NationStates Jolt Archive

here is the resolution called "ITSC", calling for WA delegate approval;

CATEGORY:International Security/EFFECT: Mild

OBSERVING the constant threat to security and safety in international airports, seaports and other terminals.

FORMING ITSSC (International Travel Security Community) an international forum meeting quarterly;

GIVING the WA a voice for ideas, concerns and queries about travel standards and safety. Such as a discussion about an appropriate international system of grading threats/security levels.

REALIZING the need for a unification of appropriate security measures and standards on customs, quarantine and isolation of incidents in airports, seaports and other access terminals.

CREATION of reports, statistical data, lists and methods of communication on these issues with each WA government.

RECOMMENDS that WA nations take on the advice of the WA when creating their legislation. However, it is not binding that WA nations must do so. WA wishes it to be used as a guide.

EDUCATE the citizens of all WA nations about proper travel safety advice regarding to baggage, custom regulations quarantine matters and anything else related with traveling to a WA nation through many forms of media.

HEREBY, declaring the ITSSC an active committee in the WA.

There's a few things I need to highlight: this proposal has been written in a way in which any nation can ignore without penalty. No proposals can be optional. It has to enforce something relating to travel security.

There's a few things I need to highlight: this proposal has been written in a way in which any nation can ignore without penalty. No proposals can be optional. It has to enforce something relating to travel security.
OOC _
That's not completely accurate: A proposal of 'Mild' strength, like this one, would normally be able to get away with one or two "URGES" clauses and no actual "REQUIRES" ones... But saying outright in the text that it's "not binding", as the author does here, [almost certainly] is illegal.

OOC _
That's not completely accurate: A proposal of 'Mild' strength, like this one, would normally be able to get away with one or two "URGES" clauses and no actual "REQUIRES" ones... But saying outright in the text that it's "not binding", as the author does here, [almost certainly] is illegal.

There's a few things I need to highlight: this proposal has been written in a way in which any nation can ignore without penalty. No proposals can be optional. It has to enforce something relating to travel security.

it says that about taking the advice for legislation.

however, the proposal gives the WA a means of finding out what the stance of all WA nations is on the issue of travel standards and security and use it in reports, statistics and other forms of media. means of education and a helpful resource for nations and citizens of those nations to use to travel safely and securely.

I still can't tell which lines are saying what the ITSC will do, which lines are saying what the WA will do, and which lines are saying why. Pick the right tense (and sometimes part of speech) for the capitalised words would make life easier, as would explicitly putting in the common implied subject, which I'm reluctantly coming to the conclusion isn't "The World Assembly". I'd give you more explicit drafting advice, but like I said, I genuinely can't tell what exactly you mean.

while definitely clearer than the last suggestion for proposal, one wonders what a new arm of bueracracy--what at best makes recommendations--would provide in ROI vs TCO?

Let's see...

OBSERVING the constant threat to security and safety in international airports, seaports and other terminals.Preamble.

FORMING ITSSC (International Travel Security Community) an international forum meeting quarterly;A committee by any other name, I guess...

GIVING the WA a voice for ideas, concerns and queries about travel standards and safety. Such as a discussion about an appropriate international system of grading threats/security levels.Um... okay... no actual effect here.

REALIZING the need for a unification of appropriate security measures and standards on customs, quarantine and isolation of incidents in airports, seaports and other access terminals.This is more of a preamble clause. No effect here, either.

CREATION of reports, statistical data, lists and methods of communication on these issues with each WA government.Feels like there needs to be more here. I assume the committee is generating these reports, but you don't actually say where they're coming from. I guess this is (sort of) an effect.

RECOMMENDS that WA nations take on the advice of the WA when creating their legislation. However, it is not binding that WA nations must do so. WA wishes it to be used as a guide.Lots of bbcode here, but not much else. Still, reasonably standard for a Mild Proposal. It's basically an URGES clause, although those usually don't broadcast their uselessness in italics.

EDUCATE the citizens of all WA nations about proper travel safety advice regarding to baggage, custom regulations quarantine matters and anything else related with traveling to a WA nation through many forms of media.This looks like it's trying very hard to be an action clause. It's just a little hard to parse.

HEREBY, declaring the ITSSC an active committee in the WA.Yeah... the passing of the Proposal does this. Utterly superfluous.


Okay. So this is certainly a Mild Proposal, but it needs work. There's a lot here that's pretty darn vague, and the order is a little weird.