NationStates Jolt Archive

Category: Environmental
Resolution Name: WEEE Act

-Whereas:
1.The health of Electrical and Electronic Equipment users is a concern,
2.The impact of Electrical and Electronic Equipment on environment during manufacture and disposal is a concern and
3. Toxic effluents released into the environment during unsafe disposal of such Equipment is a concern;

-Be it resolved that:
1.Responsibility For The Disposal Of Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) be entirely imposed on the manufacturers of such equipment.
2.Expenses for re-procurement/recalling of such (Waste) Electrical and Electronic Equipment (after equipment life termination) purchased for purely domestic purposes only be borne by the manufacturers.
3.Expenses for re-procurement/recalling of such (Waste) Electrical and Electronic Equipment (after equipment life termination) purchased for commercial purpose be recovered from the buyer right at the time of purchase.

-Abiding to the resolutions:
#154 : Waste Disposal Covenant and
#158 :UN Recycling Commission

We are concerned at the conflation of re-procurement (i.e. the procuring of replacement equipment) and recalling (the withdrawl of in-service equipment, generally due to severe unexpected hazards in usage), particularly given that subsequent phraseology suggests that the author did not intend either to be addressed. Perhaps if the honoured ambassador were to express his desires at greater length, a clearer formula for the proposal could be reached?

The Democratic States of Stopmenow100 support the general intent of proposal. However, you may want to expand the exact requirements of the proposal and make the language a little more clear.

You created an acronym, and then never use it, except once, parenthetically. Why type out "(Waste) Electrical and Electronic Equipment" every time, when you created "WEEE" to fill that need?

Also, action clause 1 is going to be a non-starter for many nations.

Also, action clause 1 is going to be a non-starter for many nations.
Especially as the manufacturers might not even be located in the same nation as the people who eventually decide to get rid of the equipment...

The Democratic States of Stopmenow100 support the general intent of proposal. However, you may want to expand the exact requirements of the proposal and make the language a little more clear.

We think the ambassador of Stopmenow100 very brave for making such a statement. We are not certain enough of what the general intent of the proposal is to echo him, and have a sneaking suspicion that we would in fact disagree with it were it more clearly explained.

-Abiding to the resolutions:
#154 : Waste Disposal Covenant and
#158 :UN Recycling Commission

I thought you weren't allowed to mention other resolutions in proposed resolutions?

Sorry, I don't play much, and as such I don't really know much about the U.N. process.

I thought you weren't allowed to mention other resolutions in proposed resolutions?

Sorry, I don't play much, and as such I don't really know much about the U.N. process.

That's okay. You can mention them, but your proposal would still have to be able to work on its own if they were repealed. (It's called the 'House of Cards' rule.) For example, you can't say
USING the definition of [whatever] that was given in Resolution #[NN];

Oh, and just in case you might need the information, a new proposal can't amend an existing resolution either...