Skip to Content

NERB June Branch Meeting

19 posts / 0 new
Last post
lindanesocialist
Offline
Joined: 28/03/2016
NERB June Branch Meeting

 Vin is secretary until the last minutes are adopted by a meeting with a quorum. 

Vin suggests an urgent branch meeting and as secretary  he will inform all memebers as per rule 6 and Standing Orders   7

He will seek  an urgent online meeting for weekend commencing Friday 17th June and attempt to inform all branch members of this meeting. It will be up to a quorate meeting how to move forward.

In the meantime can we request of the IC that Vin be allowed to take part

 

Tim Kilgallon
Tim Kilgallon's picture
Offline
Joined: 17/11/2015

Hi Linda

I'm sorry but I cannot agree with Vin's interpretation that decisions/information/resolutions taken during a meeting cannot be put into action until the minutes of the meeting have been agreed by a quorate meeting, the meeting in April was quorate therefore the decision of the meeting can be acted upon. The idea that actions can only be taken by meetings after the minutes have been agreed would be plainly ludicrous, it implies that no action could be taken for a month after each meeting. taking that precident, would the EC have to wait to impliment any decision taken today at their meeting, until the meeting they have next month?

In actuality, Vin passed on his decision to resign as secretary at the very beginning of the last branch meeting (#20), he didn't give 28 days notice, nor did he say that he would take on responsibility until the EC approved the minutes, he just said he had resigned. What are the branch sxpected to do?

As far as I am aware, Vin has not withdrawn his resignation as Branch Secretary, nor have you or Vin withdrawn your resignations from the party.

Believe me I have no wish to take on the role of secretary, I have an awful lot on my plate at the moment, however in the absence of anyone else, I have reluctantly agreed to carry out the temporary role until someone else can take over.

YFS

Tim


SocialistPunk
SocialistPunk's picture
Offline
Joined: 17/08/2012

The NERB needs to get a face to face meeting organised.


lindanesocialist
Offline
Joined: 28/03/2016

Tim Kilgallon wrote:

Hi Linda

I'm sorry but I cannot agree with Vin's interpretation that decisions/information/resolutions taken during a meeting cannot be put into action until the minutes of the meeting have been agreed by a quorate meeting, the meeting in April was quorate therefore the decision of the meeting can be acted upon. The idea that actions can only be taken by meetings after the minutes have been agreed would be plainly ludicrous, it implies that no action could be taken for a month after each meeting. taking that precident, would the EC have to wait to impliment any decision taken today at their meeting, until the meeting they have next month?

 

It seems to depend on who and what is involved, Tim. If you look back you will find that NERB decisions have been ignored untill ratified by the next meeting and voting figures supplied to the EC. WE cant have it both ways. The next branch meeting will need to consider previous minutes on their merits. We are are in favour of a face to face meeting.

 

perhaps if Vin is allowed the basic right to speak at an on line meeting without the use of a third party account we can take democracy, SO and party rule seriously.

If the branch requested the basic right of members to attend meetings there would be no need for resignations

lindanesocialist
Offline
Joined: 28/03/2016

SocialistPunk wrote:

The NERB needs to get a face to face meeting organised.

The sooner the better

 

SocialistPunk
SocialistPunk's picture
Offline
Joined: 17/08/2012

lindanesocialist wrote:

Tim Kilgallon wrote:

Hi Linda

I'm sorry but I cannot agree with Vin's interpretation that decisions/information/resolutions taken during a meeting cannot be put into action until the minutes of the meeting have been agreed by a quorate meeting, the meeting in April was quorate therefore the decision of the meeting can be acted upon. The idea that actions can only be taken by meetings after the minutes have been agreed would be plainly ludicrous, it implies that no action could be taken for a month after each meeting. taking that precident, would the EC have to wait to impliment any decision taken today at their meeting, until the meeting they have next month?

 

It seems to depend on who and what is involved, Tim. If you look back you will find that NERB decisions have been ignored untill ratified by the next meeting and voting figures supplied to the EC. WE cant have it both ways. The next branch meeting will need to consider previous minutes on their merits. We are are in favour of a face to face meeting.

 

perhaps if Vin is allowed the basic right to speak at an on line meeting without the use of a third party account we can take democracy, SO and party rule seriously.

If the branch requested the basic right of members to attend meetings there would be no need for resignations

Funny how the quote below from the NERB February meeting seems to contradict the bit I've highlighted above.

As far as I can tell, the following resolutions were accepted by the branch and acted on straight away.

Quote:

Taking on all of the comments can I suggest the following three resolutions:

"in line with Rule 5. "Members have the right to attend at meetings of Branches other than their own, and speak with the permission of the Branch" can the EC remind all members that as NERB branch meetings, held on the forum, follow the same format as any other Branch meeting, any visitors to the site during a branch meeting (including Moderators and members of the IC) should ask permission of the branch to speak, and that permission to speak will only be given if a majority of the members of the branch attending agree to allow the non branch member to speak. In view of this can the The EC be asked to inform the Internet Committee that the section of the forum 'Regional Branches, North East' is for the business of the branch."

Second resolution "Can the NERB bring to the attention of the EC the actions of the Internet Committee and their handling of the twitter account @worldsocialism.com. This branch is of the opinion that the actions of the Internet Committee have hampered the genuine attempts of this branch to use this account as a valuable propaganda tool and would like the EC to consider whether the actions of the Internet Committee, including their lack of response to requests for that committee to provide minutes of their meetings, have gone beyond the terms of reference of that committee" and

Third Resolution"That the branch Nominates Cde T Kilgallon for the AV committee"


Tim Kilgallon
Tim Kilgallon's picture
Offline
Joined: 17/11/2015

"If the branch requested the basic right of members to attend meetings there would be no need for resignations"

if the branch had had the opportunity to make this request, I'm sure the branch would have, unfortunately branch plans to hold a face to face meeting, which would I'm sure have had a more successful outcome than the online meeting, were effectively scupperred by the insistence on having a meeting on line. It also begs the question, if the branch had agreed and voted on a resolution "requesting the basic right of members to attend meetings" would Vin have been willing to wait for the next meeting to ratify that decision, before the branch acted upon it? I think, quite rightly, he would be outraged at the suggestion we wait for the next meeting before taking action.


SocialistPunk
SocialistPunk's picture
Offline
Joined: 17/08/2012

I recall my request to rejoin the SPGB via the NERB was voted on and accepted at the February meeting. I was told that I was a member then and there and so eligible to vote on branch matters.

By the logic that is being put forward on this thread, by a now ex NERB member, I would have had to wait until the next meeting for the branch to accept the vote as recorded in the previous minutes, before I was an official member of the branch.

The NERB is now in the midst of co-ordinating a face to face meeting, so this discussion is no longer relevant.


lindanesocialist
Offline
Joined: 28/03/2016

"Misunderstanding Tim,  I thought you indicated in an email to me and Steve that you didn't want to take on sec job. If you have,  then of course you are responsible for calling the next meeting and not myself. My apologies."

vin

lindanesocialist
Offline
Joined: 28/03/2016

SocialistPunk wrote:

I recall my request to rejoin the SPGB via the NERB was voted on and accepted at the February meeting. I was told that I was a member then and there and so eligible to vote on branch matters.

 

Yes true, but the EC pointed out that you were not a member until ratified by the EC and questioned decisions made that included your vote until you were. The branch disagreed of course but that's history.

SocialistPunk
SocialistPunk's picture
Offline
Joined: 17/08/2012

lindanesocialist wrote:
"Yes true, but..."

It seems I must point out my mentioning the acceptance by the branch of my rejoining  and having voting privileges there and then, is in direct contradiction to your gambit of claiming branch decisions can only be acted on until accepted by the next meeting, at the very least a month later.

You may remember this from Vin, when myself and Joe inquired about my being able to vote? 

Vin wrote:
Yes you are. The EC is an administrative body and only needs to rubber stamp or intervene if party rules etc have been contravened : which they havent. But even so you are a member untill EC says otherwise.

If you must attempt to wriggle and squirm, from that which you've brought on yourself, then please make a better job of it, because it's getting quite boring now.


Login or register to post comments