NationStates Jolt Archive

If you can see the logic in this one, I ask for aid in getting out telegrams, as that proposal list gets more snarled up all the time.

If you can't, please explain why.

Thank you.

Repeal "Education For All"
A proposal to repeal a previously passed resolution

Category: Repeal
Resolution: #3
Proposed by: Vastiva

Description: UN Resolution #3: Education For All (Category: Social Justice; Strength: Significant) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: The age levels guaranteed a free education have already been superceeded by the "Free education" resolution, which extends the right to the age of 18. Therefore, this resolution is unnecessary and causes a bureaucratic snarl in determining the maximum age of free education.

As this is the less restrictive of the two, we ask that it be striken.

Approvals: 0

Status: Lacking Support (requires 141 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Sat Nov 27 2004


Personally, I think this one should be a "gimme", but I'm willing for it to go to the voting public.

I can see a logical reason behind that. However, I am no longer sure the diplomat for Tiamat Taveril's reagion is active.

Firstly - I am not opposing the repeal. I just have a comment/question on the way it is phrased


Argument: The age levels guaranteed a free education have already been superceeded by the "Free education" resolution, which extends the right to the age of 18. Therefore, this resolution is unnecessary and causes a bureaucratic snarl in determining the maximum age of free education.

As this is the less restrictive of the two, we ask that it be striken.


The way it reads you are trying to repeal resolution 18, because that one is the less restrictive of the two.

So may I suggest a change to "As this is the more restrictive of the two" (assuming you are trying to repeal the one that goes to 16, rather than 18).

...and "striken" is incorrect. I believe the proper spelling is "stricken". Of course, considering the whole "argue" v "argu" debacle, maybe not. ;)

...and "striken" is incorrect. I believe the proper spelling is "stricken". Of course, considering the whole "argue" v "argu" debacle, maybe not. ;)

I vote yay ;) for stricken

Firstly - I am not opposing the repeal. I just have a comment/question on the way it is phrased



The way it reads you are trying to repeal resolution 18, because that one is the less restrictive of the two.

So may I suggest a change to "As this is the more restrictive of the two" (assuming you are trying to repeal the one that goes to 16, rather than 18).

#3 is the more restrictive, since the later one broadens the scope of free education to 18, as opposed to #3's 16....


Description: UN Resolution #3: Education For All (Category: Social Justice; Strength: Significant) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: The age levels guaranteed a free education have already been superceeded by the "Free education" resolution, which extends the right [of a free education] to the age of 18. Therefore, this resolution [#3 "Education for all" is the subject]is unnecessary and causes a bureaucratic snarl in determining the maximum age of free education.

Bar a few of the recommendations made in this debate, the government of Telidia is in favour of this repeal. ‘Cleaning up’ ambiguous UN legislation is definitely a worthwhile pursuit.

Respectfully
Lydia Cornwall, UN Ambassador
Office of UN Relations, Dept for Foreign Affairs
HM Government of Telidia

I've approved it, even if it's just to keep support up to motivate a resubmission (should the forum uncover some reason for editting it).

I'm probably going to start approving all of the sensible ones soon, just so that we can stop seeing them - they're getting as bad as the "Axis of Evil" repeals were. :rolleyes:

The DRA will support this resolution and will support repealling the resolution on the resolution making education free for everyone up to 18 should the Global Education Initative pass.

The GEI is a proposal I put up here a while ago and will be submitting to this board for final review tomorrow (it was delayed due to exams and essays :( )