[PASSED] - Repeal GA34 "Int'l Transport Safety"

[Goobergunchia]

Repeal target

GA#34, "International Transport Safety"
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30&start=25#p408

Motivation

The main purpose of the repeal is to remove the domestic flight/sea/train blocker in GA34.

A long list of replacements is ready to devolve the regulation to domestic authorities where possible, but also to allow the WA to properly coordinate some of the matters involved herein, like aircraft accident investigation, aircraft (and cargo ships) navigation and other matters, which are at the moment more ambiguous as to whether they are solely domestic or international in nature - is a domestic aircraft colliding with an international aircraft a domestic or international accident?

Proposed replacements

1. Aircraft Accident Investigations
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=544920

2. Aircraft Safety and Comfort Disclosures
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=541110 This passed.

3. Aircraft Terrorism Prohibition
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=547580

4. Seafarers' Qualification Protocol
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=546758

There are also a number of future resolutions forthcoming.

Category: Repeal

Re-draft 1

The World Assembly (WA):

Noting its long-standing interest in promoting free trade via resolutions that provide necessary regulations for various forms of transport, such as railways, seafaring and aircraft;

Frustrated that the target resolution, GAR 34 International Transport Safety, permits domestic transport not to comply with the regulations of the International Transport Safety Committee (ITSC, clause 6a), thereby allowing domestic carriers to adopt far more relaxed standards than those of the ITSC;

Flummoxed that the ITSC has been tasked with creating detailed regulations for shipping, aviation and railways in terms of safety, communications, accident investigation, et cetera, but that they concern only international traffic, leaving domestic traffic poorly unregulated by international law;

Anxious that, as a result of the domestic exemption:

1. WA states face severe difficulties when domestic transport of significantly lower standards shares the same space as international transport, whether over air traffic coordination in the same airspace, rail tracks shared by domestic and international rail engines, or international shipping sharing seas and rivers with domestic vessels; and
2. There is significant ambiguity as to the responsibility for investigating accidents involving multiple member states, such as when a domestic ship collides with an international ship in domestic waters, or when an international train collides with a domestic train on a WA state’s rail tracks;

Observing that there is a need for WA states to retain as much autonomy as practicable to tailor regulations for their own circumstances and needs, but that this must be balanced with the need for better coordination between member states, especially in this age of frequent international travel;

Looking forward to replacements for the target resolution that address these flaws, while preserving the good work of the target in establishing international regulations;

The World Assembly hereby repeals the target resolution, "International Transport Safety".

Co-author: Kenmoria

[Simone Republic]

Bump

[Simone Republic]

*Bump*

[Simone Republic]

*Bump*
*Bump*
*Bump*

[Tigrisia]

"As far as we see this, you are working on multiple resolutions that better cover the subject of this regulation. Are we correct?" asks Thandi Enfantia.

[Simone Republic]

"As far as we see this, you are working on multiple resolutions that better cover the subject of this regulation. Are we correct?" asks Thandi Enfantia.

Yes. There's tonnes more coming.

[Tigrisia]

"Therefore, we are in full support of this resolution."

[Simone Republic]

Bump on the Simone Republic bumper.

[Kenmoria]

Ambassador Fortier stands to speak. “I present to your Excellency a partial rewrite of the repeal, which improves flow and grammar in several areas. I fully support the goal of standardising regulations for travel not only between, but also within, the consistent member-nations of this General Assembly.”

The World Assembly (WA),

Noting its long-standing interest in promoting free trade via resolutions that provide necessary regulations for various of transport, such as railways, seafaring and aircraft;

Frustrated that the target resolution, GAR 034 International Transport Safety, permits domestic transport not to comply with the regulations of the International Transport Safety Committee (ITSC, clause 6a), thereby allowing domestic carriers to adopt far more relaxed standards than those of the ITSC;

Flummoxed that the ITSC has been tasked with creating detailed regulations for shipping, aviation and railways in terms of safety, communications, accident investigation, et cetera, but that they concern only international traffic, leaving domestic traffic utterly unregulated by international law;

Anxious that, as a result of the domestic exemption:

1. Members of the WA face severe difficulties when domestic transport of significantly lower standards shares the same space as international transport, whether over air traffic coordination in the same airspace, rail tracks shared by domestic and international rail engines, or international shipping sharing seas and rivers with domestic vessels; and
   
2. There is significant ambiguity as to the responsibility for investigating accidents involving multiple member states, such as when a domestic ship collides with an international ship in domestic waters, or when an international train collides with a domestic train on a WA state’s rail tracks;

Observing that there is a need for WA states to retain as much autonomy as practicable to tailor regulations for their own circumstances and needs, but that this must be balanced with the need for better coordination between member states, especially in this age of frequent international travel;

Looking forward to replacements for the target resolution that address these flaws, while preserving the good work of the target in establishing international regulations;

Hereby repeals the target resolution, “International Transport Safety”.

[Simone Republic]

Kenmoria's text changes have been adopted wholesale as Draft 2, and his name added as a co-author.

Draft 1

The World Assembly (WA),

Noting its long-standing interest in free trade via appropriate means of transport, such as railways, seafaring and aircraft;

Frustrated that the target resolution, International Transport Safety, permits domestic transport not to comply with the regulations of the International Transport Safety Committee (ITSC, clause 6a), permitting domestic carriers to adopt far more relaxed standards compared to ITSC standards;

Flummoxed that the ITSC has been placed heavy burdens regarding creating detailed regulations for shipping, aviation and railways in terms safety, communications, accident investigation, and other matters, but that they solely concern international traffic only;

Anxious that, as a result of the domestic exemption:

1. Members of the WA face severe difficulties when domestic transport of significantly lower standards share the same space as international transport, whether over air traffic coordination in the same airspace, rail tracks shared by domestic and international rail engines, or international shipping sharing seas and rivers with domestic vessels;
   
2. There is significant ambiguity as to the responsibility for investigating accidents such as when a domestic ship collides with an international ship in domestic waters, or when an international train collides with a domestic train on a WA state’s rail tracks;

Declaring for the record that the WA wishes for WA states retain as much autonomy as possible to tailor regulations for their own circumstances and needs, but also for better coordination between member states especially in this age of frequent travel between member states;

Looking forward to replacements to the target resolution that address these flaws;

Hereby repeals the target resolution, “International Transport Safety”.

[Ignis Ferreus]

Goddamit stop beating me to these repeals!

[Kenmoria]

(OOC: “Forms” should be inserted between “various” and “of”, in the first preambulatory clause. That one was my fault. I accidentally removed it while making my changes.

Goddamit stop beating me to these repeals!

Simone is an unusually prolific author. I recommend forum-drafting any repeals that you are currently drafting offsite. Although it is possible for different authors to write simultaneous repeals of the same piece of legislation, it is rarer.)

[Simone Republic]

(OOC: “Forms” should be inserted between “various” and “of”, in the first preambulatory clause. That one was my fault. I accidentally removed it while making my changes.

Changed.

Goddamit stop beating me to these repeals!

Simone is an unusually prolific author. I recommend forum-drafting any repeals that you are currently drafting offsite. Although it is possible for different authors to write simultaneous repeals of the same piece of legislation, it is rarer.)

I generally don't take repeals where someone else is working on the draft already (unless I totally disagree with it), but I drafted this in January 2024 so I wouldn't necessarily know.

[Waaaar]

Well this law will cause chaos, there is a difference between freedom (which I love) and full flung mayhem.

[The Ice States]

Apologies for not raising this earlier as I hadn't read the proposal until today -- I support repeal of the target but I think these arguments could be more compelling. I'm particularly unconvinced by the Frustrated clause; the resolution is called International Transport Safety and the committee is called the International Transport Safety Committee, I don't see why it also needs to regulate domestic transport. The angle for which I see a repeal is, as for #401, that the target mostly leaves the regulations up to the committee instead of specifying what they are.

[Kenmoria]

Apologies for not raising this earlier as I hadn't read the proposal until today -- I support repeal of the target but I think these arguments could be more compelling. I'm particularly unconvinced by the Frustrated clause; the resolution is called International Transport Safety and the committee is called the International Transport Safety Committee, I don't see why it also needs to regulate domestic transport. The angle for which I see a repeal is, as for #401, that the target mostly leaves the regulations up to the committee instead of specifying what they are.

(OOC: It is fine for legislation to not cover every possible topic. However, the way that the targeted resolution dances around domestic regulation, while covering international legislation in such broad scope, makes it very difficult for future legislation to create parity of regulation on the domestic and international spheres. It would almost necesarily entail duplication or house of cards.)

[Simone Republic]

The World Assembly (WA),

Noting its long-standing interest in promoting free trade via resolutions that provide necessary regulations for various forms of transport, such as railways, seafaring and aircraft;

Frustrated that the target resolution, GAR 34 International Transport Safety, permits domestic transport not to comply with the regulations of the International Transport Safety Committee (ITSC, clause 6a), thereby allowing domestic carriers to adopt far more relaxed standards than those of the ITSC;

Flummoxed that the ITSC has been tasked with creating detailed regulations for shipping, aviation and railways in terms of safety, communications, accident investigation, et cetera, but that they concern only international traffic, leaving domestic traffic utterly unregulated by international law;

Anxious that, as a result of the domestic exemption:

1. WA states face severe difficulties when domestic transport of significantly lower standards shares the same space as international transport, whether over air traffic coordination in the same airspace, rail tracks shared by domestic and international rail engines, or international shipping sharing seas and rivers with domestic vessels; and
2. There is significant ambiguity as to the responsibility for investigating accidents involving multiple member states, such as when a domestic ship collides with an international ship in domestic waters, or when an international train collides with a domestic train on a WA state’s rail tracks;

Observing that there is a need for WA states to retain as much autonomy as practicable to tailor regulations for their own circumstances and needs, but that this must be balanced with the need for better coordination between member states, especially in this age of frequent international travel;

Looking forward to replacements for the target resolution that address these flaws, while preserving the good work of the target in establishing international regulations;

Hereby repeals the target resolution, "International Transport Safety".

Co-author: Kenmoria

This has been pulled from queue because of concerns over whether the word "utterly" is technically a true statement in the third paragraph.

[The Ice States]

Apologies for not raising this earlier as I hadn't read the proposal until today -- I support repeal of the target but I think these arguments could be more compelling. I'm particularly unconvinced by the Frustrated clause; the resolution is called International Transport Safety and the committee is called the International Transport Safety Committee, I don't see why it also needs to regulate domestic transport. The angle for which I see a repeal is, as for #401, that the target mostly leaves the regulations up to the committee instead of specifying what they are.

(OOC: It is fine for legislation to not cover every possible topic. However, the way that the targeted resolution dances around domestic regulation, while covering international legislation in such broad scope, makes it very difficult for future legislation to create parity of regulation on the domestic and international spheres. It would almost necesarily entail duplication or house of cards.)

I don't see how it would; a resolution can just reenact similar policy but for domestic transport. This is if we accept that international and domestic regulations need to be identical; for domestic transport it is easier for one member nation to assert jurisdiction, while that is harder for international transport, potentially requiring more stringent international standards.

[Simone Republic]

(OOC: It is fine for legislation to not cover every possible topic. However, the way that the targeted resolution dances around domestic regulation, while covering international legislation in such broad scope, makes it very difficult for future legislation to create parity of regulation on the domestic and international spheres. It would almost necesarily entail duplication or house of cards.)

I don't see how it would; a resolution can just reenact similar policy but for domestic transport. This is if we accept that international and domestic regulations need to be identical; for domestic transport it is easier for one member nation to assert jurisdiction, while that is harder for international transport, potentially requiring more stringent international standards.

The main argument is over shared space:

- If the sky has planes that are used by domestic flights and international flights, can a shakier and poorly maintained domestic aircraft fly near international flights?

- What happens if a shoddy domestic ship rams into a well-built international ship?

- What about trains in Europe (and between some other states, US/Canada for example) where railroads/railways run across national boundaries?

[Refuge Isle]

This is now at vote

[Avinis]

While we are open to more stringent regulation on this topic, the argumentation for a repeal of the previous legislation feels uncompelling. We see no reason it would prevent tighter regulation on domestic flights from the WA later. AGAINST.

[Zantalio]

I would have to ask, what would be providing international travel standards after this bill is passed? Or will there be none? Or am I just not reading the proposal well?

[The Overmind]

I would have to ask, what would be providing international travel standards after this bill is passed? Or will there be none? Or am I just not reading the proposal well?

Simone Republic is attempting to replace this resolution with several new proposals that cover things in a more piecemeal and (theoretically) comprehensive manner. He lists them in the OP.

[Meiara]

The People of Meiara do not believe that WA should govern domestic travel safety and should only put forward guidelines for WA compliant nations to base their own internal safety regulations on. As such we believe GA34 should remain in place.

-- Message from Meiara Ambassador Klira Elirasdottir

[The Xolbarian Opposition]

Why is international transportation regulation regulating domestic transportation???