Agenda for April Meeting

August 2022 Forums Regional Branches North East Agenda for April Meeting

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 313 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #119223
    SocialistPunk
    Participant

    Anything to bring up regarding the EC minutes, Steve?

    #119224
    steve colborn
    Participant

    Yes Stevie, just trying to get the EC minutes up. 2 secs

    #119225
    steve colborn
    Participant

    e. Matters arising from the March meetingi. Accepted Nominations for Appointees and Committees Premises Committee: Shodeke withdrew nomination.Motion 2: “The EC thanks Comrade Shodeke for her work on the Premises Committee” (Browne/ Foster) carried 7-0-1Membership Applications Committee: Nomination of Botterill (Swansea). Accept. (McLellan/Browne) agreedAudio-Visual Committee: Nomination of Kilgallon (NEB). Defer. (Browne/ Craggs) agreed  vii. Audio Visual Committee: Resignations of Lansbury and Poynton.Motion 6: “That the AVC proposal submitted by Comrade Cox and as amended by the EC [see below] be sent by the Acting General Secretary to Comrades Lansbury, Poynton, Whitfield and Maratty for their consideration and the two members be asked to withdraw their resignations.” (Scholey/ Craggs) carried 8-0 AVC ProposalTaking into account the report for Conference of the Audio-Visual Committee and other recent correspondence, and its previously stated plans for 2016 onwards, the EC wishes to review its appointments to the Committee. In particular:1. To request Cde’s Lansbury and Poynton to reconsider their resignations in order to form the 2016 Committee, with Cde Whitfield as a co-opted member, to carry on the work of the Committee, including that planned or in progress, within the Product Department;2. To invite Cde Maratty to assist the Outreach Department, in developing audio-visual scripts and concepts, commencing with a report to the Campaigns Committee on the recent proposal from Kent and Sussex Branch that “Following the alleged success of Russell Brand’s ‘Trews’ channel, the EC is requested to investigate commissioning a series of short video clips on topical issues (featuring, for instance, Comrade Shodeke) and animated features (possibly based on the ‘Free Lunch’ cartoons)”. The above is totally unacceptable and moreover, outside of the EC's remit.Deferiing Tims nomination. Asking Vin, nominated "to" the AV Committee, to consider "assisting" the Outreach Department, whilst at the same time as "co-opting" Comrade Whitfield onto the AV Committee, even though he hasn't even been nominated!!!Whose chain! are the EC trying to yank?The EC is a purely administrative body, it does no set policy nor "direction of travel. The deferment of one NERB members appointment, and the "displacement of anothers, to "Outreach" shows a distinct level of contempt for NERB, as a Branch and I, for one, am unprepared to accept this kind of treatment.

    #119226
    steve colborn
    Participant

    Instal Vin and Tim, on the AV Committee, let the two resigning members of AV (really, they've spit out their dummies), move to Outreach and then we can move on, "Simples", even a pretend Meerkat knows that!!!

    #119227
    steve colborn
    Participant

    I'll be ten mins. Need to treat my infected foot and have a shower. Please discuss this issue in my absence. BRB

    #119228
    steve colborn
    Participant

    Back

    #119229
    steve colborn
    Participant

    To recap,2.Amendment/adoption of previous minutes  At the moment, SC EC SD and TK have voted for adoption of the Feb EC minutes.

    #119230
    Bijou Drains
    Participant

    Made a stop on way back to the NE, intended just to catch up, but thought it was important to add my contribution the above. To contextualize this issue, I had allowed my name to be nominated to support Cde Marratty in the role on the AV committee, in light of the resignations from that committee of cdes Lansbury and Poynton, and as such have no great burning ambition to be on the AV committee, only to help out where I can. However I do think that this has raised a very important procedural issue with the EC. Rule 17 states:"The Executive Committee shall publish and control the Party literature. Election Statements and Election Manifestos must be approved by the Executive Committee before printing excepting handbills and leaflets. They shall establish a literature agency, from which all Branches shall be supplied, establish and maintain communications with Socialist Parties abroad and otherwise generally administer the work of the Party in accordance with Party polls, Party rules and Conference decisions, and to this end may appoint sub-committees. Names shall be called for, subject to the Executive Committee being authorised to appoint members directly to these sub-Committees if no nominations are received." (my emphasis)My reading of Rule 17 is that it allows the EC to make appointments to committees, only if no other nominations have been received, in this case nominations had been received for both myself and for Cde Marratty, however Cde Whitfield had not been nominated. I have no objection to Cde Whifield taking a role on the AV committee, as I said I only allowed myself to be put forward so that Cde Marratty was not left as the sole member of the committee, as the two previous members had resigned. I do however think that it appears that the EC have gone beyond their remit as set down by Rule 17.I amm off on the road again now but will follow the discussion with interest.

    #119231
    SocialistPunk
    Participant

    I think Tim was far from happy with this EC decision as well, so he would probably like to have a bit of input in this particular issue.Me, I agree the EC shoudn't have deferred Tim's nomination and suggest Vin join a committee he wasn't nominated for.

    #119232
    steve colborn
    Participant

    Hi to Tim (when he gets back). I think Tims summation of this issue is cogent and to the crux of the matter. Whichever way I, personally, have tried to approach/rationalise this issue, it comes back to the same conclusion. The EC, for whatever reason/s, have overstepped their remit and as such, need to correct this procedural faux pas as a matter of urgency.We need a set of words that, whilst remaining comradely and non-confrontatory, leaves no one in any doubt as to our displeasure at this turn of events!

    #119233
    steve colborn
    Participant

    This is an E Mail I recieved from Comrade Robert Whitfield, which is self explanatory; Today at 14:56 Hi steve colborn,This is an automatic reminder from the site The Socialist Party of Great Britain. You have received a new private message from pfbcarlisle.


    Hi Steve & Tim, (and other NERB members),This is what I wrote to the General Secretary on April 11th regarding theE.C.'s proposals on A-V matters – "Although I have no wish to (re)join the A-V Committee, or be involved in anynew projects, I am happy to continue with the following -1) Editing new talks and uploading them to the website.2) Digitalising and editing old tape cassette recordings, with a view tomaking them available on our website."So just to clarify, I'm not a member of the A-V Committee, (or any other),but plod on with longstanding projects. Obviously, the term "co-opting" givesthe impression that I'm once again part of the A-V Committee, but this is notthe case. I /was/ a member of it until a couple of years ago.Feel free to mention this in the Branch meeting/minutes, and good luck withthe rest of the proceedings.I hope you're all well,Your for socialism,Robert Whitfield

    #119234
    steve colborn
    Participant

    Be back at 5.50.

    #119235
    Bijou Drains
    Participant

    Hi alli am back home now, however I will be a bit sporadic in my ability to contribute consistently over the course of the meeting. I will be checking regulalry and making what contribution I can.Many thanks Rob, for your post re the AV committee. I agree with Steve C we need to be comradely and non-confrontational. We also need to accept that there may be some other part of EC standing orders or party procedures that we have not come across that explains the way the decision was made. Can I suggest a motion from the branch along the lines of:"This branch would be grateful if the EC could explain and clarify the reasons why they have sought to appoint a member to a sub committee when they had been made aware of branch nominations to that committee. This branch is of the opinion that this appears to be a clear breach of Rule 17  whch states: "Names shall be called for, subject to the Executive Committee being authorised to appoint members directly to these sub-Committees if no nominations are received".

    #119236
    steve colborn
    Participant

    As a first point of call, I can live with that Tim.

    #119237
    SocialistPunk
    Participant

    Hi Tim.If you lads think this is enough to get a full explanation from the EC, then I'm ok with it.

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 313 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.