[GA - defeated] Repeal "Asbestos Consumption, Disposal, and Worker Protection"

Status
Not open for further replies.

Magecastle

Wolf of the North
Pronouns
He/Him
TNP Nation
Magecastle_Embassy_Building_A5
Discord
red_canine
ga.jpg

Repeal "Asbestos Consumption, Disposal, and Worker Protection"
Category: Repeal | GA #435
Proposed by: The Wallenburgian World Assembly Offices | Onsite Topic
Replacement: Asbestos Safety Mandate


General Assembly Resolution #435 “Asbestos Consumption, Disposal and Worker Protection” (Category: Environmental; Industry Affected: All Businesses - Mild) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.
Acknowledging the several health concerns associated with exposure to asbestos crystals,
Cognizant of the socioeconomic necessity of reliable and long-lasting housing and public infrastructure, which many member states could not possibly afford without the use of reinforced concrete,
Recognizing that one-size-fits-none mandates are hardly realistic for a membership of states with wildly varying dependence upon asbestos-reinforced concrete,
Regretting that lax or nonexistent requirements for asbestos-related inspections, as well as absurdly restrictive safety regulations, actually increase the long-term risk of public harm from asbestos due to failure to remove exposed asbestos densely inhabited environments,
Alarmed at the suggestion that large fractions of the populations of member states should be deprived of homes, schools, and places of work due to the limitations of construction technology,
Acknowledging that the membership of this Assembly is prepared to bring into law a well-considered and less reckless replacement to the target resolution,
The World Assembly hereby repeals General Assembly Resolution #435 "Asbestos Consumption, Disposal and Worker Protection" for the following causes:

  1. The target's blanket ban on the production of asbestos and asbestos-reinforced materials will halt nearly all large-scale infrastructure construction and housing projects in many member nations, particularly those which do not enjoy the technological and logistical privileges of geopolitical and imperialist fortune.

  2. The target's uncompromising attitude toward the use of asbestos totally disregards what construction options are actually available to member states.

  3. The target provides no clear requirements with regard to asbestos testing or reporting, leaving it to member states to determine whether, how often, and in what manner buildings of any given category must be tested for asbestos and whether any entity is liable to report a risk of asbestos exposure. As a result, the target creates two classes of entities: those architects, engineers, and property holders foolish enough to investigate or disclose the existence of asbestos in a structure and thereby suffer the punishments and restrictions of the target, and those that do not do so and thereby benefit their intense property and monetary interest in jeopardizing public health.

  4. The target's unreasonably stringent standards for the demolition of buildings containing asbestos result in a requirement that buildings containing asbestos concrete be deconstructed brick-by-brick "in order to avoid creating asbestos dust" by small teams working in "short, non-continuous" shifts. This makes the replacement and disposal of asbestos-reinforced concretes a logistical nightmare for any nation in which asbestos is a common ingredient in construction material. As a result, the target's own mandates increase risk to public health as a result of prolonged asbestos exposure.

  5. By prohibiting the marketing of rooms or buildings containing asbestos within their concrete, the target will produce the effect that asbestos-reinforced buildings be gradually emptied of tenants, workers, and inhabitants, regardless of the actual health hazard the structure may present.
    1. Such prohibitions will inevitably result in mass homelessness, mass unemployment, and general economic ruin for any member nation that frequently relies upon asbestos to reinforce concrete structures and actually manages to enforce these building condemnations.

    2. These effects will severely impede the capacity of member states to carry out their duties to those under their jurisdiction, including requirements by various preexisting World Assembly resolutions to provide for the basic needs of the public.
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!


ForAgainstAbstainPresent
1933
 
Last edited:
Overview
Following the defeat of another repeal of this target by the same author, this proposal seeks, once again, to repeal GAR #435, "Asbestos Consumption, Disposal And Worker Protection". The author contends that it is disproportionately harmful towards the development aspirations of less technologically and logistically advanced member states over the use of asbestos-containing structures and harmful to nations that rely on asbestos in building construction.

Recommendation
This is the second time this issue has come up to vote since the author's last attempt in August 2022 (and a proposed vote missed quorum in December 2022), and the August 2022 ended in a heavy defeat for that proposal. We remain sympathetic to the plight of asbestos-reliant developing nations, nevertheless we cannot countenance the continued use of an objectively unsafe building material that is clearly dangerous to health. We believe this view is widely shared within the World Assembly community.

For the above reasons, the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote Against the General Assembly Resolution at vote, Repeal: “Asbestos Consumption, Disposal And Worker Protection”.
 
Last edited:
This missed quorum in December and the last time it went to vote in August it was defeated, I suspect not likely to go through.

Against by the way.
 
Last edited:
(Non-WA) I am for this repeal. This is one of the more detailed repeals that I have seen, and it demonstrates a number of flaws with the target. Some are stronger than others, but the presence of even one compelling argument ought to be sufficient to justify a repeal. There is also the matter that the targeted resolution is plagiarised which, similarly to GA #002, justifies a repeal in and of itself.
 

A Proud Ship Turned Into a Giant Recycling Problem. So Brazil Plans to Sink It.
The old aircraft carrier, once the navy’s flagship, is packed with asbestos. No country, including Brazil, will let it dock to be dismantled.

Enjoy.
 
Given that this proposal is next at vote, bumping.

Also, after reviewing the arguments for the repeal multiple times, I still can't figure out why we should repeal this. AGAINST
 
(Non-WA) I am for this repeal. This is one of the more detailed repeals that I have seen, and it demonstrates a number of flaws with the target. Some are stronger than others, but the presence of even one compelling argument ought to be sufficient to justify a repeal. There is also the matter that the targeted resolution is plagiarised which, similarly to GA #002, justifies a repeal in and of itself.
The plagiarism is an issue, but my problem is the grounds for repeal cited (as it's pro-asbestos) more so than the plagiarism.
 
The plagiarism is an issue, but my problem is the grounds for repeal cited (as it's pro-asbestos) more so than the plagiarism.
The grounds for the repeal cited are not ideal, and I would have far preferred one that opposed the use of asbestos, rather than employing an approach of “it’s not that bad”. In my view, the repeal still presents good and critical arguments, even with the unfortunate choice of the angle from which it does so. However, I can very much see why the repeal is being crushed at the vote here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top