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: (Yet Another) Pollution Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: United Blobs
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: August 2072
Description[?]:
| This bill is designed to be a short term measure to guarentee the competitiveness of Hobrazian industry. With the current high regulations companies are forced to divert funds to keeping these regulations from research into reducing pollution. We have to consider that when the economy is finally introduced, unless we close our borders to international trade we will be open to cheap imports and have to guarentee that our industry thrives. Once we are sure of the technological position of our industry, we can then increase pollution controls again without fear of damaging our economy and, more importantly, safe guarding the jobs of our citizens. Our people will not be served well if our industries cannot survive. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government regulation of pollution in industry.
Old value:: The government enforces highly restrictive industrial pollution standards.
Current: The government enforces highly restrictive industrial pollution standards.
Proposed: The government enforces moderate pollution restrictions.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 21:57:08, June 22, 2005 CET | From |  United Blobs | To | Debating the (Yet Another) Pollution Act |
| Message | I hope that the WSS and CSP will once again stand behind us on this matter and we urge all new parties to join us in this attempt to reduce the regualtions stifiling Hobrazian businesses |
| Date | 22:25:02, June 22, 2005 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the (Yet Another) Pollution Act |
| Message | Of course, our position on this is well documented. |
| Date | 23:42:08, June 22, 2005 CET | From | Social Democratic Liberal Party | To | Debating the (Yet Another) Pollution Act |
| Message | Could you be more specific as to just how short-term this change in Hobrazian environmental policy will be? If a bill is passed with no strict time limit (or at least timescale eg. 5-10 years) we fear that such a relaxation of controls may turn out to be the thin end of the wedge. |
| Date | 00:24:12, June 23, 2005 CET | From |  Liberal-Progressive Union | To | Debating the (Yet Another) Pollution Act |
| Message | What guarantees are in place to make sure the pollution controls return once the short term relaxing of the controls come to an end? And what is the period of time that is needed for these restrictions to be lifted before the controls are increased again? |
| Date | 01:28:40, June 23, 2005 CET | From | National Imperial Hobrazian Front | To | Debating the (Yet Another) Pollution Act |
| Message | As usual, we support this measure. |
| Date | 01:40:20, June 23, 2005 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the (Yet Another) Pollution Act |
| Message | There cannot be any exact time-scale implemented until the economy is implemented. As far as I understand this ammendment to our current laws, this allows our fledgling economy in whatever state it appears when economics are introduced to the simulation to provide quick and efficient growth. If it is found that we are provided with a 3rd world economic situation, the relaxed laws introduced here would remain so until the economy has modernised itself to the point that ecological registrictions would not cause undue harm. Conversely, should our economy be a streamlined and advanced one (such as modern Europe or US) then the laws would be returned to their existing higher standard within about 2 years, depending upon political will. |
| Date | 16:21:46, June 24, 2005 CET | From | Social Democratic Liberal Party | To | Debating the (Yet Another) Pollution Act |
| Message | This seems reasonable enough, we will support this measure but will keep a close eye on the situation once the economy is implemented. |
| Date | 08:12:56, June 25, 2005 CET | From | Liberal-Progressive Union | To | Debating the (Yet Another) Pollution Act |
| Message | I'll support this also. |
| Date | 21:33:53, June 25, 2005 CET | From | Left Communist Party | To | Debating the (Yet Another) Pollution Act |
| Message | As again, no. |
| Date | 19:14:38, June 26, 2005 CET | From | United Socialist Movement | To | Debating the (Yet Another) Pollution Act |
| Message | The United Socialist Movement feels that the current industrial pollution standards should remain, in order to preserve the well-being of the planet. We believe that the inconvenience to industry will gradually fall, and so we have chosen to reject the proposal by the United Blobs. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 143 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 110 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 147 |
| Random fact: "Doxxing", or the publishing of personally identifiable information about another player without permission, is forbidden. |
| Random quote: "Impossible is a word to be found only in the dictionary of fools." - Napoleon Bonaparte |