[GA - PASSED] Volcanic Activity Convention

Status
Not open for further replies.

Greater Cesnica

Deputy Minister
-
-
ga.jpg

Volcanic Activity Convention
Category: Regulation | Area of Effect: Safety
Proposed by: Minskiev | Onsite Topic


The World Assembly,

Mindful that some nations are ill-prepared in the case of volcanic activity and that volcanic activity is mostly unpreventable;

Aware of the consequences that eruptions and volcanic hazards have on the environment and society if such volcanic activity is unprepared for;

Granting that disaster preparedness is already required by a previously passed resolution;

Mortified that the previous resolution says nothing on cooperation between member nations when it comes to handling disasters like multinational volcanic activity;

Attempting to legislate for a plan of action during volcanic activity, to help cooperation between all those affected by volcanic activity;

Hereby:
  1. Defines, for this resolution, volcanic activity as the activity of a volcano;
  2. Mandates that member nations whose populations face the risks of volcanic activity:
    • Address all predicted, current, and recent past volcanic activity within national borders by:
      • preparing for volcanic activity while working to minimize the loss of life, property damage potentially caused by volcanic activity, and when reasonable damage to the environment through warning systems, evacuation procedures, food, water, and shelter distribution, and the prevention of premature returns to evacuated areas;
      • actively preventing further damage by volcanic activity and distributing relevant necessary resources to where they are needed; and
      • reversing the damage caused by recent volcanic activity within reason;
    • Work with nations likely to be significantly affected to prepare for any volcanic activity via communication and combined efforts to protect the general public from volcanic activity or the damage it will or has caused, including providing aid to each other in an evacuation;
    • Inform their populace with regularly updated, widely available, and locally specific information on the dangers of volcanic activity however they see fit;
    • Take whichever evacuation measures ensure that:
      • anyone at immediate risk of volcanic activity knows how to evacuate, when to evacuate, and where to evacuate to;
      • law enforcement and emergency services are ready for evacuation, are trained to direct traffic during an evacuation, and are capable of evacuating those unable to evacuate themselves;
      • complete evacuation time is minimal through proper use of infrastructure;
      • emergency shelters are mobile and flexible enough to house and meet the demands of the evacuated;
  3. Recommends that nations at risk of volcanic activity work with the World Assembly Disaster Bureau and all other relevant WA organizations to improve the safety of the general public from volcanic activity;
Co-authored by Araraukar
Note: Only votes from TNP WA nations and NPA personnel will be counted. If you do not meet these requirements, please add (non-WA) or something of that effect to your vote.
Voting Instructions:
  • Vote For if you want the Delegate to vote For the resolution.
  • Vote Against if you want the Delegate to vote Against the resolution.
  • Vote Abstain if you want the Delegate to abstain from voting on this resolution.
  • Vote Present if you are personally abstaining from this vote.
Detailed opinions with your vote are appreciated and encouraged!

For Against Abstain Present
14100

Volcanic Activity Convention was passed 11,148 (86.5%) to 1,735 (13.5%).
 
Last edited:

Boston Castle

Kaleidoscope King
-
-
I really adore the idea here, but I’m failing to see how this doesn’t fall in the purview of 105. Against [Non-WA]. (105 casts a very wide net, that’s the issue, nothing to do with this proposal in particular.)
 

walrus

Citizen
-
I really adore the idea here, but I’m failing to see how this doesn’t fall in the purview of 105. Against [Non-WA]. (105 casts a very wide net, that’s the issue, nothing to do with this proposal in particular.)
As stated in the preamble, 105 doesn't cover multinational events. Like, at all. It's also being repealed soon :p

For (non-wa)
 

Morover

Primarily a Lurker
-
-
I have to say, the definition here is something I find incredibly funny - whether that's a positive or a negative is another story entirely.

I don't think that 105 should be perceived as preventing legislation on more specific disaster events.

Overall, I think I'm for, unless some compelling argument against is presented.

It's also being repealed soon :p
Well, let's not get ahead of ourselves - but we can hope :wave:
 

Boston Castle

Kaleidoscope King
-
-
IFV

Overview

This proposal seeks to ensure nations be prepared for volcanic activity and can minimize the damage and loss of life caused by volcanic activity including through evacuation procedures, as well as requiring nations work together for these reasons.

Recommendation
This proposal is correct in identifying a lack of international legislation on this topic, and effectively legislates on it by requiring nations to minimize and reverse as much of the damage caused by volcanoes as possible and to distribute resources where they are needed for the survival of their people. These mandates are necessary for the survival of victims of volcanic activity, especially in nations where disaster preparedness is particularly lacking.

For these reasons, the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote FOR the next at-vote General Assembly proposal, "Volcanic Activity Convention".
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Boston Castle

Kaleidoscope King
-
-
This proposal has achieved the necessary approvals to enter the formal queue. Barring it being withdrawn by the author or being marked illegal, it will proceed to the floor for a vote at Wednesday’s Major Update.

@walrus, arf
 

Mall

TNPer
I have to say, the definition here is something I find incredibly funny - whether that's a positive or a negative is another story entirely.

I don't think that 105 should be perceived as preventing legislation on more specific disaster events.

Overall, I think I'm for, unless some compelling argument against is presented.


Well, let's not get ahead of ourselves - but we can hope :wave:
The definition is a 10/10 meme.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top