We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Pollution Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: United Liberal Alliance
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: January 2042
Description[?]:
| We believe that in today's world, pollution is becoming an increasing problem. One problem is the increasing amount of waste generated by people in everyday living. We therefore propose that in the interests of trying to reduce pollution, this Act would provide guidelines on pollution reduction for use by industry however as we believe that it is not the government's place to force the guidelines upon industry and to ensure that our industry remains competitive in the world market, they will remain a loose voluntary code of practice. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government regulation of pollution in industry.
Old value:: Industrial pollution is not regulated by the government.
Current: The government enforces highly restrictive industrial pollution standards.
Proposed: The government provides pollution prevention guidelines, but does not enforce them.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | not recorded |
From | | To | Debating the Pollution Act | | Message | We support article one. Working for an improved environment is a good thing.
However, article two calls for coersive funding of new facilities. If they are worth building (as I believe) they can be built and maintained at least as well by private firms. Thus we can not support such an innovation. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | United Liberal Alliance | To | Debating the Pollution Act | | Message | We see your point on article 2, and may drop it. However, we feel that there should be a national policy on recycling and as no option to promote recycling without providing facilities is available then we feel that this is perhaps preferable. It also depends on the definition of 'facility' does this mean the entire recycling service or does it simply mean that the government provides coordinated areas for recycling whilst the actual service is carried out by private companies. Therefore whilst the government may provide an area for recycling (a facility) and therefore offical government promotion of recycling, it does not mean that the actual process of recycling (i.e. removing waste from the recycling bins and recycling it) cannot be done by private companies!! |
| Date | not recorded |
From | | To | Debating the Pollution Act | | Message | It says "funds". Simply giving advice on methods and places we can do in the guidlines of article one. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | | To | Debating the Pollution Act | | Message | So there really is no need for a second article. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | United Liberal Alliance | To | Debating the Pollution Act | | Message | The guidelines in article 1 are for industrial pollution not everyday waste and recycling. We are prepared to remove article 1 if that is the consensus but we feel that more has to be done to promote recycling amongst the general populace. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | | To | Debating the Pollution Act | | Message | Article one is fine. That's the one we support. And in the actual proposal it says "pollution prevention...", nothing about industry only. And in some countries industries are legally responsible for recycling their products. Not that that is what we propose, but it is precedent for including recycling in the pollution prevention guidlines. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | United Liberal Alliance | To | Debating the Pollution Act | | Message | Article 1 does mention industries specifically as it is called Government Regulation of Pollution in Industry. We still think that something more than this needs to be done to explicitly address domestic recycling. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | | To | Debating the Pollution Act | | Message | We agree that recycling needs to be adressed, but that doesn't require us to set up a brand new government funded institution to do it. After all, the only way to know that we do exactly as much as is worth doing is to let everyone choose exactly what they will do/pay for. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | | To | Debating the Pollution Act | | Message | If you can't include recycling guidlines in pollution guidlines, then there is ample room for it in the campaigning section (should be at least). |
| Date | not recorded |
From | United Liberal Alliance | To | Debating the Pollution Act | | Message | OK, we may consider removing the proposal. Again I do stress though that we are only talking about the government providing recycling bins. The actual recycling would have to be carried out by private firms. We are just ensuring that there is the option for everyone to recycle. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | | To | Debating the Pollution Act | | Message | They have that option. As you say, there'd be (and are actually forming) private firms doing recycling. The only thing changed by removing that proposal is that paying will be done directly by those who use the recycling-service, instead of filtered through the taxation-system.
This also ensures that the recyclers are not dependent on the government, and so can continue regardless cabinet-changes. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | United Liberal Alliance | To | Debating the Pollution Act | | Message | In that case, whilst we still feel that the government should more actively promote recycling, we will remove Article 2. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | | To | Debating the Pollution Act | | Message | Thanks. Now we support the bill. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | | To | Debating the Pollution Act | | Message | Hmm. Can I ask for an explanation for PNP's vote? Just, you know, put it in words. You don't have to, but it would be interesting to hear. |
subscribe to this discussion -
unsubscribeVoting
| Vote |
Seats |
| yes | Total Seats: 51 |
| no | Total Seats: 32 |
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Each user account may only be used by the player who set it up. Handing over an account to another player is not allowed. |
| Random quote: "If voting changed anything, they'd abolish it." - Ken Livingstone |