GA Resolut: Repeal: “Convention On International Oil Spills”

[Lenlyvit]

Repeal: “Convention On International Oil Spills”

A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation.

Category: Repeal

Resolution: GA#444

Proposed by: Lord Dominator

General Assembly Resolution #444 “Convention on International Oil Spills” (Category: Environmental; Industry Affected: Mining) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

The World Assembly,

Applauding the resolution at hand for its work at improving the environment,

But Concerned that clause 3 of the resolutions micro-manages member nations to a degree that may be harmful to the resolution's mission by:

· Mandating technologies that may be or are obsolete in some member nations,

· Using vague language regarding maintenance and inspections such as "every couple of years" and "regularly,"

Saddened that clause 4 also lists a number of technologies that may become or already are obsolete in member nations,

Believing that the micromanagement and excruciating specificity inherent in this resolution:

· Will leave nations unable to adapt to better technologies,

· Potentially wastes resources following mandates that aren't necessary in all nations,

· Includes strong suggestions that overstep reasonable bounds of the WA with instructions for spill clean-up that are better left to individual nations to determine properly,

Incensed at the needless re-treading of ground already covered in part by Responsible Offshore Drilling and Reducing Spills and Leaks and yet leaving regulation of reduction and clean-up of wildlife impact uselessly vague,

Bemoaning the listed flaws and occasional poor grammar usage,

Repeals GA 444 "Convention on International Oil Spills."

This is the discussion thread. To cast your vote, go HERE

[Aersoldorf]

Bemoaning.... occasional poor grammar usage?

If that's honestly one of the reasons that they think that GA 444 should be repealed then I'd argue that the same logic would mandate that we vote against this one because of the 'occasional poor grammar usage' that it contains.

I honestly don't care one way or the other but you asked for opinions on the RMB so there's mine. Against.

[Jabberwocky]

The language is arbitrary. It sounds like a personal grudge. Plus I find it annoying that for every proposal that passes, someone immediately tries to repeal it. Against.

[Lenlyvit]

I concur that it could be better written. I'd like to note though that there's a re-write of the targeted resolution happening right now though, so since this seems to be passing we may vote on that re-write sooner or later.

[Aersoldorf]

Meh, like I said earlier, I don’t really care one way or the other on this one