+- IDU Regional Forum (https://idugov.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Government Square (https://idugov.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=101)
+--- Forum: WA Delegate's Bureau (https://idugov.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=24)
+---- Forum: General Assembly Resolutions (https://idugov.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+---- Thread: Repeal "Save the forests of the World" (/showthread.php?tid=405)
Repeal "Save the forests of the World" - Grosseschnauzer - 12-27-2005
Quote: Repeal "Save the forests of the World"
A proposal to repeal a previously passed resolution
Category: Repeal
Resolution: #48
Proposed by: Fonzoland
Description: UN Resolution #48: Save the forests of the World (Category: Environmental; Industry Affected: Woodchipping) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.
Argument: The General Assembly of the United Nations,
COMMENDING the assumed intentions of Resolution #48, ?Save the forests of the World?;
DEEPLY COMMITTED to guaranteeing the sustainability of the world ecosystem, namely by the preservation of forests; yet
REGRETTING the confusing, discursive and unconstructive nature of said Resolution;
NOTING that it does not mandate or recommend any course of action to further the cause of sustainability, rendering it ineffective;
ACKNOWLEDGING the clear overlap between the assumed intentions of its author and the mandate of Resolution #23, ?Replanting Trees?; and
DECLARING that ambiguous and ineffective legislation threatens the credibility of the UN, especially when in duplication of previous legislation;
REPEALS Resolution #48.
Voting Ends: Sat Dec 31 2005 [/quote]
The original resolution read:
Quote: UNITED NATIONS RESOLUTION #48
Save the forests of the World
A resolution to increase the quality of the world's environment, at the expense of industry.
Category: Environmental
Industry Affected: Woodchipping
Proposed by: The lords of the isles
Description: For years the forest of numerous nations have been abused and destroyed for profit. In many nations, this is reaching critical leavels, almost to the point where all the forests are gone. If we destroy the forests now, they're gone. Forever. My reasons for this proposal are twofold:
1. Enviromental Concerns
The destruction of the rainforest has a major destructive effect on the enviroment. Countless spieces of plant and animal will be destroyed if deforestation continues at the rate that it is currently. These animals would be dead, and thier would be no way of resurecting them, short of cloning, which rases an entirly diferent moral issue. The simple fact is that the destruction of rainforest is simply pointless destruction as thier is no way to make the forests renewable without seriously cutting the money that they make, which is the reason for thier destruction anyway! The mindless destroying of a valuable national resorce will, in the long run, achieve nothing.
2. Thoughts of the future
By destroying the forests today, there is no way that they will produce money in the future, either through turism or logging. People don't recognise that, while forests make more money more quickly when felled on the mass scale, in the long run, monetarily the same amount of money could be produced by carefully felling a section of forest, then helping it regrow. This way, the woods produced would be more valuable on the international market due to the decreased availability of the timber. Over a longer amount of time, the money produced would, in fact, outstrip the money made by the wanton destruction. The forest would, with help, renew its self and go on making money. As and added bonus, turism would increase.
Solution
While decreasing the would chipping industry would, in the short term, over hundreds of years the over all efects on the enviroment would realy save the world from the rampart destruction of forest that it has fallen into a cycle of.
Votes For: 12,460
Votes Against: 7,244
Implemented: Thu Feb 19 2004 [/quote]
I can tell that the issue for us, as a region is whether to support repeal of a poorly written pro-environmental resolution, given our historic support for pro-environmental and well-written proposals.
Repeal "Save the forests of the World" - Antrium - 12-27-2005
Antrium votes FOR. It was a hard choice, because we usually vote for environmental proposals, but this one makes no sense.
Quote: Solution
While decreasing the would chipping industry would, in the short term, over hundreds of years the over all efects on the enviroment would realy save the world from the rampart destruction of forest that it has fallen into a cycle of.[/quote]
We don't even understand this, but it doesn't seem like it's really enforcing anything. So it seems pointless to us, and pointless resolutions should be repealed.
Repeal "Save the forests of the World" - Groot Gouda - 12-28-2005
As far as I know, this repeal is written with the intention to create a better one. It's been talked about in the Green Think Tank too.
For.
Repeal "Save the forests of the World" - Lawtonia - 12-28-2005
Lawtonia Abstains
Repeal "Save the forests of the World" - Keeslandia - 12-28-2005
The learned Delegate hit the nail on the head. Because of those conflicting demands, the Empire has voted to abstain.
Repeal "Save the forests of the World" - Federalist - 12-28-2005
Though Pagemaster has not always been an active participant in these debates, I side with Lawtonia and Keeslandia and shall abstain.
Repeal "Save the forests of the World" - Groot Gouda - 12-29-2005
GrosseschnauzerDec 27 2005, 06:32 PM I can tell that the issue for us, as a region is whether to support repeal of a poorly written pro-environmental resolution, given our historic support for pro-environmental and well-written proposals. [/quote]
A poorly written resolution doesn't do anything, so can't be called a "pro-environment" resolution. It's better to repeal that and come up with a better resolution than to keep it for some symbolical environmental gesture.
I don't see why that's an issue.
Repeal "Save the forests of the World" - Nidda - 12-29-2005
We are also in favour of the repeal.
The UN needs precise and clear resolutions. Therefore the repeal should be supported.
Repeal "Save the forests of the World" - Grosseschnauzer - 12-31-2005
Quote: FOR [ 4 ] [57.14%]
AGAINST [ 0 ] [0.00%]
ABSENTION [ 3 ] [42.86%][/quote]
A majority of the participating region members have voted in favor of the repeal. Had there been a tie, I would have supported repeal of this poorly written resolution with the hope that a better written more useful replacement would be forthcoming. The region's votes are being cast FOR the repeal proposal.
Repeal "Save the forests of the World" - Baranxtu - 12-31-2005
Add an "Sorry, I kinda missed this thread"-vote FOR the repeal to that, and it's even a little more clear now.
(Edited because, well - who knew there's a difference between t and d?)