[Gnejs]

Clothing Supply Pact
A resolution to reduce barriers to free trade and commerce.


Category: Free Trade
Strength: Strong
Proposed by: Gruenberg

Description: The United Nations,

Believing access to good, suitable and durable clothing constitutes a basic need,

Shocked at the plight of those lacking access to adequate clothing,

Wishing to improve the availability of adequate clothing to all,

Also wishing to promote international trade and industry:

1. Requests that nations secure for their people access to adequate clothing;

2. Defines "textile products" as:
- any items of clothing, textile or fabric;
- raw materials used towards the production of such goods (for example, crops or wool from sheep or goats);
- any machinery or equipment used in the manufacture and processing of such goods;

3. Requires the removal of all protectionist barriers on the international trade of textile products, including tariffs, import quotas, customs and excise duties, import/export taxes, and subsidies and subventions, subject to the exemptions of clause 4;

4. Declares that nations may apply for exemptions to clause 3 in the following cases:
- to ensure the stability of industries supplying essential products (such as military equipment or specialist clothing);
- in times of severe economic crisis, where such measures are required to ensure a stable clothing supply;
- to collect revenue for the sole purposes of economic recovery following severe collapse;
- to prevent price dumping of goods from non-UN nations;
- to suspend trading with nations against whom they are at declared war;

5. Declares it the right of nations to impose cultural, safety, ethical or other regulations on textile products and their manufacture, provided any such regulations are administered in a non-protectionist manner;

6. Authorises the UN Free Trade Commission to arbitrate any trade disputes arising from the interpretation of this regulation, specifically in the implementation of clauses 3, 4, and 5;

7. Encourages UN member nations to pursue similar agreements with non-UN nations;

8. Sets a timeline for implementation of ten years from the passage of this resolution.

[Eisophca]

FOR!

[Malabra]

I personally put my support behind this when I approved it, so I encourage you all to vote for the passage of this resolution.

[Antrium]

FOR.

[Keeslandia]

AYE

[Eisophca]

MalabraSep 10 2006, 08:39 AM I personally put my support behind this when I approved it, so I encourage you all to vote for the passage of this resolution. [/quote]
Ya know, I think it might be a good idea to let the delegate vote on these kinds of things as well. They're a member of the region, too, and often have good ideas and views.

[Gnejs]

We will be voting AGAINST this resolution. The reason is not that we dislike clothing or people's right to clothing. Our reasons are based upon enviormental concerns and our beliefs in bio-regionalism. A reducing of barriers will increase trade, and with an increase of trade transports will also be more frequent(transports by airplane, truck etc.). This will in long terms will be devastating for the enviorment in general, and the ozon layer in particular. We believe that there should be put more focus on bio-regionalism where people living closely to one another produce the most necessary products (such as food and clothing) for their own use.

[Grosseschnauzer]

What the heck, FOR.

There are ways to address the transportation impact on environmental concerns, such as requiring greater use of athanol and other biofuels for transporting goods across national border, and so forth.

[Malabra]

CeoranaSep 10 2006, 06:26 PM MalabraSep 10 2006, 08:39 AM I personally put my support behind this when I approved it, so I encourage you all to vote for the passage of this resolution. [/quote]
Ya know, I think it might be a good idea to let the delegate vote on these kinds of things as well. They're a member of the region, too, and often have good ideas and views. [/quote]
I was always under the impression that we could vote, but we had to vote with the region when it came to the final UN vote...oops. :unsure:

I only did it once though, and it didn't affect the outcome.

[Mikitivity]

First, Mikitivity is in favour of this resolution. My government briefly contributed during the draft discussions and generally likes the goal of this resolution.

Second, our UN Delegate should always vote in the poll here too. Since the UN Delegate office is only 3 months, after which time there is another election, I would even argue that the UN Delegate not only has the ability to vote against popular IDU opinion, but in the event that the Delegate should do this, then an explanation should be provided. Not that I'm encouraging this, but mechnically the power exists and by tradition the IDU has had UN Delegates that not only seek to do things in a democratic style, but also in a rational style ... two goals that could be crossed at times if one's own democratic process is strongly opposed to the region's democratic process.

But certainly our UN Delegate should participate in these polls and discussions.

[Grosseschnauzer]

When I served as Delegate, I always made clear when I had problems with a proposal at vote, for purposes of discussion, if nothing else.

As it turned out, I never had to cast a regional vote that was opposite the vote I would cast individually as a UN member, but I always understood I had that option if I had really strong objections to a proposal. (In other words, I would have explained my reasons.) I believe there were a couple of times when the region was even divided, he where I had the option of breaking the tie or abstaining, but that's clearly left to the Delegate to decide.

[Federation of Disjunction]

I agree that the delegate should have a vote in our discussions as well as the ability to voice opinion. I also feel that the delegate should act as a deciding vote in the case of a tie. I'm not so sure about a delegate going against the democratic results of the voting just because he or she feels strongly on the subject. That is what their personal vote is for. If they are that adament about it they have the opportunity to convince the rest of the region. Ultimately, if the Delegat has the power to vote on their own we have a representative democracy not a direct democracy, which is what I thought we operated under for UN resolution votes.

As for now I think we've been treating it like Washington's two term precedent. There was no law against it but no US president ever ran for more than two terms after him. (Until FDR and then we were forced to make it a law) I.E. no delegate has deviated from the majority decision of the UN participating voters.

As for the resolution I'm abstaining. I like what it does but I hadn't thought about the environmental impact.

[Eisophca]

In my opinion, the environmental impact is a side issue that is better addressed through positive legislation to that effect. If you don't want trucks and trains mucking up our ecosystem, write a resolution or pass a national law encouraging ecofriendly transportation practices - don't restrict trade!

[Malabra]

The region's vote has been cast FOR this resolution.