This UN resolution will be up for vote until Sunday, July 18th. As usual I'll cast my votes based on the majority of this poll.

Remember that only nations residing in Canada may vote in this poll, and those who have more than one nation in Canada, may still only vote once.


--------
Description: Protected woodland is being destroyed by illegal loggers and this wood is being sold around the world for use by companies hoping to cut costs at the expense of the enviroment.

The following rules would help to stop illegal trade.

1. The formation of a World Woodland Protection Team, aka WWP.

2. A world reconised certificate of legal logging, given to companies approved by the WWP.

3. Annual and random checks on companies by the WWP, to check that companies are logging legally.

4. A world recongised stamp of approval on all products made using WWP certified wood.

5. Heavy fines and on any company using none WWP certified wood.

6. Revoking of trade licences for repeat offenders.

If logging is illegal, than by definition, each individual nation has the right to stop it. This resolution is therefore pointless, and is of the domain of individual nations, not the UN.

NO!

The UN has no business in my region tracking "renegade loggers!"
What will they do if they catch one?
Throw em in one of my jails, so I have to feed them?
Give them a piddly fine? If so who gets the money from the fine?

Anyone stealing trees here has to answer to The Clan of APE.
We decide what the penalty is for that crime. Although anything less than
the death penalty is unheard of here... :ph43r:

And, who is voting YES on this? What is your reasoning?

Also... what if I change a persons mind about their vote, they can't change it!
There should be an option to change your vote.

The boards don't offer the change your mind option in polls (that I know of).

You'd have to post a change of vote in the thread (and I'd PM Chex as well.)

As for BT, we're voting against this one. Nice idea, could have been considerably better done and more in line with the UN's powers and authorities. It intrudes upon nations sovreignty and as Bweezy noted if it's illegal then the nation will be trying to stop it on it's own.

On that note, I'm considering dropping my UN status. If I do, I'll be creating a new UN nation. Actually, I'm thinking of creating two identical nations, one UN and one not, as an experiment to see the effect of being in the UN.

Plus it has spelling errors. I'm not going to vote for proposal that contains spelling errors. If you're going to put something up where thousands of people can read and vote on it, you'd better proofread it.

Furthermore many nations already have much _stronger_ logging controls in place. In those countries this bill would do nothing or actually be a step backward.

For example, Pillory Hall has no prisons. Those in violation of the environmental laws are subjected to public ridicule, then exiled. And I want to be the one making the decisions about who can cut where, not some faceless drone from the UN.

I'm almost considering withdrawing from the UN too. It seems like every time a resolution passes I have to raise taxes to pay for it. I'd be better off on my own.

I voted for it...didn't really see an issue with it. Nations that don't enforce their logging laws should either let the UN do it for them or repeal them, and if they don't want the UN to do it, they should do it themselves.

The problem is that the resolution is fundamentally flawed.

It says it will stamp out illegal logging. Illegal logging is not defined. It then enforces "legal logging" without defining what that is either.

Seems to me that if the UN isn't going to define what is legal logging, then it should leave the enforcement to local laws to each individual nation. As such, the creation of the WWP and its policing mechanisms is redundant and not cost effective.

Further, it really treads on areas of local sovereignty, as this resolution doesn't even give the UN any rights to define acceptable or legal logging practices in teh first place.

To be blunt, my 11 year old son could have come up with something that was better thought out than this piece of crap.

It strikes me as this: If the individual nations have laws, either they will enforce them or the UN will. If the individual nations don't have laws, then there's nothing the UN is obligated to do. That's if you accept the definitions of "legal" and "illegal" as they are defined within states.

And does that whole sovereignty thing fly? If you're so concerned abotu sovereignty, don't join the UN. There's no rule against leaving. UN rules clearly state that all member states are bound by UN decisions, and that's accepted by all those who join. Frankly, not having resolutions be binding makes the UN completely worthless.

The UN resolution, Illegal Logging, was passed, 10608 votes to 4917.

I voted AGAINST this resolution, based on this poll.


Thanks for voting. :)