NationStates Jolt Archive

A while ago I submitted a proposal a couple of times that came close to gaining enough support to reach quorum - it was called "Disease in Developing Nations". A couple of people told me that they thought it should be written out in 'proper' proposal style (i.e. with bullet points etc) so, deciding to try again, I have re-written it in this style. Please tell me what you think, and I will make suitable changes, and re-submit it in a couple of days for voting. Sorry to anyone I annoyed last time by telegramming, I promise not to spam delegates in future. Anyway, here's my new-format proposal please tell me what you think (I know it's a bit long - any ideas on how to shorten it?):

NB. Its classification as human rights is imperfect, but there is no other suitable category, and the resolution could be seen as enforcing the right to life - without basic medical care, most people cannot survive, so the right to life dictates that we should provide basic necessities to these people.

Disease in developing nations
Category: Human Rights Strength: Strong

SADDENED THAT
-easily preventable diseases are killing millions of children and indeed adults
-HIV/AIDS has become endemic to many nations, especially in Africa

POSTULATING THAT
-The prevention and curing of disease would help to alleviate many of the other problems plaguing the developing world, such as instability, and high birth rates in an effort to "compensate" for infant mortality rates
-Human lives are more valuable than any individual, corporation or country's right to the money he, she or it has earned
-Improvement of conditions in poor countries will eventually benefit rich countries through increased safety from the spread of disease, increased stability, development of poor economies (and thus benefit to all by trade), reduced demands for short term aid and reduced numbers of refugees fleeing appalling conditions.

WORRIED THAT
-corruption in poor countries' governments means that aid given to these states is often wasted

This assembly hereby authorises the establishment of a World Health Organisation Programme to deal with third world disease with the following measures:
-recruitment of both volunteer and paid medical workers
-sending these workers into countries designated as being in need of the programmes help
-establishment by these workers of free clinics
-provision of transport so that some workers can travel around to those areas which cannot be provided for by the clinics
-provision and administering by these workers directly to the people in need of free medicines, vaccinations and other treatments
-the distribution of free contraceptives to combat the spread of STDs (and as a bonus reduce spiralling birth rates)
-establishment of safe sex and hygiene education programmes as long term preventatives
-provision of clean water supplies

This programme will be funded by a tax on nation's governments, included in the UN membership fees already paid by UN countries:
-the WHO will decide reasonable amounts to tax on a sliding scale based on GNP and GNP per capita, and if it is deemed sensible, extremely poor countries could be made exempt
-these amounts shall constitute minimums - larger donations will be voluntary - and charities, individuals and corporations can donate too (though the programme must not be seen to favour the products of any particular pharmaceutical companies - any corporation whose products are in use by the programme may not contribute money, rather they may only give medical supplies, equipment, or perhaps the rights to drug patents).
-countries benefitting from the programme may be exempt from the tax, as long as they put an agreed amount into their health services

This is, IMO, a worthwhile proposal that seeks to better the poorer people of this world. Catholic Europe wholeheartedly supports this proposal.

Thankyou Catholic Europe, I remember you supported this last time around too.

Here is a list of all the nations that supported the proposal in its various incarnations:

_Myopia_, Scyphia, Chicken Fillet, Goobergunchia, Lamoni, Dionalka, Nadaskor, The Bruce, Ariddia, Free Outer Eugenia, Namaste, Clarkhall, Bluedestiny, The Emperor Fenix, Witu, Munrostan, Hazelglovia, Boudica, Three Spinning Legs, Valinon, Pirratia, Josh World, Leidestrad, New Found Love, Butthole, Elven Groves, Canine Despotism, Tanah Burung, Good Harvest, Greater Canadiana, Mattabooloo, Northeastern Ohio, Airgead, The World Government, The Rose Resistance, Sesquepadalia, Tomlandia, Fishopolis, Tempus Incognitum, Bno, Westrogoticae, Nova-Sudretia, Andinostan, Wufei, Katzistanza, Emperor Kevin, Pilgrimsburg, Meallan, Hamme, Mystical Duct Tape, Skinneria, Houk, Thax, Qaaolchoura, Contrition, CoOpera, TheKnightsOfNi, Underaloz, Huskatopia, Scary People, Kryania, Cherry Cola, Nathan Reynolds, Naha, Ickhaelm, Loashia, GRAS, Cyranelle, Independant Pluto, Non Sequitur, Veksar, Valus, Pax Romantica, UmbrellaCorp, Hogany, Political Refugees, Norion, Bahai, Samiston, Tartan commandos, PAULSON, Fenris Ulf, Of the People, Really Great People, Sheebaland, Alvarez, Lisalia, Ineptland, Dude778, Animal friends, LadyRebels, Alinna, Boischatel, FYROM, Britannia and Hibernia, Tuonela, Tarrican, AlphaZenith, Leadershipbob, Drunkenberg, Gibralterania, Pineapple Delight, Efate, Sulon, Threeve, Irnbruland, Debaermania, The twoslit experiment, New Leetoria

If any of those nations see this, hopefully they will kindly lend their support one more time - I won't actually be submitting the proposal for a couple of days, so if anyone wants to suggest improvements, please feel free (for instance, do I need to make it shorter?)

And here is a link to the thread I used to promote the original version:
http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=71850&highlight=

Ok great so noone's paying any attention...*bump*

What about richer nations that can charge what they want (or have to) to pay to treat these diseases? Can they get UN monies?

If they have a problem, they should join the UN. Once they do that, I'd be more inclined to give them MY money.

What about richer nations that can charge what they want (or have to) to pay to treat these diseases? Can they get UN monies?

If they have a problem, they should join the UN. Once they do that, I'd be more inclined to give them MY money.

Charity to those in need is the aim of this proposal, so no richer nations would not receive aid. Dealing with crises that might overwhelm the resources of even richer nations is a job for the WHO as a whole - this programme is just directed at those poor nations in need.

Whether the nations belong to the UN or not is a detail that I'm not going to specify in the proposal - it will be the job of the WHO to decide which nations are in need of help, but if WHO decisions are seen as not in keeping with the spirit of the proposal, the general assembly of the UN could vote to block certain decisions. I'll add the following clause after "recruitment...":

-the identification by the WHO every five years of poor countries in need of this type of aid to aim the programme at. (these decisions may be overturned by a majority vote from the general assembly if it feels that the WHO's decisions are not in-keeping with the spirit of this resolution)

"Poorer" is subjective. In theory, because a nation is poorer than I am, I have to help them?

"Poorer" is subjective. In theory, because a nation is poorer than I am, I have to help them?

Under my system of morals, I'd say yes you do have a responsibility to help them. After all, we're all human beings, and generally when people/countries are poor, it isn't the fault of that person/current population. People are born into poor families and countries, so it usually isn't their fault. But I've had this argument too many times on this forum - I'm not going to persuade people like Ithuania, and they're not going to persuade me, so it's a waste of time.

One more *bump*. If I don't hear anything, I'll just submit the thing tomorrow. Or should I go back to the shorter version? Here's the previous one, which isn't as professional-sounding, but it takes up far less space on the screen, so hopefully won't be as daunting (tell me whether this is better):

Disease in developing nations
Category: Human Rights Strength: Strong

This Resolution would set up a World Health Organisation Programme which would give health aid to developing nations in need of it. Currently, easily preventable diseases are killing millions of children and indeed adults, and HIV/AIDS has become endemic to many nations, especially in Africa. These problems could be remedied by a simple commitment from all UN nations to contribute to this programme. It would send medical workers - both volunteers and paid workers - into developing nations chosen by the WHO as being in need of this aid. The doctors would set up free clinics and also travel around to administer free medicines, vaccinations and treatments. The programme would also distribute free contraceptives to combat STDs (and, as a bonus, out-of-control birth rates) and set up clean water supplies and hygiene and safe-sex education programmes. The prevention and curing of disease would alleviate many of the other problems plaguing the developing world (for instance, many people in developing countries are currently forced to have many children to support them since so many die, leading to the out-of-control birth rates seen), and would be a noble cause of which we could all be proud. If the burden was spread fairly, it should not even cost too much (think of the amounts governments spend on their military forces!). This programme would avoid many of the corruption problems encountered when money is given to third world governments, because doctors and other workers would give the aid directly to the people who need it. The WHO would decide a reasonable amount to take from each member nation's government - more would be taken from countries with higher GNP, and some extremely poor countries may be made exempt - but these amounts would only be minimums, and charities, individuals and corporations can donate too (though the programme must not be seen to favour the products of any particular pharmaceutical companies - any corporation whose products are in use by the programme may not contribute money, rather they may only give medical supplies, equipment, or perhaps the rights to drug patents). Poor countries who are benefitting from the aid would be exempt from the tax, as long as they put a reasonable amount of money into a National Health Service.

To those who complain about "robbing Peter to pay Paul", human lives are more valuable than any individual, corporation or country's right to the money he, she or it has earned. Plus, improvement of conditions in poor countries will eventually benefit rich countries through increased safety from the spread of disease, increased stability, development of poor economies (and thus benefit to all by trade), reduced demands for short term aid and reduced numbers of refugees fleeing appalling conditions, so look on it as an investment if nothing else.

Well if nobody's going to comment, I will just submit the official-looking one and hope.

Actually, I'm not going to bother. Maybe tomorrow.

Ok submitted it and already got some approvals, keep them coming in

Bennyonia thinks this is a good idea. We support it.

The Free Lands of Youghiogheny supports this resolution.

- Xavier Jameson
The Free Lands of Youghiogheny,
UN Delegate and Hoopy Frood

OOC: How does one go about approving a proposal? Is it only regional delegates or can any UN member approve it?

One must be a regional delegate to approve a proposal, but once it is a resolution, anyone can vote for it. I hope it makes it to the UN floor or I become RD, b/c I support this proposal. When does voting end?

Lok supports this proposal, but we have a question. How is it determined that a nation needs this type of aid? My nation is less well-off than most in the world, yet we are not in need of this type of aid, nor would we ask for it unless we were desperate.

I also support this proposal. I'm not a delegate ,so I can't approve it ,but it sounds like it would be very beneficial to many nations.

Why must you steal from my citizens to give money to developing nations to buy 'medicine'? Poor nations are largely poor because of bad government... Most of the money is going to go towards buying new Soviet-made tanks becasue the old ones tracks got sticky from running over civilians.

Should this proposal change to include help all nations who are fighting a losing battle with disease I might support it. However as it sits I cannot lend my support as it basically states that only poor nations are worth helping. In the end it's paramount to class warfare. Nations who are pro buisness and have good economy should not suffer for that reason.

BTW to interested delegates, it's actually now called "Fighting Disease in LEDCs"

Why must you steal from my citizens to give money to developing nations to buy 'medicine'? Poor nations are largely poor because of bad government... Most of the money is going to go towards buying new Soviet-made tanks becasue the old ones tracks got sticky from running over civilians.

TGM, I made it clear that NO MONEY GOES TO THE GOVERNMENTS SO THEY CANNOT SPEND IT ON TANKS!

You even tried to make this argument last time I put this proposal up, and I explained this last time. I even pointed out what you are complaining about in the proposal:



...WORRIED THAT
-corruption in poor countries' governments means that aid given to these states is often wasted...
...provision and administering by these workers directly to the people in need of free medicines, vaccinations and other treatments...

To those asking when voting on the proposal ends, I think it's Sunday, which means midnite tomorrow. I don't think it'll go through so I'll submit it again soon. To those who are interested but not delegates, please ask your delegate and any other delegates you know to take a look!