Repeal "Protect Historical Sites" next at vote

[PoD Gunner]

This repeal will probably be the next one at a vote, as it has reached the necessary quorum yesterday. That allows us more time for discussing it. Awaiting your reactions.

Repeal "Protect Historical Sites"
A proposal to repeal a previously passed resolution
Category: Repeal
Resolution: #15
Proposed by: Jey

Description: UN Resolution #15: Protect Historical Sites (Category: Environmental; Industry Affected: All Businesses) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: The General Assembly of the United Nations,

COMMENDING Resolution #15: "Protect Historical Sites," for its intent to safeguard historically significant locations within member nations;

HOWEVER NOTING that Resolution #15 wholly lacks any apparent methods for which to protect the historical sites referenced to within the resolution text, only saying "we cannot let historical sites go to waste;"

FURTHER NOTING that Resolution #15, at no point within the resolution text, defines what constitutes a "historical site" that is worthy of protection, thus leading to confusion and misunderstandings among member nations;

CONCLUDING that Resolution #15 is an insufficient and ineffectual resolution, given that it lacks any form of implementation of its admirable intent;

REPEALS Resolution #15: "Protect Historical Sites."
Status: Quorum Reached: In Queue!

NOTE: this repeal is aimed at a rather old and superficially drafted resolution. For further reference, check the UN forums. I remind you that a repeal is used to eliminate an older piece of legislation before aiming to replace it with a better one. That is the way the UN works.

Protect Historical Sites


A resolution to increase the quality of the world's environment, at the expense of industry.

Category: Environmental
Industry Affected: All Businesses
Proposed by: X-tonia

Description: We cannot let historical sites go to waste, and new buildings built in their place. Tourism would lose all value and deprive all countries of a significant source of income.We must preserve our cultures to keep this world a fascinating place to travel in.

Votes For: 15515
Votes Against: 4317
Implemented: Fri May 23 2003

[Talmann]

Suprisingly, this is a repeal I will vote FOR. Not one to repeal things, am I, but useless Resolution 15 is. As long as they institute a new one shortly thereafter.

[Delfos]

by reading the tittle and knowing about this issue already I'm against it. I also point that how the hell there's majorities voting for things that are repealed with great majority a bit after? That's just stupid and either most of this guys are blind and vote for anything that pops up or this UN thing is a hoax.

[Talmann]

I would like to remind Delfos of how many new players have joined the UN since the old resolution. Also, the old resolution was shoddily written and does not do anything except "preserve our cultures", and even that doesn't really say anything as to how.

[Delfos]

it doesn't have to, do you know about museums robbed during invasions? do you know about Buddhist statues being destroying or whatever? This resolution prevents that, however it does, it doesn't need a practical way, but it's a thing people cannot do to another culture.

[PoD Gunner]

well, generally I agree, the point is that the old resol. #15 does none of the above. so a repeal makes sense.

[Allama]

^ Agreed, PoD.  Resolution 15 was passed with good intentions, but does nothing and should be repealed to make way for a replacement resolution that actually has a definition of the term "historical sites" and lists measures to be taken to protect them.

[tak]

The current resolution #15 does absolutely nothing. I agree with striking it down for a better drafted resoultion.

[Delfos]

then it's more a reformation than repealing, not repealing won't make any difference. But anyway...

[tak]

The UN does not allow rewriting a resolution without repealing the old one first. So I agree to the repeal.

[Delfos]

didn't know that, repeal it then.

[PoD Gunner]

Well, the blade has two sharp ends. There were enough resolutions repealed never to be replaced again with a better version. The general trend among Delegates at the moment is to defeat anything that violates national sovereignty. It looks like the author of this particular repeal (Jey from NS United Nations), has no plans of rewriting #15. Here's a quote from his responses regarding critics to this repeal:

Originally Posted by Nachtbergen View Post

I am essentially challenging you to demonstrate how repealing this resolution would assist the protection of historical sites

About as much as the current resolution. You are aware that repeals cannot introduce new legislation, only repeal the old one, correct?[/i]

Originally Posted by Nachtbergen View Post
You must argue how protecting historical sites, or the mention of historical sites is more important than having a resolution that commands explicit physical action or its prohibition.

The representative from Ausserland is correct. We believe that removing completely worthless legislation from the books is more important than the sentimentality of the worthless resolution. In fact, we founded an organization dedicated to removing poor resolutions.

Originally Posted by Nachtbergen View Post
If you truly feel that historical sites need to be protected, and you indeed feel that this is a UN proposal, then such a notion argues against such a repeal.

Not at all. We truely appreciate the intent of the resolution, however the resolution is flawed. We will not keep around resolutions simply because we like their ideas. If we did, we would not have passed repeals for "Scientific Freedom", "Keep The World Disease-Free!", "Free Education", "Replanting Trees", "Mandatory Recycling", etc. All of these resolutions had very fine ideas, but they were flawed, ineffectual, and worthless, and thus needed to be removed.

Originally Posted by Nachtbergen View Post
Hence our conclusion that we will not vote for it, unless we have significant reason to believe that a better proposal will be written.

Again, our first clause should not be considered as an agreement that we will write an appropriate replacement. You also have the opportunity to write a replacement if you feel the need to.

At the moment, the unofficial forum-poll looks like this:
Yey         29     69.05%
Ney            6     14.29%
Jey             4      9.52%
Hey!             3     7.14%
 

So I think atm it looks like a   

[tak]

Even if the resolution is not rewritten, there is nothing to lose from repealing this toothless resolution #15.

[Romanar]

Agreed.  I vote for the repeal.

[PoD Gunner]

Thank you for your votes and your opinions.

The situation atm is:

Votes For: 3,786
Votes Against: 1,279

Voting Ends: Sun Jun 24 2007

I will cast my vote on the 23rd according to your preferences.
-----------------------------------------------------------
From the jolt UN forum.
Looks like the debate about this repeal has triggered a surprisingly intense exchange of cultural values....

Zyrwick already has adequately revitalized the Tsar's palaces to preserve their historical significance. I only hope that the former Tsarina would appreciate, if she were still living, my cousin's pigs being housed in her former rose garden. Well actually the pigs belong to the Zyrwina Hog Farmer's Soviet, but you get my point.

The pigs are still in the rose garden after all.

Vladimir Alexandrovich
Janitor for the Zyrwickian UN Delegation.

 

EDIT: Poll attached. [better late then never] 

EDIT: Situation atm:

Votes For: 5,035

Votes Against: 1,779