NationStates Jolt Archive

Well, I guess there is a lot to do with Neutrality of nations, but I think there is another fundamental goal we need to reach before digging deeper into that. Don't worry, I haven't abandoned that.

The draft we are talking about now is the promotion of clean drinking water, which is a tribute to the old UN resolution 222 (http://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_past_resolutions/start=221) by Rubina. my determination is that everyone has clean and reliable access to clean water, and I am hopeful that there is no doubt that good quality water is needed for many purposes, economically and personally.

Because a future draft is based on a past resolution, my first task is to ask permission from the author. When that is done, we can get into the business of creating one.

Here is the current look of the draft:

The World Assembly,

UNDERSTANDING that one of its roles is to improve quality of life;

ACCEPTING the fact, that water is an essential resource for survival by many, irrespective of the remoteness and climate of their homeland;

BELIEVES that:
- It is an unconditional and undeniable right of any person in Member Nations to have convenient and trustworthy access to clean water, and;
- Working together to improve water supply and cleanliness is a step towards achieving this goal.

DEFINES:
- ‘Clean water’ as treated or naturally sourced water that is safe, containing no harmful elements that may potentially threaten anyone’s health, whilst retaining the ability to support aquatic life;

1) MANDATES:
a) That Member Nations must provide convenient and trustworthy access to clean water to its inhabitants, and;
b) That the World Assembly and each Member Nation will ensure to their best efforts that all sources of water are confidently safe to use, deploying methods including but not limited to: water treatment, quality examinations, appropriate waste management, and ways of raising public awareness.

2) COMMITTING to:
a) Help Member Nations, through non-repayable financial grants, that are economically poor or in need of funding to deliver clean water, and;
b) Ensure that financial grants are used only for the promotion of clean water.

EMPHASIZES that all Member Nations are welcome to help any Nation, to achieve a goal in which everyone and anywhere has convenient and trustworthy access to clean water.

APPLAUDING Nations that believe that clean water is among the goals to improve quality of life.

I think you will do well with this. Think about helping poorer nations clean their water supply and conservation of water so to minimise shortages.

Can I suggest mandatory routine testing for contaminants (as few testing sites as effectivily possible)? You should only need to test at the first divide or second divides in the pipes from the plant. You would be appalled of the regulation of "clean" water in the other demension… They're more concerned with security.

This gives me an idea for a part of the draft...

MANDATES: That the World Assembly and Member Nations will ensure to their best efforts that all sources of drinking water are confidently safe to drink, deploying methods including but not limited to: water treatment, quality examinations, appropriate waste management, and ways of raising public awareness.

Ok, I don't know if there is a way to 'officially' do this, but I would like to 'officially' complain. Write your own damn proposal for once, instead of stealing other people's.

I just checked the GTT thread, and Rubina began it May 8. The resolution passed September 12: that's over four months' work. Not to mention the discussions that had gone on previously, of proposals by Yelda and Hirota.

Clean water? When I was small boy, I had to dig well deep into ground for water. If nation is incapable of providing water for citizens, nation dies. Natural selection on large scale.
Draft will stop advancement of human race.

Here's my base plate, which should hopefully be different from Rubina's. In fact it may be because it will have no committee.

The World Assembly,

UNDERSTANDING that one of its roles is to improve quality of life;

ACCEPTING the fact, that water is an essential resource for survival by many; irrespective of the remoteness and climate of their homeland;

BELIEVES:
- That it is an unconditional and undeniable right of any person in Member Nations to have convenient and trustworthy access to safe and clean drinking water, and;
- That all methods possible should be initiated to achieve such goals;

DEFINES:
- ‘Drinking water’ as water that is intended for consumption by people, and;
- ‘Safe drinking water’ as treated or naturally sourced water that is clean, and contains no harmful elements that may threaten anyone’s health;

1) MANDATES:
a) That Member Nations must provide convenient and trustworthy access to safe and clean drinking water to their people, and;
b) That the World Assembly and each Member Nation will ensure to their best efforts that all sources of drinking water are confidently safe to drink, deploying methods including but not limited to: water treatment, quality examinations, appropriate waste management, and ways of raising public awareness.

2) COMMITTING to:
a) Help Member Nations, through non-repayable financial grants, that are economically poor or in need of funding to deliver safe drinking water, and;
b) Ensure that financial grants are used only for the promotion of safe drinking water.

EMPHASIZES that all Member Nations are welcome to help any Nation, to achieve a goal in which everyone and anywhere has convenient and trustworthy access to safe drinking water.

APPLAUDING Nations that believe safe drinking water is one fundamental route to improve quality of life.

I think he is right, in my nation, and in most nations, i got clean water.
We dont want water that is filled with pee right?

Absolutely not. This draft aims to make clean water a reality in every member nation.

The USSC supports the right of citizens of all member states in regards to access to clean, drinkable water. Clean water fuels the worker's desire to both produce necessary goods on behalf of the state and worship the Holy Trinity in order to gain salvation, both of which are important tenants of the USSC. Only a nation of capitalist, self-centered, consumerist pigs would oppose such a draft/resolution.

The USSC will do all that is necessary to help such a draft evolve into a resolution and ultimately pass in the WA.

The Dolphins stop their profane chattering and kinds huddle up together. One wonders if they are resting, plotting mischief, or are deciding the finer points of Dolphinic ettiquite. apparently a concensus is reached because the pod breaks up and while two go back to making obscene suggestions the third swims to the mike.

"This is all <censored><bleep> well and good for you<bleeping><dirty word> groundpounders! But<foul word> what about the <gross oath><vile word> ocean! In case you<filthy word> two legs, didn't <censored> notice, that is where we <censored> live! Where is our <filthy oath><nasty word> right to clean<bleeping> water. After all you <very naughty word>, We dont <bleeping> swim in your <yowzah> toilet! Don't <anatomically impssible act> pee in our <very vile explitive><offensive phrase><censored> home!"

Meanwhile the other dolphins are yelling at a member of the Thessadorian delegation
"Show us your<naughty word>, baby!"
"hey baby! lets<censored> <bleep> bleep><censored> till we're sore!"

Dolphinic laughter fills the air.

Some minor quibbles:

a) That Member Nations must provide convenient and trustworthy access to safe and clean drinking water to their people

We have a slight issue with the word "convenient". Not everyone's definition of convenient is the same, after all. Perhaps "accessible" or "available" would be better here.

2) COMMITTING to:
a) Help Member Nations, through non-repayable financial grants, that are economically poor or in need of funding to deliver safe drinking water

How exactly are these grants going to be paid for?

-Jaris Krytellin, Ambassador

- ‘Safe drinking water’ as treated or naturally sourced water that is clean, and contains no harmful elements that may threaten anyone’s health;

1) MANDATES:
a) That Member Nations must provide convenient and trustworthy access to safe and clean drinking water to their people, and;

I'm getting a bit tired of you flitting from old resolution to old resolution too, but if you're going to do it at least be consistent about your teminology.

'Accessible' is better of your two suggestions. How it would be funded is a area I am thinking at the moment. One option may be to make rich nations contribute to projects in poorer nations. I may be forced to up taxes of member nations a bit, but the benefit of clean water may be worth the contribution. Ideas for other way and means of funding clean water supply projects are open for discussion.

Absolutely not. This draft aims to make clean water a reality in every member nation.


Yes, i want clean water to. I am wiling to reward the started of this prospal in the WA, so everybody can vote on it at NS, i am willing to give him a reward of 500 million dollar, or help in any war they fight.
But i think, that clean water needs to be for everybody.

I will be writing this resolution promoting clean water, but we are at the early stages, as you can see in post #7.

"Clean the oceans, make it clean as pure spring mineral water: like that Smirnoff Ad!" shouts Amanda.

Here's my base plate, which should hopefully be different from Rubina's. In fact it may be because it will have no committee.

The governtment of Energeia is pleased to see this. It is our firm belief that commities, boards, and the like, allow for curruption, unless the members' only interest in participating (in this case) is the personal and societal protection from illness and must not have any personal, government, or private investment in the company.



As for the ocean, based on my limited experience for applying catagories and not the opinion of my government, such a proposal would belong in another catagory.

As for the ocean, based on my limited experience for applying catagories and not the opinion of my government, such a proposal would belong in another catagory.
Yes, but i still think that if every nation, every single one, woud help cleaning the ocean, it wont cost so many for 1 person, but just a bit from everyone.
I think, that clean water is somekind of the base for a good nation.
I mean, than everybody woud at least be way more happy. And that is very inportant. Nobody want water filled with pee, like i already sad.
If we dont clean it, it will be filled with pee!

Quote:
"- That all methods possible should be initiated to achieve such goals;"

If I may, I believe this part of your draft needs clarification. It seems that an organization to promote peace would need to safegaurd against some "methods" of "achieving such goals". You do not, of course, mean all methods, do you?

The governtment of Energeia is pleased to see this. It is our firm belief that commities, boards, and the like, allow for curruption, unless the members' only interest in participating (in this case) is the personal and societal protection from illness and must not have any personal, government, or private investment in the company.



As for the ocean, based on my limited experience for applying catagories and not the opinion of my government, such a proposal would belong in another catagory.

The government of the Dominion of Faereyjar is in agreement with the statement made by the representative of the government of Energeia regarding the status of oceans within the scope of the resolution in question. While the current health of the oceans is troubling and a threat to the livelihood of countless organisms, both human and non-human, such matters are far beyond the scope of ensuring safe and plentiful drink water to the populace of member nations. Let one issue not distract from the another, but rather encourage the proper and necessary discussions of each issue in its own appropriate forum.

Cleaning oceans is a way too expensive and ambiguous for us so I think I'm going to go against the suggestion of Amanda Edernegoizane and leave the oceans alone.

Now, I wish to accept that we've got to refine this draft in a way that can reduce the risk of corruption. We can see that that phrase 'All methods possible should be initiated to achieve such goals' in the BELIEVES preamble is ambiguous and liable to corruption. One idea would be to remove it together. The benefit is that the resolution would then be focused solely on clean and safe water and not "the promotion of world peace to ensure safety of people". but if we decide to improve on this clause, to something like "BELIEVES that the improvement of water supply infrastructure is a task which should be done to achieve this goal", then we are limiting this resolution to focus on safe water supply.

There are lots of ways of saying this. I could say:
- BELIEVES that the improving water supply is a step towards achieving this goal.or- BELIEVES that working together to improve water supply is a step towards achieving this goal.

Good, I like the ocean kept out of this proposal.
And the second option I like more than your first, because I like working together.

Wish you success,
greetings
Cocoamok
WA delegate for Intelligentsia Islands

Quote:
"Now, I wish to accept that we've got to refine this draft in a way that can reduce the risk of corruption."

Thank you. However,
Quote:
"limiting this resolution to focus on safe water supply"

Is that so bad? I thought in a WA page somewhere I saw something about "one resolution at a time." Adding extra things that I believe the WA is already is supposed to be doing might not be necessary. Just a thought. However this goes down, I am sure it will be great when it's finished.

Adding extra things that I believe the WA is already is supposed to be doing might not be necessary.The WA is as the WA does. In other words, the only things it does are Resolutions.

The phrase "BELIEVES that working together to improve water supply is a step towards achieving this goal." is in. For your convenience I am adding the latest version on post #1.

... How it would be funded is a area I am thinking at the moment. One option may be to make rich nations contribute to projects in poorer nations. I may be forced to up taxes of member nations a bit, but the benefit of clean water may be worth the contribution....

It should not be mandatory that nations that are financially sound and technologically advanced should have to provide "international welfare" everytime an author of one of this fluffy pieces of feel-good, save the children, can't we all just get along legislation is drafted. Yes, poorer nations will need assistance to accomplish the aims of a proposal like this, but the assistance should come from NGOs and voluntary donations from nations that are willing; not taxes and mandatory giving. There will always be poorer nations that are unable or unwilling to properly care for their citizens--whether due to poor leadership, corruption, or religious fanaticism. If well off nations want to help them...fine, but no one should be forced to help. Mandatory wealth distribution and communistic practices like this, in the end, only make the rich poorer and the poor unable to take care of themselves.

And while I'm on my soapbox I would like to add that even though as WA members our only duty really is to come up with resolutions, let us remember that we should not be trying to come up with every law and piece of legislation for member nations--that's their job, let them do it. Who wants to live in a world where all nations are forced to be cookie-cutter copies of each other and have the same laws and practices.

As a matter of record, and speaking as the author, no you do not have permission to use any element of the resolution Water Quality and Conservation.

Does it mean I have to write it differently?

Oxymorontopia, how about if we change the method of funding to allow voluntary donations from people, NGOs and the rest being funded from normal WA resources as we did in Resolution 5?

A sensible option, but if a proposal such as this passes a massive amount of resources will be needed and unless the WA is printing money, will ultimately mean a need for more money from member nations--back to square one. If anything, I wouldn't mind wording that recommends or urges nations to provide funding, but am against one that specifically mandates nations to do so.

So an Urges/Recommends clause would be a real buzzword, as well as urging big corporations to do the same. How about urging big corporations to fund the clean water project as most of them pollute anyway?

Urging big corporations will not help I am afraid, they have other interests and compete against each other. What can help is urging member nations to tax the big corporations for the clean water act. But maybe let the WA nations decide by themselves how to find the funding. Maybe put the suggestion in that the polluters have to be the one who have to pay.

...
Because a future draft is based on a past resolution,


Does it mean I have to write it differently?

It means that you cannot use the previous resolution in any way. You must write your own.

From dictionary.com: pla·gia·rism
–noun
1. the unauthorized use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work.
2. something used and represented in this manner.

I would avoid concentrating wholly on drinking water, which probably accounts for a minority of water needs. Water is also needed for cooking, cleaning, medical care, and washing, and while the water used for such ends doesn't need to be as clean, necessarily, it still needs to be of a certain quality.

No, no, no, concentrate on clean drinking water. Billions of people doesn't have that and have severe proplems to get a chance on a better future. Unclean water gives so many people a bad health, that many nations doesn't have a bright future. Drinkable water is indeed a tiny amount of the water needed for other purposes, but the importance is far bigger.

If you cook, clean, wash or tend a wound with unclean water, you will still die. If you try to go without water for such purposes, you will still die. Even respecting all the differences of political opinion within the WA, I assume we are all basically anti-death and pro-not death.

It is a good state ment but needs changes

The task now is to write this draft completely differently from resolution #222. the omission of a committee is one of the big changes. Rubina is invited to oversee our progress.

Based on the opinions of posts #33-35, I can say that the draft would need expansion to cover safe water in general, and not just drinking water. This is because using unclean water to treat patients may be potentially fatal, as Quintessence of Dust suggests.

Just a thought: how about another WA charity?

I've thought about this for a week, and I think this one might work:

MANDATES that funding solely for improvement of water supply may be come from:
- The resources of the World Assembly;
- Donations and grants from individual persons, organizations, or;
- Discretionary funding by Member Nations.