Post

Fellow WA nations, I have compiled a list of grievances about the current resolution and submitted it in the TNP MoWA thread. I request you read the grievances before committing your vote. They are not about abortion but the callous language of the resolution and imposition of regulations without taking into account member nation's unique situations.

Grievances :

1)
Clause 2 effectively forces governments to pay for a medical procedure. The clause forces a national government to bear a significant financial burden without in-fact highlighting a method to pay for it. This is of special importance in poorer countries. Additionally, if the government does not have a nationalized health service, this clause imposes additional costs in order to establish the infrastructure for the medical procedure itself. This could have worked around by providing a pathway through vouchers.

2)
In section 4,
"WA Choice Plus is established and may construct, per section 5, clinics with funds assessed by the General Accounting Office from members in which there does not exist, in the view of the WACC, adequate access to abortion."
The meaning is ambiguous. Would the clinics be built at the member's request or where WA finds necessary? If it is the latter, I believe it is a gross violation of the sovereignty of a nation.

3)
In section 5,
"The clinics will be built on land donated by members where the member doing so grants to the clinic a ten-year renewable lease in which no (a) direct tax or (b) indirect tax in excess of one per cent may be collected"
This is a blatant over-reach of WA authority in that it directs how member nations may tax their own land. The clinic may use utilities ranging from water and power to biomedical waste management services. These services have indirect fees. Why should not the clinics not pay fees for medical licensing or biomedical waste management? If it would be the case, shouldn't other medical establishments also be exempt from taxation? One might argue cancer and advanced age coronary disease treatment as just as necessary as abortion services and thus they should be exempt too?

4)
Pertaining to the same quotation from section 5 above, in a resolution as comprehensive as this, there is no mention of national governments might lease land if they do not control any. For example, a federation where the government has no direct control of their land. A relatively minor issue but shows that the resolution and its author have little regard for the diversity of governments which are WA members.