powers", specify that this is a NATIONAL thing, not a WA thing. You can probably do that just by making it read "a state agency" (which is different from "government agency" ) and removing the struck out bit, because unless you take the power away from nations like this, they have the right to make additional regulations with national legislation. Don't take away that right.

Encourages member nations to promote the recycling of waste where applicable.

OOC: This is another sideswipe at a hugely complex issue, leave it out or replace with "encourages member nations to promote methods of waste reduction to reduce their reliance on solid waste landfills as a form of waste management" or something like that, because recycling is not a waste reduction method, and it should have its own resolution (or already does unless it was repealed when I wasn't looking).

[Cretox State]

OOC: Draft 5 is now up.

OOC: No. It's about environmental protection so it belongs in the Environmental category. Why do you keep seesawing about this?

I'm uncertain as to what category would work best here. A large part of this proposal is protecting people from hazards associated with solid waste landfills, especially with the provisions dealing with groundwater and now this: "Prohibits the construction of SWLs in ecologically important areas or areas where their normal operations would cause significant danger to the wellbeing of nearby permanent residents;"

IC: "Why do you insist on creating loopholes after a perfectly working solution already existed? Not all landfills are "artificially constructed sites" - the requirements listed below can exist naturally as well."

To avoid problems with stuff like waste being dumped into a river. That's why clause 3 exists.

OOC: Also, you still have Cthulhu spawn crawling into wells, there. Leachate definition already includes particles. It doesn't say how small the particles must be to count. So strike out the "other waste materials" entirely.

The definition of leachate specifies that it be a liquid.

OOC: Just to avoid the prevalent issue of "creating committees and giving them unlimited powers", specify that this is a NATIONAL thing, not a WA thing. You can probably do that just by making it read "a state agency" (which is different from "government agency" ) and removing the struck out bit, because unless you take the power away from nations like this, they have the right to make additional regulations with national legislation. Don't take away that right.

That's a subclause for a reason. The agency would clearly be created by member nations.

[Araraukar]

I'm uncertain as to what category would work best here.

OOC: Environmental.

A large part of this proposal is protecting people from hazards associated with solid waste landfills, especially with the provisions dealing with groundwater

No. You're protecting the environment. People are part of the environment so they get protected too, but only as part of the environment.

and now this: "Prohibits the construction of SWLs in ecologically important areas or areas where their normal operations would cause significant danger to the wellbeing of nearby permanent residents;"

If you add(ed) that, it's the ONLY bit that references people directly, and that's out of 10+ active clauses (subclauses counted separately) on regulations that protect the ENVIRONMENT. It's Environmental still.

IC: "Why do you insist on creating loopholes after a perfectly working solution already existed? Not all landfills are "artificially constructed sites" - the requirements listed below can exist naturally as well."

To avoid problems with stuff like waste being dumped into a river. That's why clause 3 exists.

Assuming this was OOC reply too, last I checked, rivers were protected by the freshwater protection resolution? Or did someone repeal that? Even if it was repealed, remember you're mandating barriers between the dump site and the environment to, especially, prevent leachate getting into aquatic environments. A river is an aquatic environment. To be able to use it as a dump site, they'd still have to build barriers, etc. So, that loophole doesn't exist.

OOC: Also, you still have Cthulhu spawn crawling into wells, there. Leachate definition already includes particles. It doesn't say how small the particles must be to count. So strike out the "other waste materials" entirely.

The definition of leachate specifies that it be a liquid.

Specifically "as any liquid containing chemicals or particles originating from the solid waste stored in a SWL". It doesn't say how small the particles must be to count. Intentionally.

That's a subclause for a reason. The agency would clearly be created by member nations.

"Resolution does what it says it does" combined with "few voters know GA system that well" means you really should specify it. Like seriously, it's already your intention so specifying it won't detract, while making it blatantly obvious can only bring a positive effect.

[Cretox State]

OOC: Very well. Still not entirely convinced about the category, but it's not a hill I'm willing to die on.

[Cretox State]

Apparently I forgot about this. Submitted, if a bit later than initially intended.

[Honeydewistania]

“I agree with other ambassadors. Regulating landfills is done, at least in Kenmoria, by provincial rather than national government. This adds bureaucracy for no identifiable benefit. I suggest only targeting landfills of an exceptionally large size with those clauses.”

Shame.

Against.

[Cretox State]

“I agree with other ambassadors. Regulating landfills is done, at least in Kenmoria, by provincial rather than national government. This adds bureaucracy for no identifiable benefit. I suggest only targeting landfills of an exceptionally large size with those clauses.”

Shame.

Against.

Erm... that's an old comment from the very first draft of this proposal (which used a committee instead of relying on member nations). The context now is quite a bit different.

Edit: Didn't we already have this conversation?

[Honeydewistania]

At vote

[Heale]

OOC: A proposal to regulate the establishment and maintenance of solid waste landfills. As always, any feedback is appreciated.

Draft 5: Cleaning up.

Landfill Regulation Act

Category: Environmental
Area of effect: All Businesses - Mild

The World Assembly,

Understanding the importance of landfills in providing a cost-effective method for the disposal of non-compostable and non-recyclable solid waste,

Concerned by the potential environmental and health hazards of solid waste landfills, and

Wishing to provide a regulatory framework for the safe operation of solid waste landfills to mitigate such hazards, hereby:

1. Defines for the purposes of this resolution:
   1. a "solid waste landfill" (SWL) as a location that receives nonhazardous solid waste for the purposes of long-term or permanent storage; and
   2. "leachate" as any liquid containing chemicals or particles originating from the solid waste stored in a SWL;
2. Prohibits the construction of SWLs in ecologically important areas or areas where their normal operations would cause significant danger to the wellbeing of nearby permanent residents;
3. Forbids the long-term storage of nonhazardous solid waste in a manner or a location where it can pose a significant threat to the surrounding environment or groundwater;
4. Requires that all SWLs:
   1. include effective physical barriers designed to protect the surrounding environment and groundwater from waste contained in them and leachate originating from them;
   2. include effective systems for the collection and removal of leachate for treatment and environmentally safe disposal; and
   3. are operated in such a way that minimizes potential environmental and health hazards resulting from their operations, within reason;
5. Mandates that member nations:
   1. ensure the regular testing of groundwater and other aquatic environments that could reasonably be affected by leachate in order to gauge the effectiveness of relevant existing SWL regulations and the need for further regulations; and
   2. establish, if such does not already exist, a state agency or similar organization with the responsibility of inspecting and regulating SWLs in accordance with this resolution and reviewing complaints regarding the operation of particular SWLs;
6. Clarifies that regulations implemented pursuant to this resolution must remain in effect after a SWL stops receiving additional waste material until such a time when said regulations are no longer effective or necessary in providing for the environmentally safe maintenance of the SWL site; and
7. Encourages member nations to promote methods of waste reduction to reduce their reliance on solid waste landfills as a form of waste management.

Nonhazardous Waste Disposal Act

Category: Regulation
Area of effect: Safety

The World Assembly,

Understanding the importance of landfills in providing a cost-effective method for the disposal of non-compostable and non-recyclable solid waste,

Concerned by the potential environmental and health hazards of solid waste landfills, and

Wishing to provide a regulatory framework for the safe operation of solid waste landfills to mitigate such hazards, and the general disposal of nonhazardous solid waste, hereby:

1. Defines for the purposes of this resolution:
   1. a "solid waste landfill" (SWL) as an artificially constructed site that receives nonhazardous solid waste for the purposes of long-term or permanent storage; and
   2. "leachate" as any liquid containing chemicals or particles originating from the solid waste stored in a SWL;
2. Prohibits the construction of SWLs in ecologically important areas or areas whose characteristics could reasonably be expected to interfere with the environmentally safe operation of a SWL;
3. Forbids the long-term storage or disposal of nonhazardous solid waste in a manner that poses a significant threat to the surrounding environment or groundwater;
4. Requires that all SWLs:
   1. include effective physical barriers designed to protect the surrounding environment and groundwater from leachate;
   2. include effective systems for the collection and removal of leachate for treatment and environmentally safe disposal; and
   3. are operated in such a way that minimizes their environmental footprint;
5. Mandates that member nations:
   1. ensure the regular testing of any groundwater well that could reasonably be affected by leachate or other waste materials originating from a SWL;
   2. take reasonable measures to protect the surrounding environment after the closing of a SWL;
   3. establish, where none already exist, and utilize effective systems for the environmentally safe pre-disposal collection of nonhazardous solid waste not intended for recycling or composting in accordance with their economic capabilities; and
   4. establish, if such does not already exist, an agency or similar organization with the responsibility of inspecting and regulating SWLs in accordance with this resolution, implementing additional measures related to the operation of SWLs, and reviewing complaints regarding the operation of particular SWLs;
6. Encourages member nations to promote the recycling of waste where applicable.

Landfill Regulation Act

Category: Environmental
Area of effect: All Businesses - Mild

Understanding the importance of landfills in providing a cost-effective method for the disposal of non-compostable and non-recyclable solid waste,

Concerned by the potential environmental and health hazards of solid waste landfills, and

Wishing to provide a regulatory framework for the safe operation of solid waste landfills to mitigate such hazards, hereby:

1. Defines for the purposes of this resolution:
   1. a "solid waste landfill" (SWL) as a location that receives nonhazardous solid waste for the purposes of long-term or permanent storage; and
   2. "leachate" as any liquid containing chemicals or particles originating from the solid waste stored in a SWL;
2. Prohibits the construction of SWLs in ecologically important areas or areas whose characteristics could reasonably be expected to interfere with the environmentally safe operation of a SWL;
3. Requires that all SWLs:
   1. include physical barriers designed to protect the surrounding environment and groundwater from leachate;
   2. include systems for the collection and removal of leachate for treatment and environmentally safe disposal; and
   3. are operated in such a way that minimizes their environmental footprint;
4. Mandates that member nations:
   1. ensure the regular testing of any groundwater well that could reasonably be affected leachate or other waste materials originating from an SWL;
   2. take reasonable measures to protect the surrounding environment after the closing of a SWL; and
   3. establish, if such does not already exist, an agency or similar organization with the responsibility of inspecting and regulating SWLs in accordance with this resolution, implementing additional measures related to the operation of SWLs, and reviewing complaints regarding the operation of particular SWLs.

Landfill Regulation Act

Category: Environmental
Area of effect: All Businesses = Mild

Noting the vast volumes of waste produced by the recreational, industrial, and other activities of the peoples of the world;

Understanding the importance of landfills in providing a cost-effective method for the disposal of solid waste;

Concerned, however, of the potential environmental and health fallout of solid waste landfills;

Wishing to provide a regulatory framework for the safe operation of solid waste landfills to address the above, hereby:

1. Defines for the purposes of this resolution:
   1. a "solid waste landfill" (SWL) as an area of land or excavation that receives household solid waste or other nonhazardous solid waste for the purposes of long-term disposal in that area;
   2. "leachate" as any liquid originating from waste stored within a SWL, or any liquid that has passed through said waste;
2. Mandates that member nations:
   1. prohibit the construction of SWLs in an area if that area possesses geographical characteristics, such as a nearby fault line or being located in a flood plain, which may reasonably interfere with the safe operation of a SWL;
   2. require SWLs to:
      1. include physical barriers designed to protect the surrounding environment and groundwater from the release of leachate;
      2. contain systems for the collection and removal of leachate for treatment and disposal;
      3. have their waste compacted and frequently covered with soil or a similarly effective substitute for the purpose of reducing odor and protecting public health;
   3. ensure the frequent testing of any groundwater well that could reasonably be impacted by the operation of a SWL to determine whether waste materials have escaped from said SWL;
   4. establish a government agency or repurpose an existing agency with the responsibility of inspecting and regulating SWLs in accordance with this resolution, and reviewing complaints regarding the operation of SWLs, if no such agency exists which may perform its duties under this resolution satisfactorily;
3. Instructs member nations to take reasonable measures to protect the surrounding environment during and after the closing of a SWL;
4. Prohibits retaliation against an individual for making a complaint regarding the operation of a SWL to the responsible officials of a member nation, unless said complaint is clearly frivolous in nature.

Landfill Regulation Act

Category: Regulation
Area of effect: Safety

Noting the vast volumes of waste produced by the recreational, industrial, and other activities of the peoples of the world;

Understanding the importance of landfills in providing a cost-effective method for the disposal of solid waste;

Concerned, however, of the potential environmental and health fallout of solid waste landfills;

Wishing to provide a regulatory framework for the safe operation of solid waste landfills to address the above, hereby:

1. Defines for the purposes of this resolution:
   1. a "solid waste landfill" (SWL) as an area of land or excavation that receives household solid waste or other nonhazardous solid waste for the purposes of long-term disposal in that area;
   2. "leachate" as any liquid originating from waste stored within a SWL, or any liquid that has passed through said waste;
2. Establishes the Committee for Landfill Oversight (CLO), with the following responsibilities:
   1. surveying proposed SWL sites for potential environmental risk as a result of the construction of a landfill in that site;
   2. approving proposed SWL sites if the nature of said site does not present a significant risk of interfering with the safe operation of the landfill to be constructed there;
   3. approving plans for the construction and operation of SWLs if said plans are effective in their purpose and comply with this resolution;
   4. implementing regulations on the covering of SWLs and the maintenance of covered SWLs;
   5. implementing regulations on the control and cleanup of releases of SWL waste into the surrounding environment;
   6. conducting inspections of existing SWLs to ensure their compliance with this resolution;
   7. reviewing complaints regarding the operation of SWLs;
   8. assisting member nations with the implementation of additional measures relating to SWLs;
3. Mandates that an SWL:
   1. only be constructed if its construction is authorized by CLO in accordance with section 2 of this resolution;
   2. include physical barriers designed to protect the surrounding environment and groundwater from the release of leachate;
   3. contain a system for the collection and removal of leachate for treatment and disposal;
   4. have its waste compacted and frequently covered with soil or a similarly effective substitute for the purpose of reducing odor and protecting public health;
   5. be accompanied by frequent testing of any groundwater well that could reasonably be impacted by the operation of the SWL to determine whether waste materials have escaped from said SWL;
4. Instructs member nations to take reasonable measures to ensure the protection of the surrounding environment during and after the closing of a SWL;
5. Prohibits retaliation against an individual for making a complaint to CLO.

This gets my vote because my region is made of very strong environmentalists (with the exception of 3 non WA nations) and we support regulating landfill. I voted for.

[Heale]

OOC: Draft 5 is now up.

OOC: No. It's about environmental protection so it belongs in the Environmental category. Why do you keep seesawing about this?

I'm uncertain as to what category would work best here. A large part of this proposal is protecting people from hazards associated with solid waste landfills, especially with the provisions dealing with groundwater and now this: "Prohibits the construction of SWLs in ecologically important areas or areas where their normal operations would cause significant danger to the wellbeing of nearby permanent residents;"

IC: "Why do you insist on creating loopholes after a perfectly working solution already existed? Not all landfills are "artificially constructed sites" - the requirements listed below can exist naturally as well."

To avoid problems with stuff like waste being dumped into a river. That's why clause 3 exists.

OOC: Also, you still have Cthulhu spawn crawling into wells, there. Leachate definition already includes particles. It doesn't say how small the particles must be to count. So strike out the "other waste materials" entirely.

The definition of leachate specifies that it be a liquid.

OOC: Just to avoid the prevalent issue of "creating committees and giving them unlimited powers", specify that this is a NATIONAL thing, not a WA thing. You can probably do that just by making it read "a state agency" (which is different from "government agency" ) and removing the struck out bit, because unless you take the power away from nations like this, they have the right to make additional regulations with national legislation. Don't take away that right.

That's a subclause for a reason. The agency would clearly be created by member nations.

The only problem I see is what if the committee gets corrupted, which is very possible based on the current state of the WA.

[Cretox State]

The only problem I see is what if the committee gets corrupted, which is very possible based on the current state of the WA.

WA committees by definition can't get corrupted.