, C Buick (non-member)

The meeting was called to order around 13:00.

1. Election of Chair

Motion 1 (Carter & Easton) BIRT Deutz be chair.
Agreed

Motion 2 (Chesham & Stair) BIRT Miller take the minutes.
Carried 8-0-2

2. Minutes of the previous meeting, business arising therefrom and the
General Secretary's rising of Notices of Motion and Business from
previous meetings
a. Amendment of the 7 July 2007 meeting minutes

Motion 3 (Miller & Easton) BIRT in §2.f.iii, "Miller stated
that Martin had uttered threats of physical violence against
another comrade." be inserted at the beginning of the second
paragraph.
Carried 5-2-3

Motion 4 (White & Miller) BIRT in §2.f.iii, "(apart from
White)" be inserted before "for referring the matter to the
Branch".
Agreed

Motion 5 (Bisset & Deutz) BIRT in §2.f.iii, "and cited one
such telephone call made to Cde Bissett" be inserted after
"made abusive telephone calls to Head Office", and that
"Bissett explained that he did not feel it was an abusive
call." replace the following sentence.
Carried 6-0-3
b. Adoption of the 7 July 2007 meeting minutes

Motion 6 (Deutz & Easton) BIRT the 7 July minutes be adopted
as amended.
Agreed

c. Matters arising from the 5 May 2007 meeting minutes
i. 2.g.i (Head Office security)

Miller reported that a member's relative had posted details
of the security breach to a third-party website. He also
reported on another incident in the Head Office vestibule
where the police were involved, but that the police assured
us that we had no liability for it. Stair and Chesham said
we could incur liability for people smoking in the
vestibule. Browne disagreed.

d. Matters arising from the 2 June 2007 meeting
i. Motion 8 (GPC): Letter received from HOO and Treasurer
(27 July) indicating that the GPC was not necessary, but
that an assistant would be helpful.

Motion 7 (Miller & Easton) BIRT the EC issue a call for a
volunteer in line with the Head Office Organiser and
Treasurer's requirements.
Carried 10-0

It was agreed to reconsider the matter of the GPC at
Conference.

ii. Motion 18 (speakers' classes): No report received from
Central Organiser

iii. Motion 16 (Conference resolution implementation)
A. Report from Treasurer (27 July) regarding
implementation of resolution on Branch dues. The
Treasurer chose HSBC for the bank account and requested
that 20 000 be transferred into the new account.

Motion 8 (Browne & White) BIRT both requests of
Treasurer be granted.
Carried 10-0

B. No written report received from Ballot Committee
regarding secret ballot implementation. Browne said
that they hoped to produce a written report for ADM.

e. Matters arising from the 7 July 2007 meeting
i. Regarding §2.f.iii, Miller said we wanted to correct a
statement he had made about the abusive telephone calls. He
said that only one call was abusive; the other, a voicemail
message, was a merely inappropriate as it disclosed private
personal information about a member.
ii. Motion 24 (charge against Martin)
A. The charge proper

Bissett said that at the 7 July meeting, the chair said
he would not accept any motion but a charge under
Rule 31. Chesham said he had asked every EC member if
Martin was engaged in action detrimental, and finding
no objection, ruled that a Rule 31 charge was the only
permitted course of action. Browne said he did not
understand that ruling and that the EC had the option
of referring the matter to the Branch. Easton explained
that Rule 29 applies if the complaint is made to the
Branch, and Rule 31 if the complaint is made to the EC.
He said that once the EC deems a member to be acting
detrimental, the EC has no choice but to charge.

The following correspondence concerning the charge was
read out:
* Circular from General Secretary (11 July)
explaining that he did not mail out the charge
because the resolution did not specify the
particulars
* Letter from Central London Branch (28 July)
containing the following resolution:

BIRT with respect to Motion 24 of the 7 July EC
meeting minutes, Central London Branch calls
upon the EC to issue a more specific charge in
accordance with Rule 31. (5-0)

* Letter from Chesham, Easton, Helps, Miller, and
White (21 July) arguing that the original
resolution was sufficient, and drawing comparison
with past charges, which also did not specify the
particulars
* E-mails from S Colborn (13 July) deploring the
treatment of Martin and calling it a witch hunt and
a personal feud
* E-mail from West London Branch (27 July) containing
the following resolution:

West London Branch is dismayed that the matter
of Comrade Martin's transgressions has not been
referred to us and requests that it be done so
now, in the best interests of the Party and of
the member. Such action would be in line with
longstanding practice and consistent with the
EC's stated policy; namely, "...in general, any
complaint or disciplinary matter which can be
handled at the Branch level should be handled
at the Branch level" (Special EC Meeting
minutes, 24 June). The branch has asked Comrade
Tenner to attend your August meeting. (8-0)

* E-mail from East Anglia Regional Branch (29 July)
containing the following resolution:

This Branch gives full support to the EC motion
to charge Michelle Martin under Rule 31 at the
7 July 2007 meeting. (4-2-2)#

* An e-mail from K Martin on behalf of M Martin
(22 July) and two e-mails from M Martin (29 July
and 4 August) offering a partial apology and giving
a response to the charges
* E-mails from Lancaster Branch (31 July) containing
the following resolution:

Lancaster Branch notes and endorses the E.C.
resolution of June 24th, 2007, that "This E.C.
believes that the effect of Party discipline
should be corrective and preventative rather
than punitive."

The Branch was surprised to see an item at the
last E.C. meeting of July 7th, 2007 dealing
with complaints from 3 members of Central
London Branch against a member of West London
Branch - dealt with using a rule 31 charge when
the first rule on discipline in the Party rule
book is rule 29. The first line of this rule
states that "Charges against any member shall
be submitted in writing to the Branch and a
copy supplied to the member accused who shall
be allowed 14 days to enter the defence." We do
not understand why rule 29 was not used in the
case.

Also, the Branch was disturbed to see that a
comrade a) made a personal complaint against a
member, b) sat as chair of the EC whilst
dealing with this complaint, c) ruled that the
matter be dealt with under rule 31 rather than
rule 29, and d) voted on the validity of the
complaint. These actions filled the Branch with
disquiet.

We expect justice in the Socialist Party to be
at least as fair as the capitalist legal system
where a plaintiff would under no circumstances
find themselves in the jury in the same case.
(6-0)

Miller addressed four objections which various members
had been raising to the charge: namely, that the charge
was personally motivated or a witch hunt, that it was
out of process, that it was unsympathetic, and that the
rules were archaic. He said a witch hunt occurs only
when the accusations are baseless, whereas the EC had
considerable first-hand evidence. He said that any
personal motivations of those making the charge are
irrelevent, as the charge was debated and accepted on
its merits.

Easton said that the matter is now in the hands of the
membership, and stressed that a charge did not
automatically result in expulsion, contrary to what
some members have stated. He said that he believed the
General Secretary was acting in good faith but in
error.

Deutz noted differences with past charges, such as the
fact that the EC met weekly and that the charge was not
the first resort. She thought the application of the
rule was wrong but that it was not a witch hunt.

Chesham said that charges were so rare that there is
little tradition or precedent for handling them; we are
bound only to follow the rule, not past examples. He
said that contrary to past charges, this charge stems
not from a single issue or incident but from
overwhelming evidence, and that Martin's defence
e-mails do not ameliorate things.

Bissett said that three previous general secretaries
agreed with his circular. He said that there was no
need for the charge because corrective and preventative
discipline is working.

White said that we don't ask people to apologise for
their political views.

Stair said that the situation is being exacerbated by
people on Internet who are commenting on the case
before it has even been properly formulated. He said he
does not believe charge is being laid punitively.

Martin said she had been long thinking about changing
her mind and has been talking with Cde Montague about
the Irish question.

K Martin said that this is very clearly a personal
vendetta and that Miller was taking her words out of
context.

Browne said there is no need to proceed with this
charge as Martin's ideas have already been questioned.
He argued for referring the matter to the Branch, and
asked why the complaint wasn't made to them in the
first place.

White said the first incident was around June 2006, and
that there was uproar at the time but it came to
nothing.

Bissett said that Lawrie wrote the first letter of
complaint about Martin's MySpace pages despite not
having good computer skills.

Helps said that members of West London Branch have
known about this problem for over a year and have done
absolutely nothing. Deutz asked the West London Branch
Secretary when he learned about Martin's views. Tenner
replied that Branch members did not know about the
charges until they were made. He said that it would be
an insult not to refer the matter to the Branch, as EC
members imply that the Branch is incapable of dealing
with it.

Martin said that she doesn't think she should get
special treatment.

Allen read out examples of Martin using abusive
language against members.

Motion 9 (Chesham & Easton) BIRT the Executive
Committee, having been presented with considerable
evidence that Comrade Michelle Martin has been
expressing support for nationalist, reformist, and
theist views and organisations over the last year,
deems her behaviour to be an infringement of the
Principles and Rules and detrimental to the interests
of the Party, and for this reason reasserts that she
has been charged under Rule 31 and is suspended from
all Party activity except the matter in dispute.

BIFRT the Executive Committee shall forthwith submit to
all Branches and to Cde Martin the particulars of this
charge; namely, this Resolution, Resolution 24 of the
7 July EC meeting minutes, a copy of Rule 31, the three
letters submitted to the 7 July EC meeting and upon
whose basis the charge was laid, a list of addresses
for web pages referenced or quoted in said letters, an
offer to send electronic or printed copies of the web
pages on request, a copy of Rule 6, and a copy of
Principle 7.

Amendment (Miller & Easton) Add to the end "and the
three letters from Martin". For: Helps, Miller.
Against: Carter, Deutz, Chesham, Stair, White, Easton,
Bissett. Abstaining: Browne. Failed 2-7-1

Vote on substantive motion:

For: Chesham, Miller, Stair, Helps, White, Easton.
Against: none. Abstaining: Deutz, Carter, Bissett,
Browne.
Carried 6-0-4

Easton left at this point.

Motion 10 (Stair & White) BIRT the Assistant
Secretary send out the charge.

Amendment (Browne & Carter) Insert at the beginning
"the General Secretary and". For: Carter, Deutz,
Browne, Helps. Against: White, Miller, Chesham, Stair.
Abstaining: Bissett. Failed 4-4-1

Vote on substantive motion:

For: Chesham, Stair, Helps, White, Carter. Against:
Browne, Deutz. Abstaining: Miller, Bissett.
Carried 5-2-2

B. Conduct of General Secretary, Chesham, and Central
London Branch

The following correspondence was considered:
* Circular from General Secretary (21 July)
complaining about alleged activities and statements
of Chesham at Summer School and of Central London
Branch's involvement in disciplinary matters
* Circular from Central London Branch (21 July)
denying the General Secretary's claim that it was
responsible for the 24 June special EC meeting
* Circular from Chesham (26 July) denying the General
Secretary's claims

Bissett deplored the recent personal attacks against
him and other comrades and said that members' hasty use
of e-mail was partly to blame.

Stair took issue with Bissett's denial of having a
conflict of interest in matters involving Martin and
gave particulars of the alleged conflict of interest.
Miller concurred that Bissett had a conflict of
interest in matters involving Martin, claimed he and
others present had personal knowledge of it, and gave
nine examples of what he claimed was Bissett's active
obstruction or diversion of charge procedures. Chesham
agreed.

Deutz said that Bissett's refusal to send the charge
was for procedural rather than personal reasons.
Bissett agreed. Buick said that up to five former
General Secretaries concurred that the charge was too
vague to send out. Johnson argued for letting Bissett
handle the matter, and that his past behaviour was
irrelevant.

Motion 11 (Stair & White) BIRT the EC notes that the
General Secretary has not conducted himself
appropriately in that he has spent a lot of energy into
trying to malagin Cde Chesham; that he contradicts
himself with his personal statement (circular) in
relation to alleged slanders against Cde Smith and his
own comments, warnings, and observations about
Cde Smith's behaviour to Cde Martin and potential
behaviour to Cde Clanchy; and that he has spread
malicious rumours about the running of Head Office and
members who frequently attend and work at Head Office.

Thomas deplored the informal meeting at Summer
School to discuss the charge as the Branch is the
unit of organisation. Chesham and Miller said the
meeting was a called at the request of the General
Secretary, that it simply dispelled false rumours
of an expulsion, and that it made no decisions.
Others gave differing accounts of how meeting was
called. Bissett said his request for dialogue at
Summer School was in the hope members could sort
out problems amicably. At Bissett's request, Miller
read out the e-mail to spintcom suggesting the
dialogue.

Miller and Browne said they would not support this
motion as it assumed facts not in evidence.

For: Stair, White. Against: Miller, Bissett, Deutz,
Browne, Carter. Abstaining: Chesham, Helps.
Failed 2-5-2

Motion 12 (Miller & White) BIRT Lancaster and West
London Branches be advised that Rule 31 applies because
the complaints were made to the EC and not to the
Branch, and that Lancaster Branch be advised that as
the complaint was of a political rather than personal
nature, Cde Chesham had no conflict of interest in
voting for it.

For: Miller, White, Helps, Stair. Against: Carter,
Deutz, Bissett, Browne. Abstaining: Chesham.
Failed 4-4-1

Motion 13 (Chesham & Deutz) BIRT the resolutions from
Lancaster and West London Branches be noted.
Carried 9-0

Buick and Browne urged the EC and Assistant Secretary
to exercise caution and discretion when recording the
minutes for this item.

iii. Motion 9 (Central Branch Forms F): E-mail received from
Central Branch Secretary (26 July). Agreed to defer.
iv. Motion 21 (nominations to Internet Department)
A. Letter from Central London Branch (28 July) nominating
A Johnstone to the Internet Department
B. E-mail from A Johnstone (24 July) accepting the
nomination
Motion 14 (Browne & Helps) BIRT the EC accept the
nomination of Johnstone to the Internet Department.
Agreed
v. Motion 26 (image credits in the Standard): Oral report from
Assistant Secretary. Agreed to defer.
vi. Motions 33 and 35 (Campaigns Department report): No report
received from Campaigns Department. Agreed to defer.

The meeting was presented with a separate letter from the
Campaigns Department indicating that a speaker was needed
for an event in Ireland.

Motion 15 (Browne & Miller) BIRT Cde Cronin be appointed
speaker and that the necessary arrangements be made.
Agreed

vii. Motion 34 (Campaigns Department nominations): The meeting
received a letter from Swansea Branch nominating B Johnson
to the Campaigns Department, to the Overseas Contacts
Committee, and to Overseas Contacts Secretary. It was
agreed to defer consideration of the latter two
nominations.

Motion 16 (Browne & Miller) BIRT the nomination of
Johnson to the Campaigns Department be accepted.
Agreed

viii. Motion 46 (World Socialist Party (India)): The Central
Organiser orally reported that we were awaiting minutes of
our group in West Bengal. Agreed to defer.

f. Notices of Motion and Business
i. Notice of Business 2 (Stair) from 2 June: The EC shall
discuss the purchase of a hearing induction loop. Agreed to
defer.
ii. Notice of Motion 1 (White & Chesham) from 7 July: BIRT in
view of the fact that the Head Office computer has been
used to access and view websites of a pornographic nature,
this EC affrims that the Party's infrastructure is for the
propagation of socialism and the administration of the
party. Agreed to defer.
iii. Notice of Motion 2 (Chesham & Carter) from 7 July: BIRT
the practice of self-nomination to subcommittees be
discontinued. Agreed to defer.
3. Forms A and F
a. Form A for Charlie Wolf: No report from Membership Department.
Agreed to defer.
b. Forms F for Anne Hopkin (Swansea Branch, lapsed) and Gavin
Sinclair (Manchester Branch, deceased)
Motion 17 (Deutz & Helps) BIRT the Forms F for Hopkin and
Sinclair be accepted.
Agreed

4. Written report of the General Purposes Committee
* None received.

5. Accounts
* None received.

6. Reports of Party Officers, Party Appointees, Subcommittees, and
Departments; discussion of campaigns and The Socialist Standard
a. Report from the Video Production Department. The report gave
further details of the 9000 of equipment requested and
mentioned an upcoming film.

Miller wanted to know what the equipment would be used for, as
the EC already asked for more details on the project but
received none. White, Stair, Deutz, Chesham, and Browne voiced
concerns about the Party's potential use for the equipment and
where it would be stored.

Motion 18 (White & Miller) BIRT the EC thanks the Video
Production Department for their report but doesn't feel that
the expense can be justified. BIFRT the EC looks forward to
more detailed plans of the forthcoming film.
Carried 8-0-1

Deutz left at this point.

b. Report from the Library Department. The report gave an update
on the effort to recover overdue books and indicated that a
Library Department was necessary given the amount of work.

Motion 19 (Browne & Carter) BIRT the EC issue a call for
additional members to Library Department in accordance with
requirements from the report.
Agreed

c. Report from the Internet Department. Agreed to defer.
d. Report from the Enquiries Department. Agreed to defer.
e. Report on Actions Taken Pursuant to the 1995 Conference
Resolution Concerning the Protection of the Party's Identity
and Funds. Agreed to defer.
f. Discussion of campaigns. Agreed to defer.
g. Discussion of The Socialist Standard. Agreed to defer.

7. Correspondence
a. Matters of urgency
* None received.
b. Correspondence from or concerning Branches, the Party in
general, and members
i. Letter from Central Branch Secretary (2 July) and letter
from P Newell regarding the Zambia group (23 July). Agreed
to defer.
c. Correspondence from Companion Parties and Groups
i. WSPNZ minutes for June 2007. Agreed to defer.
ii. SPC newsletter for July 2007. Agreed to defer.
d. All other correspondence
* None received.

8. Any other business
a. Browne issued a call for reports to and items for discussion
for the Annual Delegate Meeting ADM, the deadline for receipt
of which is 31 August.

b. Stair and Browne urged the EC to renew our agreement with INK
as we had received several subscriptions through them. The cost
was 250.

Motion 20 (Miller & Carter) BIRT the EC authorises renewal of
our agreement with INK.
Carried 8-0

9. Nomination of Chair for the next meeting

Motion 21 (Browne & Chesham) BIRT Browne be chair for the August
2007 meeting.
Agreed

With no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at
19:39.