International Biodiversity Conservation Aid Act

[Blair]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-10958695

Would you be happy to introduce something like this into the scheme?

[Blair]

How would the process of convincing a foreign gov't who does not prioritize such conservation nor allows/cooperates with NGOs at present, to change such policies and pursue a better approach? Does that have to go through normal diplomatic channels? Can the IBCB play a roll in that process and if so, what does it look like?

Well sorry to hijack this but it can go through several different channels. Either face to face diplomacy with our team, or through the various UN groups if they've signed any treaties. As long as the ICBC falls under the wider branch of the office of external affairs they should be able to reach deals with other nations.

The issues with biodiversity came into it when you have a country like the Democratic republic of congo because the central government give approval to these projects when in fact they only have control of about 10% of the country

[Blair]

I offer this amendment to the bill

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Blair]

Apologies I'll propose an amendment when I get back from college in about 4 hours 

[Blair]

I think the debt incentive is probably the best one available to motivate cooperation, and I like that we have some mechanism for that.

However, I must express some degree of caution because it could encourage reckless borrowing in the future on the assumption that said debt will be cancelled by simply joining this effort. I think some limiting mechanism, maybe limiting it to just already accrued debt or some percentage of their total debts owed to Atlasia, or maybe a total cap limit per country might in some way reduce this downside potential.

It's not designed to apply to all debts or all countries-for example we wouldn't do it with france or the uk since both countries have the resources to do it, and don't need aid.

It's designed to make developing countries actually act-because a lot of people sneer saying 'these developed countries don't care about the environment'

[Blair]

I think the debt incentive is probably the best one available to motivate cooperation, and I like that we have some mechanism for that.

However, I must express some degree of caution because it could encourage reckless borrowing in the future on the assumption that said debt will be cancelled by simply joining this effort. I think some limiting mechanism, maybe limiting it to just already accrued debt or some percentage of their total debts owed to Atlasia, or maybe a total cap limit per country might in some way reduce this downside potential.

It's not designed to apply to all debts or all countries-for example we wouldn't do it with france or the uk since both countries have the resources to do it, and don't need aid.

It's designed to make developing countries actually act-because a lot of people sneer saying 'these developed countries don't care about the environment'

Who the hell said anything about France and Britain. I am talking about banana republics and Zimbabwe. Countries with the least councern and most desire to take advantage of such a mechanism. I applauded the addition of this mechanism, but it comes with its own risks and if we don't limit their ability to wipe out debts, they will load up on debts spending years worth in a single year before participating in this program, hence my point.

Okay, can we stop this idiotic idea that African and latin American countries don't care about biodiversity. Why do people seem to purport this myth that they're hell bent on environmental destruction?

They don't have the least concern for biodiversity-that honour goes to the countries that are preparing to begin oil drilling in the arctic, or the country that spilled an entire oil rig on the gulf of mexico,

The programs aren't designed to wipe out debts-all the schemes done in the last 5 years have been on a really really small scale.

I'll agree to a cap, but I don't want it to basically reduce the fact that debt for conservation swaps can be effective

[Blair]

I think the debt incentive is probably the best one available to motivate cooperation, and I like that we have some mechanism for that.

However, I must express some degree of caution because it could encourage reckless borrowing in the future on the assumption that said debt will be cancelled by simply joining this effort. I think some limiting mechanism, maybe limiting it to just already accrued debt or some percentage of their total debts owed to Atlasia, or maybe a total cap limit per country might in some way reduce this downside potential.

It's not designed to apply to all debts or all countries-for example we wouldn't do it with france or the uk since both countries have the resources to do it, and don't need aid.

It's designed to make developing countries actually act-because a lot of people sneer saying 'these developed countries don't care about the environment'

Who the hell said anything about France and Britain. I am talking about banana republics and Zimbabwe. Countries with the least councern and most desire to take advantage of such a mechanism. I applauded the addition of this mechanism, but it comes with its own risks and if we don't limit their ability to wipe out debts, they will load up on debts spending years worth in a single year before participating in this program, hence my point.

Okay, can we stop this idiotic idea that African and latin American countries don't care about biodiversity. Why do people seem to purport this myth that they're hell bent on environmental destruction?

They don't have the least concern for biodiversity-that honour goes to the countries that are preparing to begin oil drilling in the arctic, or the country that spilled an entire oil rig on the gulf of mexico,

The programs aren't designed to wipe out debts-all the schemes done in the last 5 years have been on a really really small scale.

I'll agree to a cap, but I don't want it to basically reduce the fact that debt for conservation swaps can be effective

But most everyone of those counties would acknowledge environmental concerns and work to mitigate the problem or seek to prevent it. We can argue over how this is occuring and you are right, there have been lapses, but there is a far greater society concern for the environment in welathy, democratic counties then in dictatorial, impoverised ones.

For the third time, I think debt swaps are going to be an effective tool, my point once again is that if you aren't careful, it will be taken advantage of at our expense, for not environmental gain.

But the debt swaps are always under our control-we agree how much money is going to be swapped, as I wrote into the bill we only let the swap happen if the criteria is reached and they actually meet conservation targets. We're not giving them a blank state, and we have the controls. How are we going to be taken for a ride when we have full control over the process?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's a broad oversimplification, look at India and it's widespread pollution of the ganges, and compare it with Cuba

[Blair]

Blair, do you still have an amendment you want to introduce?

As for Yankee's idea, I don't think it should be necessary. I trust the discretion of the DoEA on not making these things too ridiculous.

Nah, I'm going to attach it to the National Parks bill. Good to actually have environmental issues

[Blair]

Aye

[Blair]

Is it 7 or 10 days after passing?