NationStates Jolt Archive

Proposal submitted, you can find it here:

http://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_proposal1/match=disease

I'm trying my hand at some legislation which could potentially give the UN a sort of WHO organization with a concentration in preventing and curing diseases like HIV/AIDS, Ebola, etc. I formatted the resolution sort of like the ICPIN resolution, which I liked very much in substance and appearance. I'd like to get some constructive criticism, so let me know if you like it or hate it, but either way explain the pros and cons of the legislation at hand please.

Disease Prevention and Control
A resolution to reduce income inequality and increase basic welfare.

Category: Social Justice
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Belarum (www.nationstates.net/belarum)

The General Assembly of the United Nations,

Believing that the member states of not only the United Nations, but the world should be committed to the health and well-being of their people,

Deeply concerned by the potential lack of prevention and control of disease in the respective member states of the United Nations, as well as the potential lack of coordination between agencies of nations in bringing medical advances and preventative measures to nations of the UN in fighting disease,

Emphasizing the importance of disseminating crucial information concerning the prevention and control of disease throughout the international community, to include nations which may not hold membership in the United Nations,

Resolving to bring decent health standards as well as coordination and preparedness to combat disease to as many nations as possible, hereby:

1) Strongly encourages nations to fund research into preventative measures and cures for disease and disseminate such information internationally;

2) Further encourages coordination between the existing health agencies of nations in fighting and controlling disease;

3) Establishes the United Nations Center for Disease Prevention and Control (CDPC), with the mission to:
-identify, assess, and communicate current and emerging threats to human health from disease,
-actively research treatment, cures, and preventative measures concerning disease,
-coordinate efforts between UN member states in preventing and controlling disease;

4) Mandates the establishment of CDPC offices in the member states of the United Nations, as necessary in order to:
-research ways and possibilities to prevent and control disease,
-support relief efforts in individual UN nations through the appropriate agencies or take responsibility itself should those agencies be unable to respond to an outbreak of disease,
-disseminate crucial information and research concerning disease internationally in a quick and orderly fashion;

5) Strongly encourages nations to:
-create agencies concerned with the prevention and control of disease,
-research cures and preventative measures to combat disease,
-disseminate information internationally which could be used to impede the spread of disease.

The General Assembly of the United Nations,

Whereas the member states of not only the United Nations, but the world should be committed to the health and well-being of its citizens,
Improper grammar. Try "Believing that the member states..."
Realizing infectious diseases directly impede the health and well-being of the citizens of the respective nations of the world,
I've seen stupidity in the UN before, but I think nations are smart enough to figure this out.
Deeply concerned by the potential lack of prevention and control of disease in the respective member states of the United Nations, as well as the potential lack of coordination between agencies of nations in bringing medical advances and preventative measures to member states of the United Nations in fighting disease,
Looks good to me.
Resolved to bring decent health standards, coordination, and preparedness to fight infectious disease to the member states of the United Nations and encourage:
Improper grammar. Try "Wishing the bring decent healt standards, coordination, and preparedness to fight infectious disease to member states, hereby:"
1) Strongly encourages nations to fund research into preventative measures and cures for infectious disease and disseminate such information internationally;
Looks good.
2) Further encourages coordination between the existing health agencies of nations in fighting and controlling infectious disease;
Seems okay.
3) Emphasizes the importance of disseminating crucial information in the prevention and control of disease in the international community which may not hold UN membership;
Not sure this is necessary.
4) Mandates the creation of the United Nations Center for Disease Prevention and Control (CDPC), with the mission to:
No need for a "mandates" here. It should just be "Creates the UN blah blah blah"
-identify, assess, and communicate current and emerging threats to human health from infectious disease,
-actively research treatment, cures, and preventative measures concerning disease,
-coordinate efforts between UN member states in preventing and controlling disease;
This is good.
5) Mandates the establishment of CDPC offices in the member states of the United Nations in order to:
-research ways and possibilities to prevent and control infectious disease,
-coordinate relief efforts in individual UN nations through the International Red Cross Organization (IRCO), or take responsibility itself should the IRCO be unable to respond, should an outbreak of certain infectious disease occur,
-disseminate crucial information and research concerning disease internationally in a quick and orderly fashion,
Looks good to me, but the IRCO bit might be a HoC concern.
6) Strongly encourages non-UN nations to:
-create agencies concerned with the prevention and control of disease,
-research cures and preventative measures to combat disease,
-disseminate information which could be used to impede the spread of disease.
I'm fairly certain this is illegal, but I could be wrong since it doesn't mandate anything.

We believe this is an excellent initiative. In fact, we think it's such good common sense that we couldn't believe it hadn't been done already. So we reviewed the ten or eleven extant resolutions that we thought might have bearing on the matter. We found only one potential problem area.

As the honorable representative of New Anonia pointed out, the specific requirement for the CDPC to coordinate relief efforts through the IRCO may be a problem. Since the IRCO was established by NSUNR #29 and would cease to exist if that resolution was repealed, this might be ruled a House of Cards violation. We say "might" because we seem to recall a recent ruling on a proposal which cast doubt on whether the IRCO was actually an NSUN instrumentality which would cease to exist upon repeal. It would probably depend on how many angels happened to be dancing on the head of a pin at the moment.

We'd suggest that the text be amended to read:

Support relief efforts in individual UN nations through the appropriate agencies (for example, the International Red Cross Organization), or take responsibility itself should those agencies be unable....

This would also eliminate any possible contention that the proposal contradicted NSUNR #77, "Epidemic Prvention Protocol".

We must also agree with our colleague from New Anonia's concern about the legality of Section 6. We'd recommend replacing it with something encouraging member nations to exert their influence on non-member nations to take the specified actions. That seems unquestionably legal.

One other suggestion.... Section 5 could be read as mandating establishment of CDPC offices in every member nation. This might not be necessary or appropriate. Suggest inserting amending the introductory portion of Section 5 to read:

5) Mandates the establishment of CDPC offices in the member states of the United Nations, as necessary in order to:

Lorelei M. Ahlmann
Ambassador-at-Large

This seems an eminently sensible idea, but we have a few general comments:

In the preamble, you would do well to standardise the introductory words a little: for example, either use 'whereas' or present participles, but not both. It might be better to use 'persons' rather than 'citizens', because diseases rarely pay heed to the formal requirements of citizenship. You can probably cut down from using 'member states of the United Nations' each time: after the first mention, everyone will understand what you mean if you simply say 'member states'.
Resolved to bring decent health standards, coordination, and preparedness to fight infectious disease to the member states of the United Nations and encourage :
This makes little sense as written. I'd suggest changing to 'Resolving', and omitting entirely 'and encourage' (or else your proposal will read 'and encourage strongly encourages...'!).

Then: is there a reason why infectious diseases are specified? We hate to rehash the interminabilities of the debates on the biological weapons bans, but contagious diseases are also worthy of attention (indeed, I'd originally thought Ebola was a contagion, though it now seems I'm wrong).
3) Emphasizes the importance of disseminating crucial information in the prevention and control of disease in the international community which may not hold UN membership;
This seems somewhat redundant. While - obviously - we were fans of the ICPIN resolution too, replicating its every operative clause is probably unnecessary.

All-in-all, though, this looks like it could make a very promising proposal.
--snip--
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=11480906#post11480906

-- Samantha Benson
Acting Chair, The Green Think Tank (http://s13.invisionfree.com/Green_Think_Tank)

Just a few comments in response to those of the distinguished representative of Quintessence of Dust....

This seems an eminently sensible idea, but we have a few general comments:

In the preamble, you would do well to standardise the introductory words a little: for example, either use 'whereas' or present participles, but not both. It might be better to use 'persons' rather than 'citizens', because diseases rarely pay heed to the formal requirements of citizenship. You can probably cut down from using 'member states of the United Nations' each time: after the first mention, everyone will understand what you mean if you simply say 'member states'.



The "whereas" is the problem: sore thumb syndrome. We'd agree with the suggestion of the representative of New Anonia to use "Believing that...". The comment on "citizens" is a good one. We'd recommend substituting "people". And "its" should be "their", since the more likely referent is "states".



Resolved to bring decent health standards, coordination, and preparedness to fight infectious disease to the member states of the United Nations and encourage :

This makes little sense as written. I'd suggest changing to 'Resolving', and omitting entirely 'and encourage' (or else your proposal will read 'and encourage strongly encourages...'!).



Nothing wrong with "resolved", but the rest of the clause is a bit jumbled. We'd suggest omitting it.



Then: is there a reason why infectious diseases are specified? We hate to rehash the interminabilities of the debates on the biological weapons bans, but contagious diseases are also worthy of attention (indeed, I'd originally thought Ebola was a contagion, though it now seems I'm wrong).



Infectious is the proper term. All contagious diseases are infectious; not all infectious diseases are contagious.



3) Emphasizes the importance of disseminating crucial information in the prevention and control of disease in the international community which may not hold UN membership;

This seems somewhat redundant. While - obviously - we were fans of the ICPIN resolution too, replicating its every operative clause is probably unnecessary.



As an operative clause, this really is redundant. But it would be a worthwhile addition to the preambulatory clauses. We'd suggest moving it and revising as follows:

3) Emphasizing the importance of disseminating crucial information on the prevention and control of disease in the international community, to include nations which do not hold UN membership;

Lorelei M. Ahlmann
Ambassador-at-Large

Thanks for all the help, to all of you. Just updated the text of the draft.

Much improved. We'd still recommend moving Clause 3 up into the preambulatory clauses, where it belongs. We'd suggest between the "Deeply concerned" and "Resolving" clauses.

The Prime Minister tells me you can count on 100% support for this from Ausserland. Please make sure you let us know when it's submitted so we can try to scarf up a couple of approvals.

Lorelei M. Ahlmann
Ambassador-at-Large

Just submitted the proposed legislation, hopefully we can reach quorum by Friday. :)

http://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_proposal1/match=disease

Also, please do not endorse the first proposal that I submitted, it has a minor error in it. If you'd like to endorse this proposal, endorse the one that I have endorsed and ignore the one that I haven't. Thank you very much.

@Mods: Would it be possible to change DRAFT to SUBMITTED in my title to this thread?

Also, if anyone is interested in helping me in a TG campaign, let me know.

So how is this thing being funded? Unicorns?

http://www.meninhats.com/images/aram.gif
Aram Koopman
Ambassador representing the Knootian UN Office

So how is this thing being funded? Unicorns?

http://www.meninhats.com/images/aram.gif
Aram Koopman
Ambassador representing the Knootian UN Office

No, leprechauns.

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

This resolution is faulty for two reasons:

1) The case for tackling this problem on an international level, by a UN agency, has not been made.
2) No funding.

http://www.meninhats.com/images/aram.gif
Aram Koopman
Ambassador representing the Knootian UN Office

This resolution is faulty for two reasons:

1) The case for tackling this problem on an international level, by a UN agency, has not been made.
2) No funding.We disagree with both assertions:
1) Disease respects no political boundary. The need for international coordination in disease prevention, as noted in the preamble, is very much an international issue.
2) Funding issues are best handled through a dedicated resolution. Lack of a toss-off funding clause is not a fault.

Leetha Talone
UN Ambassador

This resolution is faulty for two reasons:

1) The case for tackling this problem on an international level, by a UN agency, has not been made.
2) No funding.

http://www.meninhats.com/images/aram.gif
Aram Koopman
Ambassador representing the Knootian UN Office

Why are you such a wet blanket?
Really now?

M. Diegaus, III
Rep from The Genoshan Isles

I dislike feel-good resolutions with no financial mandates. A lot of people will no doubt vote for this because they think they get something for FREE! Whereas, interestingly, this resolution is bound to end up hurting all economies. ((Considering its effects.))

http://www.meninhats.com/images/aram.gif
Aram Koopman
Ambassador representing the Knootian UN Office

This resolution is faulty for two reasons:

1) The case for tackling this problem on an international level, by a UN agency, has not been made.
2) No funding.

http://www.meninhats.com/images/aram.gif
Aram Koopman
Ambassador representing the Knootian UN Office

We're afraid we must strongly disagree with the objection of our distinguished colleague and friend from the Knootian East Indies.

1. Disease, particularly disease of epidemic proportions, is very definitely an international concern. Pathogens do not worry about such things as national borders. To effectively control disease often requires international cooperation. Actions by individual nations to fight disease require information, often available only outside their own borders. The sharing of such information and coordination of efforts is, we believe, an eminently suitable activity for the NSUN. We would be hard-pressed to think up an area where action by the NSUN is more appropriate.

2. The concern of the distinguished representative about funding is obviously, at least in part, a reaction to the recent failure of the "UN Funding Act". We've made it crystal clear, here and in other venues, that we consider that action by this Assembly to be a disgrace and a black mark against it. But we will not let our resentment and indignation on that score prevent us from supporting proposals which we believe are necessary and eminently worthwhile. To do so would be to give the freeloaders and naysayers another "win" -- allowing their selfish behavior to hamstring this organization's efforts to promote the betterment of the people of all our nations.

We believe this proposal is eminently sensible, obviously worthwhile, and clearly within the proper scope of interest of the NSUN. We respectfully urge our colleagues to consider adding their approvals to this proposal and look forward to voting in its favor should it come to vote.

By order of His Royal Highness, the Prince of Ausserland:

Balthasar H. von Aschenbach
Prime Minister

While I agree with Prime Minister von Aschenbach that this is a very necessary piece of legislation, I have to say that I am very concerned at the lack of any mention of funding whatsoever, even voluntary donation. After the resounding defeat of the Funding Act, I for one am very loth to give the freeloaders another free lunch.

Why are you such a wet blanket?
Really now?

M. Diegaus, III
Rep from The Genoshan Isles

He was born that way.

Timothy Schmidt
Bob Flibble's PA

We give our full support to this proposal, or another like it. If we had to list what our nation sees as the UN's main role(s), this issue would no doubt be at the very top of that list.

My nation will vote in support of this resolution

As for the funding, if the resolution requires that the nation's government establish the offices mentioned in the resolution, then wouldn't it be the government's responsibility to fund the research being done in its own country.

As for the funding, if the resolution requires that the nation's government establish the offices mentioned in the resolution, then wouldn't it be the government's responsibility to fund the research being done in its own country.
No. Anyway, the resolution doesn't specify who pays for setting up the offices. I'd assumed it was the CDPC.

"I must concur with Ambassador Talone of Rubina that funding issues are best handled with a dedicated resolution. While the UN should aim to pass a rewritten draft of the Funding Proposal in the near future, the lack of a specific funding clause should not be a barrier to the proposal currently at hand.

"Unless the UN believes that it will be unable to pass a rewritten form of the Funding Proposal in the near future?"

~ Margaret Andrea Morgan Cheltenham
Ambassador to the United Nations
The Librarians

While I agree with Prime Minister von Aschenbach that this is a very necessary piece of legislation, I have to say that I am very concerned at the lack of any mention of funding whatsoever, even voluntary donation. After the resounding defeat of the Funding Act, I for one am very loth to give the freeloaders another free lunch.

You couldn't possibly be more repelled by giving freeloaders a free lunch than we are. But we refuse to pass up opportunities to adopt eminently worthwhile legislation -- legislation that you yourself deem "necessary" -- because of that.

We strongly supported the "UN Funding Act". We would support another reasonable and sound general funding measure. But we sure as hell don't want proposals that come before this Assembly to bog down in niggling arguments about funding. And that, we think, is what would too often happen if each was required to include funding provisions.

Ausserland will continue to support sound, reasonable, worthwhile legislation when brought to our attention. We'll fight the battle of the budget later.

Balthasar H. von Aschenbach
Prime Minister

We will also be encouraging our Delegate in TWP to support this measure going to vote, and we look forward to supporting this measure once it has reached quorum.

Geoffrey Gosford
Prime Minister of Schwarzchild
Minister of Foreign Affairs-Designate, The West Pacific

Seven approvals away from quorum. :)

http://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_proposal1/match=disease

Quorum!

(But only just, with no margin for delegates changing their minds or losing office before the deadline passes...)

And now a tiny bit of breathing room. Congrats, Belarum on getting to quorum.

"Unless the UN believes that it will be unable to pass a rewritten form of the Funding Proposal in the near future?"Some call us a cynical optimist, but as there's only been one recent attempt at a funding act (despite its margin of defeat), we believe that the future does hold passage of such legislation.

I want to personally thank Ausserland for spreading the word to the NSO, as well as Quintessence of Dust for helping me with the TG campaign. I'd also like to apologize publicly to anyone who got more than one telegram from me, it's been a busy week. :p

But a thank you goes out to all those who decided that this legislation was worth the effort to endorse, as well as all those who are plan on voting in favor of it. Thank you all.

We shall be giving our support to a much needed proposal.

I agree with previous member stating that a revised Funding Resolution should be made for all UN departments.

((OOC: Knootian East Indies does not exist IC. It's Knootoss. Blame Jolt for corrupting my Knootoss account. :/ ))

Respectfully, Mr. von Aschenbach, I must disagree with your assessment of the situation. You espouse and defend a few noble sentiments, in the unfortunate defence of a faulty resolution.

First, let's look at what this resolution offers eh?

The first two action clauses do nothing, so we can safely disregard them. We already have the international red cross to give aid in medical emergencies. And why the heck should a United Nations bureaucracy be competing with the private sector to do medical research? Private companies are perfectly capable of doing that.

http://www.meninhats.com/images/aram.gif
Aram Koopman
Ambassador representing the Knootian UN Office

Disease Prevention and Control
A resolution to reduce income inequality and increase basic welfare

What? How does disease prevention and control have ANYTHING to do with income inequality?

We support the proposition, but this statement is ludicrous at best.

My government will fully support this resolution. but a crucial element has not been made clear to me. How much funding will be required to have a well-run and effective organisation? Will the fee be one-off or annual? And will the UN organisation take over from the national one or will the two overlap?

Sorry if these issues are not related to the actual resolution, I'm new here, but I think they should be cleared up. I would be quite anxious about spending valuable resources on funding more bureaucracy with little effect on what I actually voted for.

Panilovian Secretary of State

I would support this resolution of the matter of funding was taken care of, as I do not like putting my vote towards something that does not specifically state whether we will have to personally fund said resolution or not.

Laerbn,
Nazkath Representative.

What? How does disease prevention and control have ANYTHING to do with income inequality?
The author didn't write that bit, it's part of the category description for Social Justice resolutions.

Until the Rep from Karmicaria and her allies submit the improved UNFA, The Federation will fund the CDPC branch office in its own country. I advise other countries to do the same.

Some people just like to complain for complaints' sake. Have a Coke and a smile, and vote already.


Respectfully,
The Honorable Marcus Diegaus III, KCMC, CC
Envoy Extraordinary
Deputy Representative to the United Nations
The Federation of the Genoshan Isles

((OOC: Knootian East Indies does not exist IC. It's Knootoss. Blame Jolt for corrupting my Knootoss account. :/ ))

Respectfully, Mr. von Aschenbach, I must disagree with your assessment of the situation. You espouse and defend a few noble sentiments, in the unfortunate defence of a faulty resolution.

First, let's look at what this resolution offers eh?

The first two action clauses do nothing, so we can safely disregard them. We already have the international red cross to give aid in medical emergencies. And why the heck should a United Nations bureaucracy be competing with the private sector to do medical research? Private companies are perfectly capable of doing that.

http://www.meninhats.com/images/aram.gif
Aram Koopman
Ambassador representing the Knootian UN Office

The honorable gentleman from Knootian East Indies has been around this Assembly quite long enough to know that Ausserlander dwarves are hard-headed, practical people. (Some say "bull-headed".) We don't have a whole lot of interest in noble sentiments and such. We care what resolutions will do for the people of NationStates. In this case, we think the positive, very practical benefits of the resolution will be significant and that it deserves our full support.

The whole focus of this resolution is on epidemiology. That should be clear to anyone who reads it in an unbiased way. It seems equally obvious that the research to be done would be based and focused on the epidemiological aspects of the problem: the efficacy of treatment modes and attempted cures, and the value of prevention strategies. How many private firms are doing that sort of research? We'd imagine very few, since firms which market pharmaceuticals and medical equipment usually conduct research to develop marketable products, not epidemiological research.

Certainly, private firms could be put under contract to do epidemiological research. They would rightly expect to make a profit. And that profit would be on top of their operating costs. To have the research done by a UN instrumentality eliminates the expected profit, thereby reducing total cost. We'd also imagine that, given our assumption that firms now doing medical research (most of them, at least) are not working in this specific area, the UN would end up footing a certain amount of "start-up" costs. And having the research done by the collecting entity would also streamline the process.

Toss out what the gentleman sneers at as "noble sentiments" and what remains is eminently practical and very worthwhile. We have voted FOR the resolution and will continue to give it our strongest support. We respectfully but strongly urge our colleagues to do likewise.

By order of His Royal Highness, the Prince of Ausserland:

Balthasar H. von Aschenbach
Prime Minister

We have voted FOR. I, Emperor Zonkan in the hopes that this resolution will pass, have commissioned the Imperial Senate to look into establishing a permanent research facility to work with our cloners to make our population immune to all illnesses. If this resolution passes, we will be happy to help other like minded nations, UN members or not, to end sickness on this world.

THE SATANIC EMPIRE OF GIBBZ AGREES WE NEED DISEASE PREVENTION AND CONTROL PRONTO!

SIR GIBBZ
SIR GIBBZ

christlerland is against this reso, because it seems to us that it restricts nations from exerting their own power seperatedly.:mad:
it restricts sovereign states from doing what they want inside their state.
why focus on so much international cooperation, and not on a smaller scale system which stresses the cooperation of neighboor states? we already have the WHO (world health organization) to fix this kind of stuff and help states to find ways to cope with deseases and pandemics. :rolleyes:

thanks,
the (currently) Iron Fist United Socialist States of Christlerland

We, The Glorious U.S.S.A. are very interested in bringing this piece of legislation to our delegate. It is in our best interests that some sort of comprehensive system of Disease prevention and control be established for all concerned. However we have a few concerns we would like to address before taking our findings to our regional delegate.

1. Would the U.N. be solely responsible for future quarantine and border security procedures concerning biological agents?

2. What role would each nation play in providing/creating new vaccines and treatment? Would we be allowed to research new diseases in order to fulfill our own personal commitments to our people?

3. How will the new changes affect our current health care system? Wouldn't it make more sense for each nation to set it's own standard instead of a somewhat vague doctrine that does not necessarily benefit all nations?

We, The Glorious U.S.S.A. do hereby issue this statement for the perusal and criticism of all nation who care to issue a response. Which we are most certainly anxious to see. Seig Howdy!


Signed,

The Supreme Prime Minister For Life,


K. Von Shizer

Her Majesty's Kingdom of the Far North of Bautizar seeks to agree with the spirit of the document, but it is concerned with the lack of criteria set in Operative Clause 4, Subsection 2, noting in particular the text reading "...or take responsibility itself should those agencies be unable to respond to an outbreak of disease...." As presented, this section appears to be a blank check for the superseding of local authorities by staff and personnel operating under the jurisdiction of the United Nations, as there are no specific guidelines laid down for circumstances likely to occur in the field.

The matter of funding, previously mentioned by my fellow delegates Ifan ap Rhys of the Gobbannaen Principalities and Aram Koopman of the Knootian UN Office, is something which Her Majesty's Kingdom would like to again point out. While we can agree with the previously-expressed sentiment of financial concerns bogging down passage of the document, we believe that funding is an integral part of this legislation. As of right now, the author of "Disease Prevention and Control" has proposed to create the CDPC but has not established a source of funding for the organization.

Are member nations expected to fund the branches in their nation-states? We can only imagine the cries that will be sent up by developing nation-states with neither the technical expertise or the knowledge to establish and/or maintain these highly-sophisticated facilities. Or are member nation-states going to fund these offices and research centers through their yearly generosity to the U.N.? This latter option makes the offices and their research dependent on member contributions, which are assumed but not mandated.

The author's willingness to ignore the highly-important funding question in the substantiative text of the document, thereby leaving a very large question mark across "Disease Prevention and Control" (my government would like to further point out that there are at least three different answers on the question of funding in this discussion alone) is something that does not sit well with the duly elected authorities of Bautizar and its colonies.

So in conclusion, Her Majesty's Kingdom of the Far North of Bautizar would like to once again reaffirm its support to the spirit of the document, but it is concerned with technical details that appear to have been overlooked. My government has therefore voted in opposition to "Disease Prevention and Control" in hopes that the aforementioned issues will be addressed in a revised later version of this document.

2406 Contrite Decline
Diplomatic Representative of the UNSC of Bautizar

christlerland is against this reso, because it seems to us that it restricts nations from exerting their own power seperatedly.:mad:
it restricts sovereign states from doing what they want inside their state.
why focus on so much international cooperation, and not on a smaller scale system which stresses the cooperation of neighboor states? we already have the WHO (world health organization) to fix this kind of stuff and help states to find ways to cope with deseases and pandemics. :rolleyes:

thanks,
the (currently) Iron Fist United Socialist States of Christlerland

With all due respect to our new colleague from Christerland, we find his arguments far off the mark.

First, exactly what in the resolution "restricts nations from exerting their own power separately"? Each nation can still take whatever steps it deems necessary to control disease within their own borders. The CDPC will act to coordinate these efforts and help nations achieve maximum impact and avoid wasteful, duplicative efforts.

Second, where in NationStates do we find this WHO? We would remind the representative that this is the world of NationStates, not the mythical world of Real Life.

Travilia E. Thwerdock
Ambassador to the United Nations

We, The Glorious U.S.S.A. are very interested in bringing this piece of legislation to our delegate. It is in our best interests that some sort of comprehensive system of Disease prevention and control be established for all concerned. However we have a few concerns we would like to address before taking our findings to our regional delegate.

We'd like to thank the honorable representative of Amerikaners for airing his concerns here and allowing us to respond. We stand ready to be corrected by the distinguished author of the proposal, if necessary, but here are our responses, from our understanding:

1. Would the U.N. be solely responsible for future quarantine and border security procedures concerning biological agents?

We find nothing in the resolution that gives the UN the responsibility or the authority to establish quarantine or border security procedures. The CDPC could certainly recommend them to nations, but the actual procedures and requirements themselves remain completely the prerogative of each nation.

2. What role would each nation play in providing/creating new vaccines and treatment? Would we be allowed to research new diseases in order to fulfill our own personal commitments to our people?

Nothing in the resolution would prevent national governments, corporations, or individuals from conducting whatever research they wanted or producing countermeasures to disease. The only difference we see is that they would benefit from what is learned from the efforts of the CDPC, making their individual efforts less costly and more productive.

3. How will the new changes affect our current health care system? Wouldn't it make more sense for each nation to set it's own standard instead of a somewhat vague doctrine that does not necessarily benefit all nations?

The new changes will affect each nation's health care system only as much as the nation wants it to. Again, each nation will benefit from what the CDPC learns about the spread and control of disease, allowing them to make their individual health care systems safer and more cost-effective.

Travilia E. Thwerdock
Ambassador to the United Nations

Most likely to have Cookesland's support although i would like to read through this one more time.



The Blue Eyed Man
UN Ambassador
U.S.C.

I dislike feel-good resolutions with no financial mandates. A lot of people will no doubt vote for this because they think they get something for FREE! Whereas, interestingly, this resolution is bound to end up hurting all economies. ((Considering its effects.))


Although I share Ambassador Koopman's belief that funding specifications should be included in all proposals, the default here is that each nation will simply have to provide adequate ressources. Which is a mere detail considering the positive outcomes this resolution will have in the field of health. Ensuring the health of our peoples supersedes minor economic concerns.


Christelle Zyryanov (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Christelle_Zyryanov),
Ambassador to the United Nations,
PDSRA

i think this person was just a little pedantic if you ask me. no matter how the grammar was, the message still got through. if someone who speaks another language is asking you, in their native tongue, if they want a glass of water for instance, it doesnt matter how they show or tell you, the message will still get through to you in the end. unless you're incredibly stupid, of course.

Improper grammar. Try "Believing that the member states..."

I've seen stupidity in the UN before, but I think nations are smart enough to figure this out.

Looks good to me.

Improper grammar. Try "Wishing the bring decent healt standards, coordination, and preparedness to fight infectious disease to member states, hereby:"

Looks good.

Seems okay.

Not sure this is necessary.

No need for a "mandates" here. It should just be "Creates the UN blah blah blah"

This is good.

Looks good to me, but the IRCO bit might be a HoC concern.

I'm fairly certain this is illegal, but I could be wrong since it doesn't mandate anything.

The honorable gentleman from Knootian East Indies has been around this Assembly quite long enough to know that Ausserlander dwarves are hard-headed, practical people. (Some say "bull-headed".) We don't have a whole lot of interest in noble sentiments and such. We care what resolutions will do for the people of NationStates. In this case, we think the positive, very practical benefits of the resolution will be significant and that it deserves our full support.

The whole focus of this resolution is on epidemiology. That should be clear to anyone who reads it in an unbiased way. It seems equally obvious that the research to be done would be based and focused on the epidemiological aspects of the problem: the efficacy of treatment modes and attempted cures, and the value of prevention strategies. How many private firms are doing that sort of research? We'd imagine very few, since firms which market pharmaceuticals and medical equipment usually conduct research to develop marketable products, not epidemiological research.

Certainly, private firms could be put under contract to do epidemiological research. They would rightly expect to make a profit. And that profit would be on top of their operating costs. To have the research done by a UN instrumentality eliminates the expected profit, thereby reducing total cost. We'd also imagine that, given our assumption that firms now doing medical research (most of them, at least) are not working in this specific area, the UN would end up footing a certain amount of "start-up" costs. And having the research done by the collecting entity would also streamline the process.

Toss out what the gentleman sneers at as "noble sentiments" and what remains is eminently practical and very worthwhile. We have voted FOR the resolution and will continue to give it our strongest support. We respectfully but strongly urge our colleagues to do likewise.

By order of His Royal Highness, the Prince of Ausserland:

Balthasar H. von Aschenbach
Prime Minister

What Knootian East Indies? We lost that lovely little colony years ago. It's called Tanah Burung (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Tanah_Burung)now. The Might of the Knootian colonial Empire may not ring as powerful as it once did, but we still have the force of a superior argument.

This resolution does nothing useful, except impede on the authority of the International Red Cross and have a huge internationalist bureaucracy do the work of fine Knootian corporations.

You see, your facial-hairily impaired Excellency, your statements imply a precision in this resolution where none exists. You claim that the focus of the resolution is on epidemiology yet that word is not used a single time in the entire resolution. The resolution does not refer to epidemiology or epidemics, but instead consistently refers to "disease". This gives this UN bureaucracy a properly -Communist- scope that the Dutch Democratic Republic is entirely unwilling to approve or fund.

We're talking about an unfunded mandate for an organisation that aims to destroy and usurp the entire private medical research market, using taxpayer money.

We're talking about a resolution that is already receiving the endorsement of all the moronic and disgusting first-time-speakers in this house, because they think they're getting someone for free again. This IS a Free Lunch resolution.

Really. If I were a sensible voting member of the of the NSUN, I wouldn't allow a bunch of garden gnomes to tell me what to do.

Think Independent. Vote NAY!

http://www.meninhats.com/images/aram.gif
Aram Koopman
Ambassador representing the Knootian UN Office

With all due respect to our new colleague from Christerland, we find his arguments far off the mark.

First, exactly what in the resolution "restricts nations from exerting their own power separately"? Each nation can still take whatever steps it deems necessary to control disease within their own borders. The CDPC will act to coordinate these efforts and help nations achieve maximum impact and avoid wasteful, duplicative efforts.

Second, where in NationStates do we find this WHO? We would remind the representative that this is the world of NationStates, not the mythical world of Real Life.

Travilia E. Thwerdock
Ambassador to the United Nations

all right, my bad- :D

i am pretty new, so i tend to forget these things- i am in a mun mindset

<snip>
Really. If I were a sensible voting member of the of the NSUN, I wouldn't allow a bunch of garden gnomes to tell me what to do.

Think Independent. Vote NAY!

http://www.meninhats.com/images/aram.gif
Aram Koopman
Ambassador representing the Knootian UN Office

"We must be glad that you are not a sensible voting member of the NSUN, then, as evidenced by your drastic exaggeration and misinterpretation of this resolution's effects, and your downright incomprehension of the main thrust of the Ausserland Ambassador's argument.

"To wit; this resolution will not "destroy and usurp the entire private medical research market", because by and large private firms are not doing the necessary research; furthermore, you appear to be under the misapprehension that this resolution outlaws private medical research!

"And further, you seem to view this resolution entirely in terms of economics - the money it will take to fund it, the money that will be lost - which would be entirely appropriate in an economic resolution, which this is not. Think for a moment, Ambassador, not of money but of lives. I assure you that a single life is worth more than its weight in Euros!

"So I'm glad to hear that, as an insensible voting member of the NSUN, you'll be allowing the Compliance Ministry into the Knootian East Indies to enforce this resolution."

~ Margaret Andrea Morgan Cheltenham, FIHTL Ambassador to the UN

We, The Glorious U.S.S.A. have officially been accepted to the United Nations. As a result of the response to our open letter as answered by Ambassador Twerdock, we shall be voting for the Disease Control and Prevention resolution. It seems to us that the resolution itself serves only to bolster our own efforts. This is very acceptable and indeed, welcome.



Signed,

W.F. Bailey
U.S.S.A. Ambassador to the U.N.

Signed,

Hieronimus Spank
U.S.S.A. Foreign Policy Minister

Signed,

K. Von Shizer
Supreme Prime Minister for Life

i think this person was just a little pedantic if you ask me. no matter how the grammar was, the message still got through. if someone who speaks another language is asking you, in their native tongue, if they want a glass of water for instance, it doesnt matter how they show or tell you, the message will still get through to you in the end. unless you're incredibly stupid, of course.
OOC:...The hell? I was giving some help with the proposal. That was before it was submitted. In case you didn't notice, the author of the proposal took just about all the advice I gave.

I can't see how anyone would be against this, the only thing missing is the funding problem. Cookesland votes FOR

The Blue Eyed Man
UN Ambassador
The United States of Cookesland

Oh yes, and in case you couldn't tell, I happen to be FOR.

Lord Edward Black
Navanonian UN Representative

My, my, my, the representative of Knootian East Indies certainly has gotten his knickers in a knot, hasn't he? Well, we'll try our best not to sink to his level of offensiveness.

What Knootian East Indies? We lost that lovely little colony years ago. It's called Tanah Burung (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Tanah_Burung)now. The Might of the Knootian colonial Empire may not ring as powerful as it once did, but we still have the force of a superior argument.

The nation in question is officially enrolled in this Assembly as the Knootian East Indies. If the officials of the nation can't be bothered changing that, we can't be bothered about it either.

This resolution does nothing useful, except impede on the authority of the International Red Cross and have a huge internationalist bureaucracy do the work of fine Knootian corporations.

The pertinent parts of the resolution were carefully tailored to avoid infringing on the prerogatives and responsibilities of the IRCO. This is simply a red herring.

You see, your facial-hairily impaired Excellency, your statements imply a precision in this resolution where none exists. You claim that the focus of the resolution is on epidemiology yet that word is not used a single time in the entire resolution. The resolution does not refer to epidemiology or epidemics, but instead consistently refers to "disease". This gives this UN bureaucracy a properly -Communist- scope that the Dutch Democratic Republic is entirely unwilling to approve or fund.

If it looks like a duck, waddles like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we're sure that most of the members of this Assembly could recognize it as a duck. Anyone who understands what the term "epidemiology" means and reads the resolution with any intent of understanding it would recognize in a heartbeat that this is what the resolution is about. This is perhaps the most absurd argument against a resolution that we've heard yet.

We're talking about an unfunded mandate for an organisation that aims to destroy and usurp the entire private medical research market, using taxpayer money.

More nonsense. We pointed out the fallacy in this argument earlier. We won't bother repeating ourselves.

We're talking about a resolution that is already receiving the endorsement of all the moronic and disgusting first-time-speakers in this house, because they think they're getting someone for free again. This IS a Free Lunch resolution.

How nice. The representative dismisses all new members who speak in favor of the resolution as "moronic and disgusting", does he? We consider this comment to be thoroughly inappropriate and offensive. And here, finally, we come to the heart of the representative's bizarre objections to the resolution. He is so fixated on his resentment of the failure of the "UN Funding Act" that he's attempting to dredge up any argument he can imagine, no matter how spurious and misleading, against this fine resolution.

Really. If I were a sensible voting member of the of the NSUN, I wouldn't allow a bunch of garden gnomes to tell me what to do.

How nice. The representative now lowers himself to sling an insult that he knows full well is grossly offensive to our dwarven population. We'll swallow our resentment. Actually, we're quite pleased that he included this comment. It demonstrates quite clearly the level he's willing to sink to try to torpedo this legislation.

Think Independent. Vote NAY!

We respectfully suggest that our colleagues think intelligently and vote in favor of the resolution.

Balthasar H. von Aschenbach
Prime Minister

OOC: Ausserland, with respect, I do not post with KIE out of choice. Jolt fucked up my account. Go complain with the admins of this crappy forum. God knows I tried. If you're going to ignore RP, I'm not going to reply to your post.

Thank you.

Honorable Ambassador, I present this Letter onto you, by order of my father, His Royal Higness, Prince Rylan.

To the Honorable Ambassador to Balarum,

I bid my warm greetings to you. I wish to personally commend you for this resolution, and pledge our full support of your endeavours to improve health care in the world.

*signed and sealed with the official royal seal of the Principality of New Avarin*

Rylan,
Prince Sovereign of New Avarin.

Marek,
Prince Regent of New Avarin
Chief Consul & Head Ambassador

We fully agree with this resolution and support it whole-heartedly.

While we do understand the objections that have been raised with regards to funding we are confident that when the revised version of the UN funding act is submitted it will pass and as such it is not necessary to include funding details in this resolution. In the mean time Sanguinex will provide the funding for any CDPC facility established in our nation.

Sebastian Rath
Sanguinoi Ambassador to the UN

Sensible and reasonable legislation. The New Cultural Revolution supports.

Benedictions,

OOC: Ausserland, with respect, I do not post with KIE out of choice. Jolt fucked up my account. Go complain with the admins of this crappy forum. God knows I tried. If you're going to ignore RP, I'm not going to reply to your post.

Thank you.

OOC: Reply or don't reply. Your choice. As far as I'm concerned, I didn't ignore roleplay, I engaged in it. In your sig, you state that Knootian East Indies is acting as Knootoss. You say nothing about the new name of your nation, which you could easily have done (unless your account problems extend to being unable to change the sig of that account). As far as you inform the people here, the nation is Knootian East Indies, acting for Knootoss. Then you criticized the Ausserland delegation for using the "wrong" name. They called you on it. If that bothers you, I regret it, but I don't feel obliged to apologize for continuing a piece of IC play you started.

Second, where in NationStates do we find this WHO?

I believe you will find him in the archives of the stranger's bar. The Doctor (Who?) came in, entered his tardis and was followed by an invisible Wrabbit.

OOC: Reply or don't reply. Your choice. As far as I'm concerned, I didn't ignore roleplay, I engaged in it. In your sig, you state that Knootian East Indies is acting as Knootoss. You say nothing about the new name of your nation, which you could easily have done (unless your account problems extend to being unable to change the sig of that account). As far as you inform the people here, the nation is Knootian East Indies, acting for Knootoss. Then you criticized the Ausserland delegation for using the "wrong" name. They called you on it. If that bothers you, I regret it, but I don't feel obliged to apologize for continuing a piece of IC play you started.

OOC: Sorry, butI only called you on it IC when you used the name Knootian East Indies AGAIN after I had politely asked you not to use it the first time. I'll just assume you've been talking to someone else all the time.

Ta.

OOC: Reply or don't reply. Your choice. As far as I'm concerned, I didn't ignore roleplay, I engaged in it. In your sig, you state that Knootian East Indies is acting as Knootoss. You say nothing about the new name of your nation, which you could easily have done (unless your account problems extend to being unable to change the sig of that account). As far as you inform the people here, the nation is Knootian East Indies, acting for Knootoss. Then you criticized the Ausserland delegation for using the "wrong" name. They called you on it. If that bothers you, I regret it, but I don't feel obliged to apologize for continuing a piece of IC play you started.
OOC: Actually, his sig says "Due to account problems with my main nation, this account is acting as Knootoss for the time being".

I understand what Knoot's doing because it's similar to what I did with Iron Felix, the difference being that Knoot isn't doing it by choice, he's doing it because the Knootoss account is borked. When he says "this account is acting as Knootoss", he's just referring to the forum account, not the nation of Knootian East Indies. I'm not sure what KEI even is (or used to be). When I deal with KEI I assume (and RP as if) I'm dealing directly with Knootoss, not Knootian East Indies.

I believe you will find him in the archives of the stranger's bar. The Doctor (Who?) came in, entered his tardis and was followed by an invisible Wrabbit.

And if I remember correctly, that was actually The Doctor's second appearance in the bar.

OOC: I'm not sure what KEI even is (or used to be).A colony, probably vaguely similar to a VOC holding. It later was "taken" by another player, giving us Tanah Burang (or however it was spelled). There's quite a bit of RP history there, but it's neither here nor there.

For what it's worth, we on the NS side have done everything we possibly can to fix the Knootoss account, and there's literally nothing we can do about it. We've informed Jolt and they're either unwilling or unable to fix it (or the handful of other accounts similarly screwed up). This is a somewhat unusual problem, with probably less than a dozen active players affected by it. I doubt that's any consolation, but...

OOC: Sorry, butI only called you on it IC when you used the name Knootian East Indies AGAIN after I had politely asked you not to use it the first time. I'll just assume you've been talking to someone else all the time.

Ta.

OOC: You did mention that in an earlier post. I stand corrected. Now, could we return this thread to discussion of the resolution at vote?

1) Who decides what "disease" is. What classifies under "disease". I see a gross missapropriation of funds in the future should someone decide alcoholism is a "disease" and tries fixing that. Seems stupid to me.

2) I see the words "strongly encourage" alot. By what means? Can't anyone "strongly encourage" anything? What power would this group have to see their message is heeded?

3) I am new to this. This is my first post. Should I expect to see debates on grammer? That's what the majority of posts and replies seem to be here. Few are debating the proposal itself, more how it was written. Changing the words does not define.

We hope this new agency helps in the elimination of persistent zombie virus outbreaks. We are donating one billiion dollars if this resolution passes to create an international depository for rage virus medicine and VODAIS plague medicine. It is our wish to support the elimination of the problem of zombification through appropriate medical controls. We further would like to support the creation of "public health" teams to hunt minor outbreaks of mutant viruses, and other threats to humanity.

Regards,

Rex Smiley, UN Representative

Ambassador Koopman,

Is your country in a rut? Can it not pay for a CDPC branch in its own territories?
You complain that this is a "free lunch" resolution. Well, guess what. Until there is some official legislation, then yes, it is a free lunch resolution. Does it mean it'll work any less? No. It'll work without funding, for now, until the revised Funding Act is submitted.

You, sir, are a soggy wet blanket. Crawl in a dryer and come out fluffy, and then you can join in, in intelligent conversation and debate.


Respectfully,
The Honorable Marcus Diegaus III, KCMC, CC
Senior Ambassador-select
Permanent Representative (select) to the United Nations
The Federation of the Genoshan Isles

We'd like to welcome the new member from Vacilo to the Assembly. We have some thoughts in response to his questions.

1) Who decides what "disease" is. What classifies under "disease". I see a gross missapropriation of funds in the future should someone decide alcoholism is a "disease" and tries fixing that. Seems stupid to me.

When a term isn't defined in a resolution, you go with the most common, generally accepted meaning of the term. Yes, there might be some debate about whether a specific condition is or is not a disease, but we think those times would be rare. And your example, alcoholism, is widely recognized by medical authorities as a disease.

2) I see the words "strongly encourage" alot. By what means? Can't anyone "strongly encourage" anything? What power would this group have to see their message is heeded?

"Strongly encourages", "urges", and similar clauses are what we call non-mandatory clauses. They're statements of principle by the Assembly, but nations are not required to follow them. Some nations pay careful attention to them. Others yawn and say "So what?"

3) I am new to this. This is my first post. Should I expect to see debates on grammer? That's what the majority of posts and replies seem to be here. Few are debating the proposal itself, more how it was written. Changing the words does not define.

We have a saying in Ausserland: "The law means what the law says." The law speaks to us with words. Grammar is the way we put those words together to make it clear what they mean. Poor use of grammar can warp the meaning of a resolution. Good use of grammar can make it clear and unambiguous.

There's another reason why people try to help correct grammar in proposals they support. They want the proposal to be in the best possible shape when it goes up for approval. Bad grammar and sloppy spelling put a proposal at a disadvantage. It makes it look like the author didn't care enough to do things right.

Now, there's a problem with that. We have valuable members of the Assembly for whom English is a second language. Sometimes, they have trouble with the strange quirks and illogical rules of English grammar. Most of us who take the NSUN seriously have respect for their ability to communicate in more than one language and are glad to help them "tune up" the language.

Effective use of grammar helps promote clarity and eliminate ambiguity. Poor grammar makes a proposal look careless and sloppy. That's why you see a lot of people giving it attention.

Lorelei M. Ahlmann
Ambassador-at-Large

Quote:
Disease Prevention and Control
A resolution to reduce income inequality and increase basic welfare.

Category: Social Justice
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Belarum

The General Assembly of the United Nations,

Believing that the member states of not only the United Nations, but the world should be committed to the health and well-being of their people,

Deeply concerned by the potential lack of prevention and control of disease in the respective member states of the United Nations, as well as the potential lack of coordination between agencies of nations in bringing medical advances and preventative measures to nations of the UN in fighting disease,

Emphasizing the importance of disseminating crucial information concerning the prevention and control of disease throughout the international community, to include nations which may not hold membership in the United Nations,

Resolving to bring decent health standards as well as coordination and preparedness to combat disease to as many nations as possible, hereby:

1) Strongly encourages nations to fund research into preventative measures and cures for disease and disseminate such information internationally;

2) Further encourages coordination between the existing health agencies of nations in fighting and controlling disease;

3) Establishes the United Nations Center for Disease Prevention and Control (CDPC), with the mission to:
-identify, assess, and communicate current and emerging threats to human health from disease,
-actively research treatment, cures, and preventative measures concerning disease,
-coordinate efforts between UN member states in preventing and controlling disease;

4) Mandates the establishment of CDPC offices in the member states of the United Nations, as necessary in order to:
-research ways and possibilities to prevent and control disease,
-support relief efforts in individual UN nations through the appropriate agencies or take responsibility itself should those agencies be unable to respond to an outbreak of disease,
-disseminate crucial information and research concerning disease internationally in a quick and orderly fashion;

5) Strongly encourages nations to:
-create agencies concerned with the prevention and control of disease,
-research cures and preventative measures to combat disease,
-disseminate information internationally which could be used to impede the spread of disease.


Disease: impairs normal functioning and is typically manifested by distinguishing signs and symptoms

also:a harmful development (as in a social institution)

Finally a resolution to get rid of the U.N.!! The U.N. is most definitly a disease organism. The U.N. impairs the normal funtions that nations go through every day. Since I'm busy cleaning out the social disease of foriegners from my country does that mean the CDPC will be forced to help me remove the social disease of foreigners (I'm trying for a more pure nation)? Will it help quarantine all things that I define as a disease?

I'm not to concerned about disease crossing my borders from refugees (yet another social disease), my 5 mile strip of land mines around my country tend to prevent movement by land. Since everyone in my country in the military the get all the best medical treatment in the first place. All the best vaccine you name it.

What if someone calls my country a disease and tries to wipe me out? I will not support this ridiculous resolution.

We will not pay for a CDPC branch in our own territories, because we do not want one. Government healthcare in this country is limited to an oversight body directed by the State-Secretary of Private Healthcare, Welfare and Sports. Healthcare and fighting disease is a private matter. We'd rather not have a bureaucratic international body meddle with our advanced private healthcare system like we are some Third World nation in need of assistance.

Research in the Dutch Democratic Republic, on the other hand, is directed by the State-Secretary of Research who reports to the minister of Education. We don't need another body to do any of the work that is already being done by our government. Especially when the UN is going to research anything "disease"-related. Is fighting alcohol addiction really something that needs to be tackled by an international body? It seems to me a national issue.

The claim that this proposal does not need funding is frankly preposterous. Refusing to fund this baby seems to me the perfect way to defeat it.

http://www.meninhats.com/images/aram.gif
Aram Koopman
Ambassador representing the Knootian UN Office

OOC: Ambassador Koopman,

In the wonderful land of RP, funding is as real at partially-human creatures who run countries, and gnomes who staff the offices of the UN. Guess what? It'll be funded regardless. If I say the Genoshan CDPC branch will be funded, it's gonna be funded.

IC: You make zero sense. Or maybe I'm hungry, and don't have the time/energy/patience to deal with your nonsensical ramblings.
You're voting against. Fine. Make your point known, without talking crap about others.

Brig (select-ret.) M. Diegaus, III
FGI UN Rep

We will not pay for a CDPC branch in our own territories, because we do not want one. Government healthcare in this country is limited to an oversight body directed by the State-Secretary of Private Healthcare, Welfare and Sports. Healthcare and fighting disease is a private matter. We'd rather not have a bureaucratic international body meddle with our advanced private healthcare system like we are some Third World nation in need of assistance.

Research in the Dutch Democratic Republic, on the other hand, is directed by the State-Secretary of Research who reports to the minister of Education. We don't need another body to do any of the work that is already being done by our government. Especially when the UN is going to research anything "disease"-related. Is fighting alcohol addiction really something that needs to be tackled by an international body? It seems to me a national issue.

The claim that this proposal does not need funding is frankly preposterous. Refusing to fund this baby seems to me the perfect way to defeat it.

http://www.meninhats.com/images/aram.gif
Aram Koopman
Ambassador representing the Knootian UN Office

It seems that, as Ambassador Koopman becomes more and more frustrated that he can find no convincing arguments against this resolution, those he advances become more and more groundless.

He pronounces that fighting disease is a "private matter". Yet he touts his government's efforts in the field. Which is it? We're told that his government directs research in the field, and that he doesn't want some international body messing in it. Now, in Ausserland, our Ministry for Health and Science coordinates health-related research efforts. They do a very good job. But we recognize that, although we have some fine people involved, nobody's perfect.

Unlike the apparent case of the researchers in Knootoss, we don't know everything. So could we benefit from an internationally coordinated effort to share information and knowledge gained? Could the people of all our nations benefit from properly coordinated efforts by nations to fight disease? Could the coordination of research efforts minimize wasteful duplication and enhance the effectiveness of these efforts? We believe the answers are clearly and unarguably "yes", and we'll be more than happy to participate. We'll be pleased to provide a facility in Ausserland for a CDPC office, if desired, and to furnish quarters and subsistence for assigned personnel.

The representative also misstates the position of the proponents of the resolution concerning funding. Of course the CDPC will require funding. Who has said otherwise? It will be funded just as almost all the NSUN instrumentalities established by past resolutions have been funded. The representative does the cause of fiscal responsibility in this organization no service by his narrow-minded and chauvinistic statements, his gratuitous slurs on other nations, or his desperate reaching to find reasons to torpedo this excellent resolution.

Balthasar H. von Aschenbach
Prime Minister

OOC: In the wonderful world of RP, your decision to fund this institution can equally be met with a decision by other nations to not fund it. And, given the way most UN nations have acted so far, one can only assume that most of them endorse the principle without actually expecting to pay for it.

IC:
Crap about others? The resolution is a badly-worded fluffie abomination. I'm rather glad that only a minority of nations is likely to end up funding it, so it is just a bit of useless feel-good bureaucracy.

-Aram Koopman

The NSUN Nuncia of the Eternal Kawaii steps up to the podium for a brief statement:

"As a nation in the midst of a mass exodus and finding our people rubbing shoulders with all manner of foreigners, we strongly support this initiative. It is vital for the well-being of both guest and host that proper standards of health and hygiene be maintained."

Stepping down from the dais, she comments privately to one of her aides, "This Center thing will teach the heathens how to use soap and water, right? You wouldn't believe some of the delegations I've had to sit next to."

OOC: In the wonderful world of RP, your decision to fund this institution can equally be met with a decision by other nations to not fund it. And, given the way most UN nations have acted so far, one can only assume that most of them endorse the principle without actually expecting to pay for it.

IC:
Crap about others? The resolution is a badly-worded fluffie abomination. I'm rather glad that only a minority of nations is likely to end up funding it, so it is just a bit of useless feel-good bureaucracy.

-Aram Koopman

We can't help but wonder if the representative of Knootoss is being deliberately obtuse or is so blinded by his obsession with the failure of the "UN Funding Act" that he's incapable of seeing reality.

The NSUN, time after time, in resolution after resolution, has extablished instrumentalities. Those instrumentalities have been funded. This one will be too, whether or not individual nations choose to support it financially. His sneering comment flies in the face of both organizational history and logic.

The resolution is not badly worded. It is quite well-written. It is not "fluffie". It will accomplish something eminently practical and worthwhile. The representative can call it "feel-good bureaucracy" if he likes. That's certainly his right. But we highly doubt that any thinking nation which has followed his chain of ever-more-baseless arguments will be persuaded to agree with him.

Balthasar H. von Aschenbach
Prime Minister

Ambassador Koopman,

Nowhere in this resolution does it state that each country must fund thier own center. Nor would I support such a measure that would. Funding should be budgeted accordingly.

Further, the honorable Prime Minister von Aschenbach from Ausserland sums up the other merits of my argument, so I will not repeat them.

The world is a community, and the sharing of information regarding the prevention, treatment & control of diseases would save countless lives in the long run.

However, I understand, and too some extent share your concerns about what classifies a disease. I note, though, that there is no mandate of providing treatment for diseases. Only that the centers would research and disseminate information.

I ask the Ambassador from Knootas, why would you be against such an agency?

Respectfully,

His Highness, Marek
Prince Royal of New Avarin; Abassador-at-Large & General Consul.

The Commonwealth of Shugarlands would like to offuh its support for the current UN measure, and urge our regional representative to vote in favuh of the measure.

We of the Commonweal are a small group of people. We pride ourselves on our hospitality and endeavor to make ourselves and others comfortable in our modest confines. Being so open to visituhs, one nasty bout of avian flu or such could wipe out better than half our population. The word 'security' does not begin and end with metal detectors at the airports and armed guards at the borders. The concept of security is rooted in stability. And sick nations simply are not stable. Let's have our magnificent UN body take up a task that is not military or dictatorial in any way for once. Let us encourage ourselves and our neighbors to take care of the health of our own, and share the most basic of knowledge, that of life, with our neighbors.

Sincerely,

Guvnuh Perry, Commonwealth of Shugarlands

Nowhere in this resolution does it state that each country must fund thier own center. Nor would I support such a measure that would. Funding should be budgeted accordingly.
So it should. Which makes the fact that the the UN is currently funded by the voluntary donations of a couple of dozen nations a bit of a problem. TANSTAAFL: if you don't fund a centre in your country, the UN won't be able to afford to do it.

I am against the prevention of Disease, as we all learned, learnt, Got smartyfied from the Nekomimi Flu incident Disease breeds Healthier people, why if we were to kill off a lot of folks with disease just imagine how much stronger the race would be.

DOWN WITH PREVENTION,
AN OUNCE OF PREVENTION BREEDS WEAKNESS.

Go away and never come back.

Lord Edward Black
Navanonian UN Representative

I support this but beleive that a "partner" bill should come through to deal with the funding for past, current, and future orginizations.

Excuse this post if the UN funding act deat with this, but i was not a UN member at the time of it.

Excuse this post if the UN funding act deat with this, but i was not a UN member at the time of it.

The UN Funding Act would've dealt with the problem of funding, however it failed so it's a moot point.

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

This resolution should go beyond words to help people of the world understand the dangers of infectious diseases. I disagree with those who think the resolution has "obvious" wording--if the problem were obvious enough to the world, it would have been solved by now.

As long as this resolution has backbone--all too uncommon in the UN's past--Melle Hondo is proud to support it.

D.M. Cooper
Secretary of Health
Melle Hondo Public Health Works

“Strongly encourages nations to fund research into preventative measures and cures for disease and disseminate such information internationally;”

How does the UN intend to encourage a nation to fund research?

-support relief efforts in individual UN nations through the appropriate agencies or take responsibility itself should those agencies be unable to respond to an outbreak of disease,

I hope they would only take on the responsibility on the request of the host nation!!!


But most of all I would not like for “some” nations to know our national infectious disease control…..for the sake of our national security.

-disseminate information internationally which could be used to impede the spread of disease.

However, I do like the idea of a Program where we are able to find cures for diseases and disabilities….perhaps this resolution can be re-written without some of the pork 

With respect for your honorable representatives,
Geoffrey E. Ward, UN Ambassador
The Peoples Republic of Wezani

So it should. Which makes the fact that the the UN is currently funded by the voluntary donations of a couple of dozen nations a bit of a problem. TANSTAAFL: if you don't fund a centre in your country, the UN won't be able to afford to do it.

The representative of Gobbannium must have access to information we don't. Exactly where do we find "the fact that the the UN is currently funded by the voluntary donations of a couple of dozen nations"? And where can we verify the statement that "if you don't fund a centre in your country, the UN won't be able to afford to do it"?

Lorelei M. Ahlmann
Ambassador-at-Large

if the problem were obvious enough to the world, it would have been solved by now.

D.M. Cooper
Secretary of Health
Melle Hondo Public Health Works

Apparently you don't realize that while a problem may be obvious, the solution to said problem might not be.

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

This is bothering me, to no end.

Either people are not caring about grammar, or they are ignorant.

There IS No Such Thing As A Free Lunch
If you all are throwing this concept around, then spell it right, hot-dangit!
TINSTAAFL

TANSTAAFL results in:
There ARE No Such Things As A Free Lunch. Inequal Quantities.
Bad grammatical usages by "learned" men, women, gnomes, inter-sexed, etc.


M. Diegaus III,
FGI UN Rep

A = Ain't

If "ain't" is good enough for Heinlein, it's good enough for me.

Wouldn't be an issue if the UN had some reliable form of funding.

/hijack

I fully support this proposal. Although each nation state has the right to implement their own healthcare policies within their borders as they see fit, I believe there needs to be an international cooperative organization to monitor patterns in communicable diseases throughout the world.

Infectious disease has an impact on ALL nations regardless of political boundaries, and an outbreak in one nation state has the power to detrimentally effect all other nation states whether through direct spread of infection with immigration and travel, or indirectly through the economy. The sharing of health information internationally and the pooling of resources can also save lives and speed up research in finding cures for all citizens of the world. I believe in promoting the health and well-being of all human beings regardless of political boundaries. I understand why some would have concerns about imposing upon the sovreignty of each nation state, but disease knows no boundaries, and I believe this issue needs to be addressed by the entire international community as a whole.

x-posted to my region and political party's boards.

Regards,
President Rea
Republic of Avoidants

This whole idea of destroyng disease is a good idea however it negates the idea of biological weopons and also diseases ae prety well under control so the extra spending is unnessesary

Many years ago, on my homeworld, Concord Dawn, we managed to overcome the Karatos Plague. Now, of course, everyone born on the planet is innoculated against it at birth, but I've seen what it does to offworlders who become infected when visiting -- blindness within 40 minutes and then brain death within an hour. If we had something like the CDPC, those offworlders might've known about the Karatos Plague in advance and taken the necessary precautions before visiting Concord Dawn.

New Vandalia casts its vote FOR the proposal on the floor.

Ailyn Vel (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/images/Ailyn.jpg)
New Vandalian Ambassador to the UN

Proposal submitted, you can find it here:

http://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_proposal1/match=disease

I'm trying my hand at some legislation which could potentially give the UN a sort of WHO organization with a concentration in preventing and curing diseases like HIV/AIDS, Ebola, etc. I formatted the resolution sort of like the ICPIN resolution, which I liked very much in substance and appearance. I'd like to get some constructive criticism, so let me know if you like it or hate it, but either way explain the pros and cons of the legislation at hand please.

i think that your law is great. and i think that it gives hope to all the liberals. and it proves that my leader is wrong, that liberal laws can be paseed. i voted yes on your preposition. i can wait till tomorrow.;););):):):):)

Our Supreme Leader has commanded us to make it clear that no funding for this measure shall be forthcoming from our coffers. The encouragement of Natural Selection is a top priority for our nation, and we do not intend to interfere with it for petty political purposes.

We also feel that the battling of disease furthers the natural selection of said diseases, making these microbes more powerful and more resistant to our relief efforts. Thus, we will begin to quarantine all persons of any nationality who have the misfortune of becoming contagious within our borders.

Those who survive and are declared clear of infection will be allowed to resume their lives; those who die will buried in lots of 50, near the borders of our land. Note that this mass burial does not apply to foreigners, whose corpses shall be thrown over the fences of their homelands, as is appropriate to our customs.

We happily invite your doctors and scientists to study the effects of disease and to test various remedies on our sick, so long as you remember that they too are subject to quarantine once any sign of infection is noticed.

This whole idea of destroyng disease is a good idea however it negates the idea of biological weopons
Good thing we already banned those, then.

Lord Edward Black
Navanonian UN Representative

This is just another blatant attempt by the reactionary bulwarks within the UN to force their 'globalist' transnationalist corporatism onto Socialist Republics in these guises. Healthcare is the priority of the State, and the Socialist State of Andaras will use it's subsidies and public funding to tackle these populace problems together as a people united in socialist solidarity. Healthcare is universal and free in my great state, although with all welfare.

Answer: No

Samuel J. Benson, Chairman of the Radical Workers Marxist Party.

Next time, try reading the proposal.

Lord Edward Black
Navanonian UN Representative

Go away and never come back.

Lord Edward Black
Navanonian UN Representative

Next time, try reading the proposal.

Lord Edward Black
Navanonian UN Representative

There is a difference between role-playing and just being bitchy. You haven't managed to properly balance the one against the other yet.

Knock off the "in-character" flaming. Now.

Good thing we already banned those, then.

Lord Edward Black
Navanonian UN Representative

I don't know how biological weapons has anything to do with this proposal and if it does isn't it a GOOD THING if these weapons are rendered useless??

:gundge:

So, the "A" stands for "ain't".


I can dig it.

I retract my former statement.


M. Diegaus III
FGI UN Rep

The representative of Gobbannium must have access to information we don't. Exactly where do we find "the fact that the the UN is currently funded by the voluntary donations of a couple of dozen nations"?
I looked in the pickle barrel.

The resolution Disease Prevention and Control was passed 9,095 votes to 2,134, and implemented in all UN member nations.

Wo0t. :)

I'd again like to thank all those that voted for this resolution, and give a special thanks to all those that helped make the final product.

Concordo em plenitude com as propostas aqui apresentadas, mais atrevo-me a dizer que deveria ser formado um estado federalista no que diz respito a estes assuntos

P.S This is writen in Portuguese, Tugaria National languge

Concordo em plenitude com as propostas aqui apresentadas, mais atrevo-me a dizer que deveria ser formado um estado federalista no que diz respito a estes assuntos

P.S This is writen in Portuguese, Tugaria National languge

Ruf ypuid haqd desa oui taleta du bucd eh y myhkiyka pacetac Ahkmecr, oui bnujeta y dnyhcmydeuh?

Bob Flibble
IH Nabnacahdydeja


How about next time you decide to post in a language besides English, you provide a translation?

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

Ailyn stands, clearly a bit tipsy, and raises her flask of Corellian brandy. "K'oyacyi!" she cries out.

Silence.

"Okay, so no one here understands Vando'a," she grumbles, sliding back into her seat. "It's not like I do either. I had to ask my guard how to say that."

I came across Al Bhed back when I was a captain, during a deployment.
Is there an Al-Bhed to Universal Standard (English) available?


Respectfully,
The Honorable Marcus Diegaus III, KCMC, CC
Senior Ambassador
Permanent Representative to the United Nations
The Federation of the Genoshan Isles