The South PacificBoard

OWL recommends voting  FOR  the at-vote resolution, "On the Supremacy of the Potato". The Delegate has been asked to cast their vote accordingly.

Please find below the Office's Analysis for an examination of the resolution and the reasons for the final recommendation.

Acclaiming potatoes as a widely enjoyed, versatile, and important food, the at-vote resolution "On the Supremacy of the Potato" would declare potatoes the WA's official food. Its arguments include further nods to several potato-related events in NationStates history, such as an Issue, their role in the incumbent WA Secretary-General's 2020 election campaign, and the multi-time N-Day "Potato Alliance" faction, among others.
While pie, ice cream, and especially cake 🍰🍰🍰 are objectively superior to the potato in every way possibly imaginable, the Office finds this to be only a minor concern, since an international increase in demand for potatoes after the passage of this resolution would in turn leave more of the aforementioned desserts free to delight South Pacifican taste buds. We specifically acknowledge the potential of the potato to be used in recipes for the same, combining their benefits.
Furthermore, if ignoring the lack of a sentence subject, the proposal is adequately written and incorporates the illustrious history of potatoes in NationStates well. Especially as a fellow member of the N-Day Potato Alliance and treatied ally of the centre of all potato efforts Spiritus, the South Pacific is happy to support the promotion of potatoes.

Thus, OWL recommends a vote FOR the at-vote resolution, "On the Supremacy of the Potato".

OWL recommends voting  FOR  the at-vote resolution, "Repeal 'Whistleblower Protection Act'". The Delegate has been asked to cast their vote accordingly.

Please find below the Office's Analysis for an examination of the resolution and the reasons for the final recommendation.

The at-vote resolution "Repeal 'Whistleblower Protection Act'" seeks to strike GA#539 from the pages of international legislation. While the proposal recognises the need for a WA resolution on the topic of whistleblower protection, it claims that the target's provisions are too intrusive in some and too restrictive in other areas, and that it should be replaced by a more adequate resolution.
The deficiencies pointed out by the proposal are accurate and explained in an easy-to-understand manner; especially the more complicated issue demonstrated in point 3, a legal requirement in order to prosecute whistleblowers/media outlets which is impossible to achieve due to time constellations, is untangled well by the authors. We also find the first point of the proposal particularly serious ‒ where the target resolution likely had high-ranking officials such as ministers in mind, it likewise opens up every lowly local bureaucrat's financial information to be published without possibility of legal retaliation, effectively assuming every civil servant guilty of financial misconduct without any proof needed. We wholeheartedly agree that this is utterly unacceptable.
Point 2, while appearing similarly outrageous at first, seems less serious to us, since "private" crimes can still be normally reported on without necessarily making use of the (still possibly innocent!) accused's personal information ‒ mostly, such information does not contribute much to the case at hand, and instead plays into medieval legal beliefs of public shaming. Nonetheless, this is only a proposal to repeal on these grounds, not to itself make legislation to those ends, and as such we see little harm in supporting what is otherwise a well-argued proposal to strike a flawed resolution from the books.

Thus, OWL recommends to vote FOR the at-vote resolution, "Repeal 'Whistleblower Protection Act'".