[DEFEATED] The Environmental Protections Act

[Goobergunchia]

Since it appears that neither The empire of Prussian peoples nor TInhampton have elected to create a thread for their proposal, here we are.

Believing that economic growth, individual wellbeing, and environmental protection most certainly can co-exist, and that all of these factors can and do intersect in parks and green spaces,

Recognizing that such spaces, as well as often featuring many flora and fauna which can help to remove harmful greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, can also facilitate the creation of jobs (such as in park maintenance) and provide a relaxing and beautiful environment for both locals and tourists alike, and

Hopeful that, by requiring member states to ensure that the parks and green spaces they own are well-maintained, more people will visit, enjoy, benefit from and respect such spaces,

The General Assembly hereby:

1. requires that, in all parks and green spaces owned by the government of a member state (or one of its political subdivisions), that government:
   
   1. operate a hotline where visitors to those parks or green spaces can report any problems about those parks,
   2. respond to all complaints received through that hotline in a prompt and fair manner,
   3. maintain all buildings on the grounds of those parks and green spaces, especially where those buildings are accessible to the public, and
   4. hire enough workers to maintain and run those parks, green spaces, and any buildings on their grounds,
2. suggests that, where parks and green spaces open to the public are owned by private entities, those private entities take measures similar to those described in Article 1,
3. recommends that all owners of parks and green spaces in member states that are open to the public allow all visitors to enter free of charge, especially where this is economically feasible, and
4. urges member states to only grant planning permission for commercial developments on brownfield sites that have previously been developed upon, as opposed to undeveloped greenfield sites (including parks and green spaces), to the extent that granting such permission would neither be unviable nor lead to significant harm to the habitats of rare or endangered species.

Co-author: TInhampton

[Tinhampton]

The Not Miners at it again, huh? I'm here if you guys have any questions by the way - and yeah I strongly recommended that TEOPP draft his proposal on the forums but he never listened proper title capitalisation is The Environmental Protections act, for some unfathomable reason

AS OF 1423 GMT ON SATURDAY: Approvals: 53 out of 59 needed (Tinhampton, Echoslavia, Josephtan, Tysoania, Albrook, Telgan Alpha, Krovx Indochina, Ko-oren, Stonehave, Cheries, Baccalieu, Treadwellia, Jean Rowe, The Scottish Republic, Arkilandic, South Boston Irishmen, Bearded Dragones, The Flyin, Gumeus, Tevaris, United Zephation, Boreguard, Queenbury, Ceneopia Hana, Republic of Dixie, Polomon Islands, Novum Orientis, Recycling Bins, Estathuania, Agalaesia, Reultan, Willtechia, Gloriuous Mother Russia, Juice Elijah Tentacion, Viktorovitch, Pasaistan, The Bolivian Socialist Falange, Johill, Cream of Potato Soup, The Free Columbian States, Oost-Suid-Afrika, Dabberwocky, The Free Northern Isles, The Anarchist Federation of Spain, The Tinfields, Owswaldia, Kokhestan, Sedgistan, The Finntopian Empire, The Communists of the Multiversal Empire, Libonesia, North Gerveric, Komrat)

[Greater Cesnica]

The Not Miners at it again, huh? I'm here if you guys have any questions by the way - and yeah I strongly recommended that TEOPP draft his proposal on the forums but he never listened proper title capitalisation is The Environmental Protections act, for some unfathomable reason

AS OF 1423 GMT ON SATURDAY: Approvals: 53 out of 59 needed (Tinhampton, Echoslavia, Josephtan, Tysoania, Albrook, Telgan Alpha, Krovx Indochina, Ko-oren, Stonehave, Cheries, Baccalieu, Treadwellia, Jean Rowe, The Scottish Republic, Arkilandic, South Boston Irishmen, Bearded Dragones, The Flyin, Gumeus, Tevaris, United Zephation, Boreguard, Queenbury, Ceneopia Hana, Republic of Dixie, Polomon Islands, Novum Orientis, Recycling Bins, Estathuania, Agalaesia, Reultan, Willtechia, Gloriuous Mother Russia, Juice Elijah Tentacion, Viktorovitch, Pasaistan, The Bolivian Socialist Falange, Johill, Cream of Potato Soup, The Free Columbian States, Oost-Suid-Afrika, Dabberwocky, The Free Northern Isles, The Anarchist Federation of Spain, The Tinfields, Owswaldia, Kokhestan, Sedgistan, The Finntopian Empire, The Communists of the Multiversal Empire, Libonesia, North Gerveric, Komrat)

lol fair enough

[Refuge Isle]

Do we really need a government hotline for problems with a park?

[Minskiev]

Do we really need a government hotline for problems with a park?

I’m sure park rangers aren’t as readily accessible as a hotline at all times, so it’s possible.

[Xernon]

"Correct me if I am wrong, but this is essentially a park management bill fulfilling functions that are all very local in nature. The pre-ambulatory clauses are fine and cool and they build up a good case for WA intervention in national environmental policy, but you lose me when it is suggested that the way this is done is through intervention in local park management. For these reasons, our delegation opposes this."

[Imperium Anglorum]

This makes more sense as a Parks and Rec joke than an actual proposal. Opposed.

[Seveshka]

This sounds like, at best, a state/municipal issue. Heavily opposed.

[Milorum]

---

The Europeian Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote AGAINST the General Assembly Resolution, "The Environmental Protections Act".
Its reasoning may be found here.

---

[Polomon Islands]

And the vote kicks off!

[Caymarnia]

Examining the proposed resolution, we find that the title is far more grandiose than the proposal, and the limited scope of the resolution is a matter that can be easily handled by the member nations without resorting to World Assembly oversight. Caymarnia therefore votes against.

[Berusturg]

The federation of Berusturg declares this Resolution as incomplete and recognizes it as a proposal, as it mostly ignores other, more important greenery such as forests and jungles, and chooses to vote against it.

[Tinhampton]

This proposal is currently being defeated by 1,026 votes to 5,918 - 14.78% support. The two largest delegates in opposition are Madjack/St George of The North Pacific (933) and Albrook/Aurora Yukihime of The East Pacific (699).

Madjack offered no explanation for his opposition on TNP's offsite forums; his region's recommendation against offers no reasoning other than to condemn a non-binding clause which in no way prevents charging for access to parks and green spaces. Albrook also openly admitted that she overrode the results of a public poll.

If Madjack and Albrook had lent their support to this proposal, and assuming that no other votes change (which is quite obviously not the case, given that lemming voters exist), it would only be down 2,658 votes to 4,286 - 38.28% support.

I continue to believe that there is widespread public appetite for high-quality, common-sense regulation to protect parks and green spaces across the World Assembly. I hope to converse with the author about next steps and potential improvements in due course.

[Desmosthenes and Burke]

We are happy to see this nonsense going down in flames, and commend the honourable delegate of The East Pacific for having more intelligence than the mob.

[Outer Sparta]

Why wouldn't they vote on their own accord against flawed resolutions? Do some voters in the public polls in the off-site forums even know what the resolution does?

[West Ord-Nekidstan]

Representing the people of The Confederacy of West Ord-Nekidstan, we must vote against this proposal.

We believe stronger and global regulation for environmental protection is necessary, but this proposal is lacking in several ways.
Overall, it is misleading and creates a false sense of action, while not addressing the environmental crisis in any significant way.

We would like to point out the urgency of the matter, and call for meaningful multilateral action without further delay.

[Chodean Kal]

What a waste of time. I'm disappointed in those Delegates who approved this fluff piece.

[The Swaggerlands]

I agree with the sentiment of this proposal, but I can see how a lot of people would see this as too overreaching for international policy, especially with the mandate on the green space hotline and maintenance of green space. The policy has a very strong ideological slant (which I totally agree with), which in general people find unpalatable for international law.

That being said, hope to be voting on a replacement for Promotion of Clean Energy soon.

[Amerion]

The South Pacific's World Assembly Delegation has cast the Coalition's vote AGAINST this proposed resolution, The Environmental Protections Act, as per the recommendation of the Office of WA Legislation.

While the title of "The Environmental Protections Act" may make it seem like a sweeping bill protecting the environment of member nations, it is anything but. The proposal has a narrow focus on parks and green spaces, and includes some very specific mandates, such as a hotline to report problems about parks. These kinds of micro-managing regulations are better left to national governments, rather than the WA. Furthermore, the recommendation that "all owners of parks and green spaces" should not charge a fee upon entry to such spaces is impractical, as many parks and green spaces may rely on entry fees to maintain the parks. Additionally, the bill's operative clauses focus on the preservation of parks and green spaces for tourists rather than for general environmental preservation purposes. Several terms also lack definitions, which leads to ambiguity. Regrettably, this proposal was not drafted on the forums, so these kinds of problems were not caught and fixed before submitting. Thus, OWL recommends a vote AGAINST the at-vote resolution, "The Environmental Protections Act".

The Coalition warmly encourages fellow member regions to vote AGAINST.

[Apeiros Evimeria]

Speaking for the people of Aperios Evimeria,

It is our belief that this act does not provide enough general solutions, while instead it focuses on other things, essentially micromanaging the process. It is our belief that there needs to be a solution to this problem quickly, however this act does not provide enough general solutions, as earlier states. Thus, Aperios Evimeria is against the Environmental Protection Act, and encourages other nations to be against it as well.

[Sonakion]

This proposal doesn't solve the problem at hand

[Polomon Islands]

"This is absolute nonsense! Who would vote For this tiny micromanagement proposal! We are voting against, and we recommend all of TOUN do as well. Next time, focus on bigger problems and manage them with bigger things, not with such little things like a hotline for reporting problems.
For those delegates who voted for this to be rejected, thank you for voting."

-Tsutsumi Tsuneo

Translated Version
これはまったくナンセンスです。誰がこの小さなマイクロマネジメントの提案に投票しますか。私たちは反対票を投じています。TOUNもすべてそうすることをお勧めします。次回は、より大きな問題に焦点を当て、そのような小さなことではなく、より大きなことでそれらを管理します。問題を報告するためのホットライン。
これに投票して拒否された代表者の皆さん、投票していただきありがとうございます。」

-恒夫つつみ

[Princess Rainbow Sparkles]

I voted against. Further comment probably isn't necessary seeing as how this has basically already been defeated.

But for the record, I think establishing a national park help hotline via international law is completely absurd. And not in a fun, good way. In an eye-rolling way.

Similarly, should international law really be micromanaging (even gently) the cost/funding for access to national parks? I don't think so. It's not a minor point. Park funding on all levels (even national) is ultimately driven by the needs of the local community served. The local community is in the best position to know what the best funding mechanism is for them, without any need or use for WA prodding.

Also - one last point - I'm not ordinarily a big proponent of definitions because I think they're overused. But if you're going to use technical terms that aren't common in everyday discourse (like, idk, "brownfield") it's best to give folks a definition for easy reference, to ensure everyone knows what you mean. Taken literally, one might wonder why the brown fields of Death Valley ought to be paved over to make room for another starbucks.

Okay, I'm done dancing on the grave of this one. Time for coffee.

[Imperial Felchah]

This is staggeringly incomplete and not at all helpful to the overall problem at hand. Opposed wholeheartedly.

[Czarskovia]

I personally don't believe that this act is necessary. If a nation wants to become environmentally aware, then it should be able to pass legislation the way it likes. I have a lot of industry in my nation, and I can't afford to let that go. However, I do like to try and be environmentally aware, at the smallest cost to my manufacturing.