NationStates Jolt Archive

Category: The Furtherment of Democracy
Strength: Significant

CONVINCED that the United Nations requires a regular and sustainable source of funding in order to continue to effectively enact legislation,

CONCERNED by the current dependence on voluntary contributions,

NOTING that assessing member nations for mandatory contributions has never been declared illegal by UN legislation:

1. DECLARES the establishment of the United Nations Accounting Department (UNAD);

2. AUTHORIZES the UNAD to institute a compulsory system of assessed contributions whereby all member nations shall contribute towards a collective fund to be used solely for the upkeep of the Secretariat and for administration and enactment of legislation;

3. DEFINES the assessed contribution as:

a. being calculated as a percentage of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of each member nation,
b. operating on a progressive scale,
and
c. not exceeding the sum of 0.005% of national GDP for that nation;

4. DECLARES that the UNAD shall be the sole agency for collection of compulsory contributions;

5. REQUESTS that the UNAD establish a United Nations Trust Fund (UNTF) solely for the holding of any surplus funds, where the annual budgetary requirements have been exceeded, to a limit of twice the annual total assessment;

6. FURTHER REQUESTS that the UNAD return all funds to member nations in the ratio of assessment where the annual budgetary requirements have been exceeded and where the UNTF has reached its maximum capacity;

7. CALLS FOR the creation of the UNAD Supervisory Committee (UNADSuC);

8. GRANTS the UNADSuC rights to:

a. commission and report on external audits of the UNAD,
b. monitor and adjust assessment rates where economic change necessitates such measures,
and
c. in exceptional circumstances grant temporary exemption where nations can provide independently corroborated proof of inability to meet the lowest assessment level;

9. BANS the UN from engaging in deficit spending;

There were few comments last time: I can only assume it's perfect.

There were few comments last time: I can only assume it's perfect.

I could be wrong - but I think (9) is illegal as it limits future resolutions. But please feel free to ask someone who - you know - knows :}

Ehhh.... It's the "Prohibits any future resolution...." part that bothered me. However, I have given this some thought since I last posted here, and I'm going to let this slide; it's not limiting what proposal categories the UN may consider.

From this (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7001381&postcount=20).

Now, that decision is old. I am not aware of new precedent, but it is possible. I am not saying Cog's ruling stands; I am merely basing my resolution on all I can do, which is assume it still stands.

For the moment, I continue to believe OC9 is legal.

From this (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7001381&postcount=20).

Now, that decision is old. I am not aware of new precedent, but it is possible. I am not saying Cog's ruling stands; I am merely basing my resolution on all I can do, which is assume it still stands.

For the moment, I continue to believe OC9 is legal.

Ok. I just thought I would mention it :}

Ok. I just thought I would mention it :}

Ok. But...anything to say about the actual proposal? I don't really understand what's so hideous about it that no one dares say anything.

Ok. But...anything to say about the actual proposal? I don't really understand what's so hideous about it that no one dares say anything.

Generally I don't say anything unless either a) I think it might have illegal issues (in which case it is more of a warning than anything else) or b) I find something horribley wrong with it and am forced to comment.

So when I am silent, it's mostly good.

Why do we need it?

Why do we need it?

To fund 'the UN'. In other words, upkeep on the building, paying the gnomes, stocking the Strangers' Bar, electricity for the small heaters keeping DLE's chair warm. But also, money to enact legislation. A number of resolutions do not mention where they get their funding from; well, it has to come from somewhere. This provides that somewhere.

this sounds like paying your membership fees at a golf club. without money they can't pay the green keeper, bar staff etc.

you've also mentioned that you were concerned by the dependance on voluntary contributions.

there are some resolutions on the book that require nations to pay into the UN. I can't remember of the top of my head which ones these are.

will point nine of this proposal replace these funds that are paid through these resolutions?

It's true that the NSUN has required a system of established official funds from its member nations to keep it going. The benefits of joining this international union and enjoying the fruits of cross-national, cross-cultural harmony and love (on occasions), is worthy of paying any fees to ensure its up-keep.

In addtion, my offices could do with some serious re-furbishment and a few light-fittings need looking at too. :)

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

From this (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7001381&postcount=20).

Now, that decision is old. I am not aware of new precedent, but it is possible. I am not saying Cog's ruling stands; I am merely basing my resolution on all I can do, which is assume it still stands.

For the moment, I continue to believe OC9 is legal.

The Hackian Laws changes the idea of ammendments from Enodian Protocols, though I can't say for sure about limitation of future proposals. The last line is obviously an attempt at acknowledging the duplication laws, but it really does read like a limitation of future proposals. I'd ask a mod.

this sounds like paying your membership fees at a golf club. without money they can't pay the green keeper, bar staff etc.

you've also mentioned that you were concerned by the dependance on voluntary contributions.

there are some resolutions on the book that require nations to pay into the UN. I can't remember of the top of my head which ones these are.

will point nine of this proposal replace these funds that are paid through these resolutions?


No it wouldn't. You can't ammend past resolutions, so those funds would be on top of the ones already passed. However, IIRC, the resolutions in question actually force the nation to spend the money on internal projects for an International purpose, while this resolution is about money given to the UN for all projects taken on by the UN itself or just plain operating costs. Considering that we are said to be working in the largest building in the world - both in terms of height and volume - we're probably in need for guaranteed funding.

this sounds like paying your membership fees at a golf club. without money they can't pay the green keeper, bar staff etc.

I was being mildly frivolous. However, UN funding is genuinely needed.

will point nine of this proposal replace these funds that are paid through these resolutions?

No. I can't change old legislation. I will have to think about this more.

t's true that the NSUN has required a system of established official funds from its member nations to keep it going. The benefits of joining this international union and enjoying the fruits of cross-national, cross-cultural harmony and love (on occasions), is worthy of paying any fees to ensure its up-keep.

In addtion, my offices could do with some serious re-furbishment and a few light-fittings need looking at too.

Thank you for your support. We do assure you that OC7 should ensure no funds are wasted or embezzled.

The Hackian Laws changes the idea of ammendments from Enodian Protocols, though I can't say for sure about limitation of future proposals. The last line is obviously an attempt at acknowledging the duplication laws, but it really does read like a limitation of future proposals. I'd ask a mod.

Any resolution limits future proposals. No proposal can ban nuclear armaments. I agree I'm imposing an extra limitation...but I still believe it's not limiting anything mechanical, only textual.

Any resolution limits future proposals. No proposal can ban nuclear armaments. I agree I'm imposing an extra limitation...but I still believe it's not limiting anything mechanical, only textual.

Actions by consequence have, in many rulings, been seperated from direct actions

Ok. If I toned it down to 'SUGGESTS that further requests for compulsory contributions would be unnecessary and potentially wasteful' that would be legal? I know you're not a mod, but I'm asking your opinion as someone who seems to know a reasonable bit about legality.

The problem with that is it's not a mandatory clause....so someone could form another committee doing the same thing, adding another few percentage points.....

Hmm.....how about:

The UNAD shall be the only agency that collects compulsary membership fees

This, I think, is SLIGHTLY more legal, and the possibility of increasing the UNAD's would fall under ammendment.

The problem with that is it's not a mandatory clause....so someone could form another committee doing the same thing, adding another few percentage points.....

Hmm.....how about:

You know, there are disadvantages to turning off quote-pyramiding completely.

This, I think, is SLIGHTLY more legal, and the possibility of increasing the UNAD's would fall under ammendment.

Thanks, that's a good suggestion. I'll make it something like that.

Right, I've added in 4, and removed 9, and shunted. Look ok?

To fund 'the UN'. In other words, upkeep on the building, paying the gnomes, stocking the Strangers' Bar, electricity for the small heaters keeping DLE's chair warm. But also, money to enact legislation. A number of resolutions do not mention where they get their funding from; well, it has to come from somewhere. This provides that somewhere.
This will also help us cover our paychecks.:D

In addtion, my offices could do with some serious re-furbishment and a few light-fittings need looking at too.
We'll get someone on that ASAP. Bear in mind that we're currently understaffed so it might be a while before we get to it.

William Smithers
Senior VP, UN Building Mgmt.

Well, I'm not really sure what 'the sums' are going to be...but here's start. UNAC=UN assessed contribution. Figures taken from NSEconomy.

http://img463.imageshack.us/img463/2807/workistan16fy.png
http://img463.imageshack.us/img463/2557/workistan27zq.png

That gives over $51.5 billion from 30 nations. Hugely approximate extrapolations would tend to $50 trillion (perhaps a little less, given the 'punk noob' effect) per annum for the whole UN.

"6. FURTHER REQUESTS that the UNAD return all funds to member nations in the ratio of assessment where the annual budgetary requirements have been exceeded and where the UNTF has reached its maximum capacity;"


Who EVER heard of a bureaucracy that couldn't find ways of using ALL of the funds available to it? ;-)

Who EVER heard of a bureaucracy that couldn't find ways of using ALL of the funds available to it? ;-)

I'm not sure what you're alluding to here. Could you expand your point, please? The clause is to prevent the UN holding onto your money needlessly; I would have thought that was a good thing.

I was suggesting that the UN bureaucrats would almost certainly find ways of spending however much money this resolution raised for them, so that the likelihood of there actually being any "surplus" funds to return in the way that that clause specifies seemed extremely low to me...

I was suggesting that the UN bureaucrats would almost certainly find ways of spending however much money this resolution raised for them, so that the likelihood of there actually being any "surplus" funds to return in the way that that clause specifies seemed extremely low to me...

Ok, idly bashing the gnomes isn't really that constructive, unless you're going to substantiate. If you can turn general 'all bureaucrats are wankers' into something that has pertinence to the UNMA, I'd be very grateful. It is a legitimate concern, but I don't feel it's being presented productively at the moment.

Well, while we think about that, there will be some changes to the way UNACs are calculated. In the meantime, here's my list of justifications in terms of resolutions where funding is not specified. NOTE: this is not a criticism, and in fact these resolutions seem disproportionately good.

#32 – Global Aids Initiative
- Global education program
- Economic incentives to multinational pharmaceutical companies
Mentions a fund to be contributed to by all member nations for purchase and distribution of AIDS medication.

#45 – UCPL
- International Copyright Organization with chapters in every capital
- Additional sub-agency for different languages
- Additional sub-agency for infringement control

#54 – UN Educational Committee
- UNEC will provide funding for:
o Repairs
o Security
o Extra-curricular activities
o Healthier school lunches
o Training teachers
o Purchasing up-to-date materials

#55 – World Blood Bank
- World Blood Bank with centralized organization established
- Nations need to partake in funding but no mechanism mentioned

#57 – Reduce Black Market Arms Sales
- Formation of an independent council
- Calls for an international conference

#66 – Illegal Logging
- Formation of WWP
- Annual checks on companies by WWP

#70 – Banning Whaling
- Commission for scientific research

#74 – The Law of the Sea
- UN commission on Maritime Preservation Zones
- International Maritime Standards Bureau for setting nautical standards

#83 – The Eon Convention on Genocide
- Creation of The Pretenama Panel
- Means for TPP to conduct investigations

#84 – NS HIV AIDS Act
- Expansion of UNAIDS
- Fund allocations for:
o Hiring staff
o Purchasing top-grade equipment
o Financing international operations
- Know HIV/AIDS media program
- Think HIV/AIDS program for:
o Nanotechnological and biomedical research
o Alternatives to blood transfusion
- Treat HIV/AIDS public health departments
- Eliminate HIV/AIDS education programs
Much of this appears to be funded from the provisions of #32, Global Aids Initiative

#85 – Support Hemp Production
- 30% funding of hemp promotion program

#90 – Tsunami Warning System
- Tsunami Emergency Warning Center staffed by team of experts
- Network of buoys and sensors

#92 – Humanitarian Intervention
- More work for TPP
- Independent experts to be commissioned

#100 – Natural Disaster Act
- Natural Disaster Assessment Organization
Nations are only urged to contribute financially.

#114 – UNWCC
- United Nations Water Cleansing Committee

#119 – UNCoESB
- Executive body for monitoring wildlife
- Specialists commissioned
- Full funding for endangerment alleviation

"#85 – Support Hemp Production
- 30% funding of hemp promotion program"

I must have missed that detail when I looked through the passed resolutions.


(Memo to self: try to get some endorsements, in order to propose a repeal of THAT resolution...)

"#85 – Support Hemp Production
- 30% funding of hemp promotion program"

I must have missed that detail when I looked through the passed resolutions.


(Memo to self: try to get some endorsements, in order to propose a repeal of THAT resolution...)

Maybe we could keep comments on-topic, i.e. talking about how brilliant I am, and not how crappy other resolutions are?

Maybe we could keep comments on-topic, i.e. talking about how brilliant I am, and not how crappy other resolutions are?

You are very brilliant and we all bask in the wonder of your brilliance and thank the goddesses you are alive.

(Hey - I like your proposal, and have nothing else to say, so I thought I would humour you instead, thought it might have turned in to overly sarcastic humour (smirk))