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: Responsible Industry
Details
Submitted by[?]: LibCom Party
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: September 2055
Description[?]:
| In order to reduce waste, it will be mandatory for producers of goods to accept packaging (returned via the point of sale), and to recycle it. Recycling will not be mandatory for residents, but there will be a deposit on reusable items (such as bottles) to encourage reuse. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government-sponsored recycling programs.
Old value:: The government funds recycling facilities for public use.
Current: Local governments decide about this.
Proposed: The government funds recycling facilities and enforces mandatory recycling for residents, commercial enterprise, and industry.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 14:06:26, May 09, 2005 CET | From | LibCom Party | To | Debating the Responsible Industry |
| Message | Due to the cost of recycling, this will discourage excessive packaging, and encourage the use of reusable packaging. This should lead to a significant reduction in waste. |
| Date | 18:43:43, May 09, 2005 CET | From |  Protectorate Party | To | Debating the Responsible Industry |
| Message | We will support this |
| Date | 21:29:57, May 09, 2005 CET | From | Leviathan Party | To | Debating the Responsible Industry |
| Message | We once again point out that recycling is a hoax, and has been throughly discredited by independant sources. It does not save energy, it does not save raw materials, and we do not have a waste management 'crisis' as alarmists often claim. If recycling did save energy and materials, wouldn't it be profitable to recycle for businesses? Why does they need government funds then? This bill would amount to corporate welfare to support the bogus policies of uneducated environmentalists. |
| Date | 23:24:38, May 09, 2005 CET | From | Free Reform Coalition (FRP) | To | Debating the Responsible Industry |
| Message | hmmm.... |
| Date | 23:26:17, May 09, 2005 CET | From | Free Reform Coalition (FRP) | To | Debating the Responsible Industry |
| Message | On the other hand, what it amounts to is better waste management. Instead of huge garbage dumps, some materials can be reused to serve other purposes. We can't remember at the present time, but how long does plastic take to finally disintegrate? |
| Date | 17:25:15, May 10, 2005 CET | From | LibCom Party | To | Debating the Responsible Industry |
| Message | LevP raises a fair point regarding government funding - clearly, in order for there to be an incentive to reduce waste, this proposal depends on the recycling being paid for by industry, not by the government. OOC: Damn, not enough options again! |
| Date | 02:38:19, May 11, 2005 CET | From | Leviathan Party | To | Debating the Responsible Industry |
| Message | Actually, there is an option available to us: end government funding and let businesses do what is best for them. We already have (perhaps over) strict pollution regulations in Malivia, so if recycling lessens pollution and saves resources, wouldn't it be profitable without government funding? |
| Date | 03:13:11, May 11, 2005 CET | From | Protectorate Party | To | Debating the Responsible Industry |
| Message | How much does it cost the government to require a deposit on a bottle? To force reuse of packaging? This would at little cost to the government cut back on litter and waste thus making a cleaner Malivia. |
| Date | 11:48:22, May 11, 2005 CET | From | LibCom Party | To | Debating the Responsible Industry |
| Message | Letting businesses do what's best for them means letting them produce lots of cheap and nasty packaging for marketing purposes, which is then discarded by the consumer and left for us to deal with. This intent of this bill is to force businesses to clean up after themselves. |
| Date | 23:05:55, May 11, 2005 CET | From | Leviathan Party | To | Debating the Responsible Industry |
| Message | If that is the intent, why not simply write solid waste regulations into oure pollution laws? |
| Date | 05:28:06, May 19, 2005 CET | From | Protectorate Party | To | Debating the Responsible Industry |
| Message | Solid waste regulations would have a tough time handling drink containers while a deposit will be an easy way to reduce them scattered across the nation. |
| Date | 16:01:37, May 20, 2005 CET | From | LibCom Party | To | Debating the Responsible Industry |
| Message | Putting this to the vote. Note the government already funds recycling facilities - this will simply shift most of the burden onto businesses. |
| Date | 22:16:08, May 20, 2005 CET | From | Leviathan Party | To | Debating the Responsible Industry |
| Message | Are we to understand that this bill would then pay for recycling facilities from the private sector, not the government's coffers? |
| Date | 19:04:47, May 21, 2005 CET | From | LibCom Party | To | Debating the Responsible Industry |
| Message | The government would continue to fund domestic recycling facilities, but on a smaller scale, since industry would incur the costs of recycling or reusing returned packaging. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 88 | |||||||
| no | Total Seats: 0 | |||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 12 |
| Random fact: Your user name is not your party name. Choose a concise and easy to remember user name. You can change your party name at any point in time later in the game. |
| Random quote: "Corruption greases the wheels of government, and my private jet." - Sung Dae Kim, former Dranian politician |