Repeal Restrictions on Child Labor (DRAFT)

[Grays Harbor]

We cannot in good conscience support any repeal of the Child Labour Laws enacted.

[Enn]

This is a disturbing draft to read. You would seek to repeal sensible restrictions on child labour, not out of any newly discovered flaw in the original resolution, but because you wish to enslave children?

Enn shall never countenance such actions.

Stephanie Fulton,
WA Co-Ambassador for Enn

[Quelesh]

We would not necessarily be opposed to repealing GAR4. My predecessor, Leonard Roku, even drafted a repeal proposal himself a while back. However, we suspect that this repeal attempt is being done for the "wrong reasons." Also, it is horribly written.

Alexandria Yadoru
Interim Ambassador to the World Assembly
Empire of Quelesh

[Syvorji]

Lucas Chernenko announces to remove the resolution from any history, and begins to plan on the next resolution.

[Epistamai]

In short, no. We just do not agree with your reasoning. All children have a right to be educated, instead of being shoved into some factory or mine.

That is still purely treating the symptom of poverty. Just stating that they have a "right" to education does not actually do anything. Treating the cause of a problem is much more efficient than trying to medicate symptoms, while ignoring the cause (especially when the medication does more bad than good).

Quite frankly, banning child labour would most likely result in more death and suffering of children than the act of child labour itself. And as noting previously, this is not a proposal to legalize slavery... the whole slavery thing is purely designed to distract people from the real issue at hand.

[Meekinos]

CURRENT DRAFT
Repeal Restrictions on Child Labor

Acknowledging how good it brought to various nations in the World Assembly;
Yet, at the same time, feeling the economy should not tied down to human rights
Believing that without slavery, children can work heavy industrial jobs as long as they want to,
Saying that economy is better than education, including a step to a strong economy;
Praising the economy if the resolution is repealed,
Hereby repeals Resolution #4, Restrictions on Child Labor.

Voting ends in 4 days, 9 hours.

Ideas, critiques, comments?

Lucas Chernenko
Syvorjin Ambassador to the WA since 2010
Secretary of the 69th Congress from 2004 to 2005

Did you even bother to read the actual text of the resolution and take the time to understand it? This repeal doesn't actually address any perceived flaws in the bloody resolution.

What your repeal is blind to is the fact that there are other jobs which can and are suited to younger citizens and are perfectly legal under this resolution. These jobs carry less responsibility but are safer due to the conditions. These jobs provide experience while allowing them to earn an income and thus contribute to the economy.

[Darenjo]

In short, no. We just do not agree with your reasoning. All children have a right to be educated, instead of being shoved into some factory or mine.

That is still purely treating the symptom of poverty. Just stating that they have a "right" to education does not actually do anything. Treating the cause of a problem is much more efficient than trying to medicate symptoms, while ignoring the cause (especially when the medication does more bad than good)

Not if the medication causes you to get sick with something else.

Quite frankly, banning child labour would most likely result in more death and suffering of children than the act of child labour itself.

And your logic for that statement is...

[Epistamai]

Not if the medication causes you to get sick with something else.

I would rather be sick from chemo, rather than be dead from cancer.

[Mesogiria]

Not if the medication causes you to get sick with something else.

I would rather be sick from chemo, rather than be dead from cancer.

"Could you perhaps actually answer the question?" asks Ambassador Rodriguez, without much hope that her request will be granted.

[Epistamai]

"Could you perhaps actually answer the question?" asks Ambassador Rodriguez, without much hope that her request will be granted.

Could you please clearly state a question? I am unsure of which question you are referring too.

[Mesogiria]

"Could you perhaps actually answer the question?" asks Ambassador Rodriguez, without much hope that her request will be granted.

Could you please clearly state a question? I am unsure of which question you are referring too.

"The honored delegate from Darenjo asked:

And your logic for that statement is...

in response to your statement:

Quite frankly, banning child labour would most likely result in more death and suffering of children than the act of child labour itself.

"

"I am most interested in your answer on the matter."

[Epistamai]

Oh, I had already covered that particular question in this discussion already... I had assumed that you meant that there was a new question. Just take a look at the previous minutes of this discussion. However I can reiterate.

The short of it is as follows: Those children choose to work because it is their best option. Denying them of that option can only make things worse, they already have the option to not partake in child labour. Those "evil" industries and sectors who were "taking advantage" of those children will no longer be able to employ them, and thus those children will fall into greater poverty that they already are. Child labour only really happens in the poorest of countries, and will only strain the imploded economy more so.

Again, child labour is a symptom. To effectively treat the problem you must address the cause of that problem (abject poverty). Creating more poverty (which banning child labour does) is not going to solve this problem.

[Mesogiria]

Oh, I had already covered that particular question in this discussion already... I had assumed that you meant that there was a new question. Just take a look at the previous minutes of this discussion. However I can reiterate.

The short of it is as follows: Those children choose to work because it is their best option. Denying them of that option can only make things worse, they already have the option to not partake in child labour. Those "evil" industries and sectors who were "taking advantage" of those children will no longer be able to employ them, and thus those children will fall into greater poverty that they already are. Child labour only really happens in the poorest of countries, and will only strain the imploded economy more so.

Again, child labour is a symptom. To effectively treat the problem you must address the cause of that problem (abject poverty). Creating more poverty (which banning child labour does) is not going to solve this problem.

"And what of the business interests," asks Rodriguez, scratching out a note on her notepad, "That would have a vested interest in preventing the end of child labor? Would not they take steps to ensure that education was not made available to children, that poverty was not ended, so as to preserve that (undoubtedly highly profitable) segment of their workforce? And, if this is the case, how can the nation ever expect to climb out of poverty if its workforce and citizens remain, generation upon generation, poor and uneducated?"

"It also seems the more appropriate action here would be to ban child labor while making an education for children mandatory in some sense, at state expense if necessary. So long as children can be used, and I say used because of my government's misgivings about whether many children employed in such fashion would be capable of giving meaningful consent, they can be abused."

[Epistamai]

Yes there may be business interests that may attempt to use lobbying, and bribes to gain monopoly power in order to effectively economically enslave a poor country... but child labour is only one aspect of that problem. To better address that I would think that good anti-trust laws should be enacted, and government corruption should be targeted.

You bring up a good point, that education is important. Literacy and basic mathematics are very important for a nation to bring itself out of poverty. What we must keep in mind though, is that it is not only the cost of education that these children need to be provided for them, but the opportunity cost of not being employed. Every hour spend in the classroom is one fewer hour of employment at any job, which may provide needed food.

Another important thing to keep in mind about education in poor countries is attendance rates, of both students and teachers. Just throwing money at the problem is not enough, especially when the money is spent as socialists would prefer to spend it. The government funding the school is not enough, as students will be absent because their stomach cannot wait until they get an education to eat, of illness keeps them home (anti-parasite medications are the most effective way to increase pupil attendance rates in poor countries). Teachers are notorious for only showing up less than 20% of the time in these countries. Incentives must be provided for the children to want to (and be able to) go to school, and incentives must be provided for teachers to show up to those schools.

In short, this issue of providing education for the poorest citizens in the poorest countries is no simple matter. Simply banning a symptom of poverty is not even scratching the surface of the problem. It is a lazy and thoughtless way to deal with child labour, it is just a "feel good" policy which is adored by the ignorant. I would not be opposed to working on a resolution dealing with education in the developing world at a later date (OOC: I am still very new, and am still fairly unfamiliar with the process).

When dealing with the scale of poverty which the WA (pretends) to address with these child labour laws, efficiency and cost effectiveness are paramount, as funds are always in short supply.

[Mesogiria]

Yes there may be business interests that may attempt to use lobbying, and bribes to gain monopoly power in order to effectively economically enslave a poor country... but child labour is only one aspect of that problem. To better address that I would think that good anti-trust laws should be enacted, and government corruption should be targeted.

"But on top of that, should we not also reduce even the possibility of corruption, but eliminating all legal avenues toward child labor?"

You bring up a good point, that education is important. Literacy and basic mathematics are very important for a nation to bring itself out of poverty. What we must keep in mind though, is that it is not only the cost of education that these children need to be provided for them, but the opportunity cost of not being employed. Every hour spend in the classroom is one fewer hour of employment at any job, which may provide needed food.

"But every hour spent in the classroom is an hour that will better serve the country later on. It is in the interests of the state to finance, if necessary, the education of its children. Its as simple as a basic investment theory: give up some of what you have to get more later on. The state can and should sacrifice some of its potential workforce and tax revenue to ensure a larger workforce and larger tax revenue later on. The cost of non-education is much, much higher than the cost of non-labor, at least in primary schooling. If the children require food, can not that also be provided by the state?"

Another important thing to keep in mind about education in poor countries is attendance rates, of both students and teachers. Just throwing money at the problem is not enough, especially when the money is spent as socialists would prefer to spend it. The government funding the school is not enough, as students will be absent because their stomach cannot wait until they get an education to eat, of illness keeps them home (anti-parasite medications are the most effective way to increase pupil attendance rates in poor countries). Teachers are notorious for only showing up less than 20% of the time in these countries. Incentives must be provided for the children to want to (and be able to) go to school, and incentives must be provided for teachers to show up to those schools.

"There seems to be a very simple solution to children not attending school because they need to work for food: provide food at schools. Children will attend, and parents will certainly send them, both for the benefit of education and the reduction of their own expenses. Provide incentives for the teachers as needed, and fire and harshly prosecute those who fail to turn up to their assigned posts."

In short, this issue of providing education for the poorest citizens in the poorest countries is no simple matter. Simply banning a symptom of poverty is not even scratching the surface of the problem. It is a lazy and thoughtless way to deal with child labour, it is just a "feel good" policy which is adored by the ignorant. I would not be opposed to working on a resolution dealing with education in the developing world at a later date (OOC: I am still very new, and am still fairly unfamiliar with the process).

When dealing with the scale of poverty which the WA (pretends) to address with these child labour laws, efficiency and cost effectiveness are paramount, as funds are always in short supply.

"Then perhaps an international fund, drawing on both charity and special, nominal taxes from willing nations, could be used to finance the education of these poorest citizens. Many, I would think, would be the people and nations willing to donate comparitively small sums to ensure the education of destitute children. Indeed, I would even pledge 10% of my own salary as ambassador for such a scheme."

"Permitting the continuation of child labor, or allowing its reintroduction, would only serve to entrench the process, not facilitate its elimination."

[Flibbleites]

You know after hearing some of the recent comments I think some people here need to go back and reread the resolution. being repealed. Restrictions of Child Labor does not ban child labor, it merely places limits on where children can work.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

[Meekinos]

You know after hearing some of the recent comments I think some people here need to go back and reread the resolution. being repealed. Restrictions of Child Labor does not ban child labor, it merely places limits on where children can work.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

Funny, I already made the same comment. I wonder if any of the delegates who seem this think that this outright bans child labour could even be arsed to read the resolution itself. I wager they probably just glanced at the title and assumed that it did ban it... we fear for this current batch of delegates.

[Bears Armed]

I wonder if any of the delegates who seem this think that this outright bans child labour could even be arsed to read the resolution itself. I wager they probably just glanced at the title and assumed that it did ban it... we fear for this current batch of delegates.

The previous batch was much the same, and the one before that, and...

[Eireann Fae]

You know after hearing some of the recent comments I think some people here need to go back and reread the resolution. being repealed. Restrictions of Child Labor does not ban child labor, it merely places limits on where children can work.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

Funny, I already made the same comment. I wonder if any of the delegates who seem this think that this outright bans child labour could even be arsed to read the resolution itself. I wager they probably just glanced at the title and assumed that it did ban it... we fear for this current batch of delegates.

"We, too, have brought this up," said Rowan, speaking for herself, but with the Emissary's explicit permission. "My presence here, and being a direct employee of the Eireann Fae government should be proof enough of the ability of children to find work well within existing laws."

[Mesogiria]

"We, too, have brought this up," said Rowan, speaking for herself, but with the Emissary's explicit permission. "My presence here, and being a direct employee of the Eireann Fae government should be proof enough of the ability of children to find work well within existing laws."

"Agreed," said Kelly Rodriguez, crumpling up a sheet of paper covered in angry red scribbles and throwing it to one side. "The current law is sufficient in what it allows and what it forbids, there is no adequate reason to over-turn it at the present time."

[Epistamai]

In response to the concerns of not having read the initial legislation:

(2) work in which they are required to be in physical locations that would be damaging to their health

What is considered "damaging to their health"? There are studies and hearsay all the time that come up that say that "this phone causes cancer", "this food causes obesity", "this drink is addictive", "this activity causes carpel tunnel in the long term", etc. Can we not have children work in a candy shop because that candy will make them fat? Can we not have children work as dancers because that would be damaging to their ankles? Can we not have children work as video game testers as that may give them carpel tunnel syndrome, or as samples for new television shows because those television shows may cause seizures? What about working at a petting zoo, they may develop allergies so I guess not!

(7) work which would preclude the pursuit of a full-time education, such as work for long hours or work where they are unreasonably confined to the premises of the employer

Yes there is an example of being "unreasonably confined o the premises of the employer", but what are the other examples? Many children in abject poverty are employed (or seeking employment) their entire childhood because they require food. They have no time or money for education.

Our concern is that the alternative to employment is even worse poverty, or even death in many cases.

[The Dourian Embassy]

*snip*

As for Section 2: Reasonable nations theory will prevail here. Any nation in which watching television is banned because it is a risk factor in seizures has problems beyond my resolution.

And for Section 7: A system in which full time employment for children in dangerous situations is preferable to allowing full time education is a broken system. Fix your nation, then come back and deal with the resolution.

[Fascist Fae Elves]

I speak for the representative of Epistamai, which is no longer a member of the WA.

And for Section 7: A system in which full time employment for children in dangerous situations is preferable to allowing full time education is a broken system. Fix your nation, then come back and deal with the resolution.

The reason why a situation can be that bad is because there is no easy fix. Waiting for an inherently broken system to be fixed, or waiting for a repel to the Restrictions on Child Labor can be a long time to go without basic necessities of life... which that resolution mandates.

Child labour is only a symptom of the problem. You yourself have hit the mark as it is due to a "broken system" that must be "fixed". Banning child labour is analogous to a ban on coughing; treating the cold is a much more effective means of stopping that cough.

[Enn]

Child labour is only a symptom of the problem. You yourself have hit the mark as it is due to a "broken system" that must be "fixed". Banning child labour is analogous to a ban on coughing; treating the cold is a much more effective means of stopping that cough.

OOC: Interesting analogy to use there, considering that the common cold cannot itself be medicated with today's technology. In regards to that virus, we're entirely limited to treating the symptoms.

Kinda like stopping children from taking part in dangerous work, no?

[Fascist Fae Elves]

OOC: Interesting analogy to use there, considering that the common cold cannot itself be medicated with today's technology. In regards to that virus, we're entirely limited to treating the symptoms.

Kinda like stopping children from taking part in dangerous work, no?

OOC: The term "medicate" could mean "lots of sleep and water", so I believe that the analogy may still stand. Personally I never treat the symptoms of an illness that is as easily shaken off such as a cold, I just focus on getting rid of the illness.

Though it was the first thing that came to mind, so I could probably have picked a better example.