Dude's got a pretty easy job considering LEGO children won't be invented for decades yet.

Wow. If everyone paid their UN dues like they agreed to, maybe they could afford something adult-sized to drive around in.

"Limited release. Only available from the LEGO Club in Canada."

Well good for them...

"Available on BrickLink starting at $1490 used and $8000 new."

:1 u wot?

@MCLegoboy said:
""Limited release. Only available from the LEGO Club in Canada."

Well good for them...

"Available on BrickLink starting at $1490 used and $8000 new."

:1 u wot?"

It’s baffling, too, because the only exclusive parts as far as I can see are the stickers (or prints maybe). A high new price makes sense but $1500 used is just bizarre.

Wow, very unique. Nice little vehicle too.

The panels are only $350.00 each...

Im surprised they made a UNICEF van given that UNICEF is *technically* political. Like its a U.N agency and Lego doesnt even make Red Cross things. (or even put a red cross on any medical related sets anymore which sucks)

Great Speed Champion source material.

It's a good thing that guy has a shovel. There's always some digging to be done when you're driving the UNICEF van.

What’s interesting is that this appears to be the only United Nations themed set aside from the Architecture UN headquarters. Pretty unique set which would explain the outrageous demand/prices.

They also made a few other Canadian exclusives that featured brands such as Air Canada, the Canadian post, and a milk truck company. Somehow though this van got thrown in as well.

Also, as someone else said the only exclusive part are the two panels, but getting the pair will set you back at least $700…

@Harmonious_Building:
Are you kidding? Look at how long it took for him to raise enough money to pay for the new molds! Everywhere he goes, everyone just asks if he has change for a hundred...

@Brickchap:
UNICEF is a humanitarian organization that just happens to be under the governance of a political body. It is not, itself, political in nature.

@EvilTwin:
Or he could just perch it on the shovel blade and carry it.

@PurpleDave yes I'm aware of that but it is nevertheless apart of a politically influenced 'world government' of sorts body and therefore could be argued as not relevant for Lego. I am not arguing that, but others could and the fact that we have only ever had this obscure set and the U.N headquarters as sets proves that even the U.N and agencies related to it can be considered controversial for Lego sets. Again, that is not my personal belief but one that could be argued.

Did you even bother to read the rest of my comment regarding the Red Cross (also loosely associated to the United Nations)??

@MCLegoboy said:
""Limited release. Only available from the LEGO Club in Canada."

Well good for them...

"Available on BrickLink starting at $1490 used and $8000 new."

:1 u wot?"

Only $1000 for a set where the parts are "a bit chewed" :D

LMAAOOOO I never expected to see comments bashing the United Nations on Brickset, of all places. Did Google point me at Breitbart by mistake?

Good night everyone, we’ll do an autopsy on this thread in the morning and see what killed it and how we can avoid the same mistake again.

@Brickchap said:
"Im surprised they made a UNICEF van given that UNICEF is *technically* political. Like its a U.N agency and Lego doesnt even make Red Cross things. (or even put a red cross on any medical related sets anymore which sucks)"

It was made nearly four decades ago, things such as the UN weren't such hot button topics. Releasing this today would be a different story. Using the Red Cross is a little different, as its use is highly regulated. LEGO would likely not want to contravene international law and risk being publically sued and shamed by the Red Cross.

@Brickchap:
Of course I did. As has been noted here on a few occasions, the Red Cross symbol is trademarked, and all LEGO sets that bore that symbol were unlicensed. There are other issues, since the cross symbol has religious connotations (hence the Red Crescent being used as an equivalent symbol in most Muslim nations), which is a topic that they avoid purely by choice. In the US, the cross symbol trademark is held by Johnson & Johnson, which further complicates things.

On the political issue, though, they’ve also released two White House sets, one US Capitol Building, and tons of sets licensed by and bearing the name of NASA, an organization under the US government.

The 106 Unicef Van was NOT an exclusive... it was also sold thru Toys R Us in Canada. Everyone thinks that it was exclusive, thus explaining the high price on the secondary market. But when I researched it for my Unofficial LEGO Sets/Parts Collectors Guide... a Canadian LEGO collector told me he got one at Toys R Us in Canada, and sent me an image of his MISB box with a price sticker on it from that store.

Also, there was a Red Cross set produced in 1987 in Denmark. Elsewhere it was just a regular set with a red cross on the vehicle in the 6523 set in Brickset. The Danish version is not mentioned in Brickset, but it is set 6523-2 in Bricklink.

@Harmonious_Building said:
"Dude's got a pretty easy job considering LEGO children won't be invented for decades yet. "

Plot Twist, the minifig actually IS the child of 269 : Kitchen or 261 : Bathroom or 297: Nursery

Thank you huwbot for picking this great set on my birthday!

@PurpleDave said:
" @Brickchap :
Of course I did. As has been noted here on a few occasions, the Red Cross symbol is trademarked, and all LEGO sets that bore that symbol were unlicensed. There are other issues, since the cross symbol has religious connotations (hence the Red Crescent being used as an equivalent symbol in most Muslim nations), which is a topic that they avoid purely by choice. In the US, the cross symbol trademark is held by Johnson & Johnson, which further complicates things.

On the political issue, though, they’ve also released two White House sets, one US Capitol Building, and tons of sets licensed by and bearing the name of NASA, an organization under the US government."

The Red Cross symbol also has had to be changed with various videogames over the years. Sometimes this is done by just changing the color of the cross (such as Skullgirls just making it pink) or just changing the symbol altogether (sometimes games will have a photo of a pill). Kinda related, but I just thought that would be something neat to note.

As for the politics, I’d argue that anything related to the UN is a lot messier given the scope of said organization. I think people are generally wary of one army patrolling the whole world, and the organization is widely seen as ineffective. When the most notable thing you do is post a video of BTS performing as violent terrorist topple a government, then you probably aren’t very good at your job.

Also, there are other factors to consider. The White House sets aren’t created to support any political agenda or ideology. It’s just a set of an iconic building that represents the United States. Think of it as something like Buckingham Palace or the Taj Majal (hope I spelled that right). It would be like complaining the Eiffel Tower is political.

NASA itself is also not an inherently political topic. They explore space and conduct scientific research. The government just more or less oversees them, but I’d say learning more about the galaxy is a pretty noble goal all things considered! Heck, I think it’s one of the biggest things humanity has to look forward to. Now if NASA were to say... start making satellites capable of orbital strikes or launching nukes... then I would have an issue.