[ABANDONED] Delete Records

[Montrandec]

[snip]

[Bears Armed]

OOC
This is NOT 'Free Trade'. [one-sixth of GenSec]

[Kenmoria]

(OOC: Welcome to the General Assembly. It is good that the proposal has been drafted here, but there are some issues with the concept, which the Kenmorian ambassador addresses below.)

“Why? I can’t see any need for business documents to be deleted every two years. It would be a logistical nightmare, and would need the business to ask every single one of its customers or clients to resubmit its forms. Where swiftness is needed, for example private hospitals, this could be disastrous.”

[The New California Republic]

I really don't see the point of this. You should have some kind of preamble where you set out the need for this.

[Grays Harbor]

OOC: This is not Free Trade. It is also not significant. (That makes this opinion 1/3 of Gen Sec, now)
Free Trade - A resolution to reduce barriers to free trade and commerce. This does not reduce barriers.

IC: what is your reasoning for this? Why is this necessary? Why is this any of the WA’s business?

After exactly 10 years a business representative shall give in the documents.

Exactly? So, every business, every day, must make a pilgrimage to the government”.

About multinational corporations
For corporations established in two countries or selling/advertising their product(s) various company representatives shall go each to the government representative, with the document in hand the government representative hands it in to the government and then the various governments shall make a treaty or accord

... And every single day, by the clumsy wording of this, all documents must be handed in to every government where they even advertise. Which, with the internet, is Every country. Then a new treaty needs to be signed, as per the clumsy wording, every single day.

Congrats, you just solved the universes unemployment problem as so many couriers carrying documents, and bureaucrats to process them all, would be necessary there are probably not enough people to fulfill all the job openings.

This entire concept is simplistic, overreaching, and ludicrous.

[Montrandec]

I now see why this proposal is mediocre at best

[Bears Armed]

):

On the bright side, at least you showed that you have enough sense to post your draft here for comments first, instead of going straight to the submissions page: Far too many new authors don't do this... Congratulations for that.
And, as I didn't say it before: “Hrarroom!” (= “Greetings”).

[East Meranopirus]

I have a feeling someone's told you before to read passed resolutions, but if they haven't (or you didn't listen), here it is again. Please read at least a couple of them to see what good resolutions are like.

[Newark Aristocracy]

Category: Free trade--------------------------Strength: Significant

Deleting Records

Effect
Deleting immediately every business record after 10 years of the government ratification of said document. The business is obliged to hand in the document or documents

Application of said law
After exactly 10 years a business representative shall give in the documents.

Exceptions
If a document ratified 10 years ago or prior is affected by a lawsuit and/or needed as evidence for a private or public case this law does not apply.

About multinational corporations
For corporations established in two countries or selling/advertising their product(s) various company representatives shall go each to the government representative, with the document in hand the government representative hands it in to the government and then the various governments shall make a treaty or accord

About non-government-approved businesses
When such businesses are spotted any government official is granted authority to enter the business and claim that all 10 year old and earlier documents.

Hereby destroys every business document 10 years or older

The Newark Aristocracy's ambassador to the WA reads over the laid forth proposal.

He stands up.

"For God's sake,change the Damm category,it's stupid that this proposal is apparently in the Free Trade Catagory, even it doesn't even promote free trade.

I object the proposal because the entire thing is horribly written, horribly ineffective,and horribly stupid.
I'd honestly like to condem the nation who even laid the proposal out to be honest. Now, back to professionalsm.

The proposed legislation is,bad to put it in nice terms.
Like a member of Gensec said:

Congrats, you just solved the universes unemployment problem as so many couriers carrying documents, and bureaucrats to process them all, would be necessary there are probably not enough people to fulfill all the job openings.

Now that says something. I'm all for dealing with unemployment,but this proposal is just overly stupid.
No support."

[The New California Republic]

I know the WA has had some quite bureaucratic proposals in the past, but this one in particular just looks like bureaucracy for bureaucracy's sake. I assume the "need" to destroy business records comes from privacy concerns...or...something? Can the author please spell out explicitly and coherently what the actual reasoning behind this is? It would help immensely if we understood the why of it, as then we would better understand what is actually the goal behind the destruction of business records.

[Minoa]

There are many reasons why business records have to be kept for longer than ten years. One example is historical research. Another example is the prevention of corruption. Another example is to not repeat the mistakes from the past.

I think we already have a privacy resolution (#213). I note that there used to be a data protection resolution (#461), but that was repealed under #462. It may be possible to develop a resolution similar to the GDPR, but it cannot mention the GDPR by name due to the RL references rule, and quite a lot of work is needed to prevent conflicts and duplications with #213 and other resolutions.

-- Minoa

[Ransium]

I have edited the title to include the draft tag as I kept clicking on this thread thinking it needed to be moved to technical or something.

[Marxist Germany]

I think we already have a privacy resolution (#213). I note that there used to be a data protection resolution (#461), but that was repealed under #462. It may be possible to develop a resolution similar to the GDPR, but it cannot mention the GDPR by name due to the RL references rule, and quite a lot of work is needed to prevent conflicts and duplications with #213 and other resolutions.

OOC: Oh don't worry, someone by the name of Marxist Germany is working on that.