Kent and Sussex Branch

August 2020 Forums World Socialist Movement Kent and Sussex Branch

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 270 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #80980
    Dave Chesham
    Participant

    Very pleased with the branch turn out yesterday (8). Welcomed a new visitor. Dealt with lots of party business and started planning for propaganda events. This was the first meeting of the year, and was very relaxed. Lots of interesting discussion around the table. This is a new branch, so we are all getting to grips with planning and organising.

    Branch Secretary. Paul Hope

    <paulvhope@blueyonder.co.uk>

    07783 235792

    #87284
    Dave Chesham
    Participant

    Branch meets this coming Sunday (12th) at 3.00pm.   Same time and place.http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/event/kent-and-sussex-regional-branch-maidstone-1All welcome

    #87285
    Dave Chesham
    Participant

    Minutes of the 4th Meeting of the Kent & Sussex Regional branch of The Socialist Party of Great Britain held on 12th February 2012 The meeting started at 15.00 and was held at the Muggleton Inn, High Street, Maidstone, Kent Present: – Paul Hope (Branch Secretary/Organiser). Rob Cox (Treasurer and Chairman), Dave Chesham (Literature Secretary), Marie Chesham, Ed Mann, Hannah Dutton (Visitor) Apologies from Dave Humphries and Glenn Morris 1. Minutes of the 3rd Meeting dated 8th January 2012 read out MOTION 1. D. Chesham & M. Chesham “That these minutes are a correct record and that they be adopted” AGREED 2. Matters arising from the branch minutes (numbered below) 3. Re Item 1. Visitor. It was reported that Martin Russell will come to a future meeting. 4. Re Item 4. Identity and Questions & Answers leaflets. The branch ordered 200, but we managed to obtain 50 of each, and these are inside the display case for the stall. 5. Re item 14. Business Cards for the branch. We have a small collection of cards that advertise the DVD ‘Capitalism and other kids stuff’, and these have been placed in the case. The ‘rail card’ design has run out, and we are uncertain if they will be reprinted. 6. Re item 15. Socialist Standard order. All the copies are inside the display case, we have not had opportunities to sell or give these away. We should try to buy these as members, and pass them on to interested people. NOTED 7. Matters arising from the EC Minutes of the 1st Meeting held on the 7th January 2012 Refer to Motion 16 on the EC minutes. The new Head Office router wasn’t working properly, a replacement was obtained but isn’t functioning properly either. Therefore the network inside the office isn’t working as necessary and is hindering members’ work. MOTION 2. M. Chesham and P. Hope “The branch is concerned that the problems surrounding the Head Office router have not been resolved, as we have had no follow up in the February EC minutes”Carried (4 for, 0 against, 1 abstained) 8. Matter arising from the EC Minutes of the 2nd Meeting held on the4th February 2012 Text taken from the EC minutes – “The EC received the following nominations were received for Head Office Organiser – Dave Chesham (one day a week), Jacqueline Shodeke (one or two days a week) Oliver Bond (Actively looking for full-time employment and may not be able to commit to working as Head Office Organiser for a year. He is willing to be flexible and share this position with other nominees). Motion 2 – Deutz and Field moved that Oliver Bond be appointed as Head Office Organiser. Amendment to Motion 2 – Deutz and Field moved that the following be added to the beginning of Motion 2 – “In view of the fact that only one person can be Head Office Organiser and that the other two nominees declare that they could only work for less than 3 days”.Carried (5 for, 1 against. 2 abstentions) Motion 2 as amended –“In view of the fact that only one person can be Head Office Organiser and that the other two nominees declare that they could only work for less than 3 days that Oliver Bond be appointed as Head Office Organiser”. Carried (6 for 0 against, 2 abstentions)” The EC’s decision stems from the Head Office Organiser terms of reference that states that only one person can hold the post. This has meant that the two nominees the branch put forward have been rejected. MOTION 3. Ed Mann and Paul Hope “The branch is dismayed that the EC has missed an opportunity by not appointing the other two nominees as joint Head Office Organisers. We contest the assertion that only one person can be Head Office Organiser” AGREED 9. Nominations List from the EC Minutes dated 4th February – a call was made for – 2 further nominations for the Advertising Department.1 further nomination for the Ballot Committee1 further nomination for the Blog Department2 further nominations for the Campaigns Departmentfurther nominations for the Enquiries Departmentfurther nominations for the Media Department2 further nomination for the Membership Application Department1 further nomination for the Publication Departmentnominations for the Production for Use Committee To reach Head Office by the next EC meeting on 3rd March 2012 The branch has no nominations – NOTED 10. Minutes of the 2011 Autumn Delegate Meeting held on the 1st and 2nd October 2011 – NOTED 11. Preliminary Agenda for Conference The branch read and discussed the Motions 1 to 8, Amendment to Rule 14 and Items for Discussion 1 and 2 – NOTED 12. Treasurer and Finance Form ‘C’ arrived from Head Office for the Treasurer Rob Cox to complete and return before Conference. Report from the Treasurer regarding dues. He wrote to members on the 2nd Feb (except those with waived dues) and requested that they make payment to the new branch account. We have had three members transfer from North London (formerly Central London) branch, four transferred from Central branch, and one new member. The Treasurer recommends that the one member paying directly to HO, should be allowed to continue. We should also note that three members have yet to reply concerning their dues to the branch. The treasurer has created a membership register. R. Cox will check the status regarding Glenn Morris and his dues. Branch Financial Statement – Balance at bank as at 31st January 2012 is £110.00, cash £13.50, less current liabilities to head Office £12.00 – total £110.50 Motion 4. D Chesham and P. Hope “That Ed Mann’s dues be waived” AGREED 13. Propaganda – Mail out to Libraries of the Socialist Standard Letter received from Cde Bond of Head Office dated 10th Feb 2012. “I’m afraid that I have been very busy with the General Secretary and the HOO work. I have made no further progress on this issue. I’m off next week, but I will look at this issue the week after. YFS Oliver Bond HOO”   NOTED 14. Notice of Business to discuss at the next branch meeting setting up a branch discussion group after the business meeting.  NOTED 15. Kent & Sussex branch Stall – Gillingham High Street The dates now proposed are Saturday 17th March and Saturday 24th March, from 12.00 – 3.00pm near to where the market is held. The stall will consist of one table and the display stand. We now have a good selection of literature and pamphlets to give away or sell. The stall will be advertised on the website. We have three members and one supporter to help us. Further discussion will take place at the next branch meeting. 16. Next branch meeting will be Sunday 11th March at 3pm at the Muggleton Inn. AGREED Meeting adjourned at 18:10

    #87287
    Dave Chesham
    Participant

    The future of the SPGB’s latest branch is in jeopardy.   The meeting this coming Sunday, 11th March will, amongst other things, discuss the present parlous situation.Please come if you’re in the area and have nothing better to do   http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/event/kent-and-sussex-regional-branch-maidstone-1

    #87288
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    gnome wrote:
    The future of the SPGB’s latest branch is in jeopardy.   The meeting this coming Sunday, 11th March will, amongst other things, discuss the present parlous situation.
    Please come if you’re in the area and have nothing better to do  
    http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/event/kent-and-sussex-regional-branch-maidstone-1

     
    I don’t think it’s that serious, although there are things to discuss I grant you. ‘Parlous’ and ‘jeopardy’ are not words I would use to describe the situation and is more likley to put people off attending than encourage them.
    And whilst I welcome open and honesty within the Party, is there a need or tradition to publish full Party internal meeting minutes online in such a fashion?
    I am acutely aware that many people would be less than encouraged to attend and contribute to discussions and meetings if they knwo that thier names are to be minuted and then published in such a fashion. This is not an argument for clandestine operation or paranoid secrecy, but I sometimes wonder at the lack of decorum and discretion in the conduct of Party activities…..

    #87289
    ALB
    Participant

    Personally I’ve always been against putting branch Minutes on the internet for precisely the reasons you give. I’m sure there must be quite a few members who, for various reasons, don’t want their names and political opinions splashed all over the internet, and for ever. Maybe this should be the subject for a future Conference discussion and decision. You could also raise it in your branch and get the practice dropped unless all branch members agree to it. Most branches don’t do it.

    #87290
    Dave Chesham
    Participant
    SussexSocialist wrote:
    I don’t think it’s that serious, although there are things to discuss I grant you. ‘Parlous’ and ‘jeopardy’ are not words I would use to describe the situation and is more likley to put people off attending than encourage them.

    Not “that serious” when, in the forseeable future, K&SRB can probably only guarantee two regular attendees when the required quorum is three?   Out of eight members, one has never been, one is often in Wales, one is going to Spain, one is in hospital for an indeterminate period, one has a possible prison sentence in the offing and the sixth you know about.[quote-SussexSocialist]And whilst I welcome open and honesty within the Party, is there a need or tradition to publish full Party internal meeting minutes online in such a fashion?I am acutely aware that many people would be less than encouraged to attend and contribute to discussions and meetings if they knwo that thier names are to be minuted and then published in such a fashion. This is not an argument for clandestine operation or paranoid secrecy, but I sometimes wonder at the lack of decorum and discretion in the conduct of Party activities…..[/quote]Which fashion did you have in mind?  You can either have openness and “honesty within the Party” OR “clandestine operation or paranoid secrecy” which, whether you admit it or not, is precisely what is being suggested.  Any member who objects to their name being minuted is free to say so; up to now the silence has been deafening.  Does your perceived “lack of decorum and discretion” within the Party apply also to EC, Conference and ADM minutes then; should we cease to publish them online……..?

    #87286
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I think you are missing my points entirely. No-one suggested that people’s names shouldn’t appear in the minutes, but I am saying I for one, and I am sure others may agree, do NOT want the minutes published openly and freely for all too see on a forum. It is indiscrete and off-putting to potential members. Openess and access to information and not nessecarily the same as publishing EVERYTHING in the public domain. Much information is freely available upon request, but that is not the same as posting that information here there, and everywhere. I am sure if I asked nicely, you’d show me your living room, but I do not expect you to live in a house with no front door and open access for everyone who walks by. This does not equate to secrecy.
    And as for the deafening silence, perhaps members don’t spend their entire waking lives trawling the SPGB website to see if their names have been published and attendance at a meeting does not imply consent to publish this information. For the record I am NOT happy about such information being published and wasn’t aware that it was unitl I came here today to catch up on news in the Party.
    And regards the situation with the branch, this is for the branch to decide at the meeting and judge how serious it is – mellow dramatic descriptions about jeopardy and the like are neither factual nor helpful.

    #87291
    Dave Chesham
    Participant
    SussexSocialist wrote:
    I think you are missing my points entirely. No-one suggested that people’s names shouldn’t appear in the minutes, but I am saying I for one, and I am sure others may agree, do NOT want the minutes published openly and freely for all too see on a forum. It is indiscrete and off-putting to potential members. Openess and access to information and not nessecarily the same as publishing EVERYTHING in the public domain. Much information is freely available upon request, but that is not the same as posting that information here there, and everywhere. I am sure if I asked nicely, you’d show me your living room, but I do not expect you to live in a house with no front door and open access for everyone who walks by. This does not equate to secrecy.

    Quite frankly I’m not sure what your points are but if you have some inexplicable reason for not wanting branch minutes “published openly and freely for all to see” I suggest that you attempt to persuade your branch to place a motion on the next Conference agenda.  Three branches now publish their minutes online; before very long this will hopefully be the rule rather than the exception.  ‘Secret’ branch meetings, like secret ballots, will then be consigned to the dustbin of party history.  Yippee!

    SussexSocialist wrote:
    And as for the deafening silence, perhaps members don’t spend their entire waking lives trawling the SPGB website to see if their names have been published and attendance at a meeting does not imply consent to publish this information. For the record I am NOT happy about such information being published and wasn’t aware that it was unitl I came here today to catch up on news in the Party.

    Then I suggest you lodge an official complaint with your branch.

    SussexSocialist wrote:
    And regards the situation with the branch, this is for the branch to decide at the meeting and judge how serious it is – mellow dramatic descriptions about jeopardy and the like are neither factual nor helpful.

    Your thought processes must be very different to mine; if I saw that my branch was in obvious trouble, which Kent & Sussex incontrovertibly is, then I would want to do everything within my power to come to its assistance.

    #87292
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Perhaps this is why nobody goes to meetings? Perhaps this is why this Party is shrinking not growing? Perhaps the fact that this forum is crammed full of posts by the same few posters is an indicator that an abrasive, oddball and out-of-step attitude wins no friends and alienates the very people you are trying to reach…..
    I don’t want my details sprawled everywhere – I have a job to maintain and a family to keep. And it annoys the hell out of me that whenever there is anything raised out of the ordinary or in contravention of the established beaucracy it is either met with indecision, outdated methodology or downright refusal.
    I give up. I quit. Bollocks to it.

    #87293
    Dave Chesham
    Participant

    Very congenial meeting yesterday which lasted almost four hours. Much time spent discussing the branch’s future, Conference agenda and propaganda activities particularly the literature stall the branch is arranging in Gillingham High Street next Saturday March 17th from around midday. Depending on the outcome of the latter the intention is to have the stall the following Saturday (24th) as well.http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/event/literature-stall-gillingham-high-street-kentPlease note that K & SRB’s next meeting will be held on the third Sunday of the month; that is April 15th………

    #87294
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Interesting. So despite the ‘jeopardy’ and ‘parlousness’ of the situation, it would appear that even more people attended than normal and branch activities continue apace? Glad that wasn’t over-egged and usurped by a needless pre-meeting forum row then……..

    #87295
    Dave Chesham
    Participant

    Four members attended, one probably for the last time.  Hardly a comfortable situation particularly as those present heard that another member is on the point of transferring out of the branch.  The stalwarts, with the help of an ardent supporter, will continue to keep things ticking over, at least for the time being………..I know nothing of any “pre-meeting forum row”.  Were you involved in one then?

    #87296
    Dave Chesham
    Participant

    Minutes of the 5th Meeting of the Kent & Sussex Regional branch of the Socialist Party of Great Britain held on 11th March 2012The meeting started at 3:10pm and was held at the Muggleton Inn, High Street, Maidstone, KentPresent: Paul Hope (Branch Secretary/Organiser), Rob Cox (Branch Treasurer), Ed Mann (Chair), Dave Chesham (Literature Secretary) Visitor: Hannah Dutton   Apologies: Andy Thomas, Marie Chesham, DH.1. Minutes of the 4th Meeting dated 12th February 2012 read outMotion 1. D. Chesham & Cox “That these minutes are a correct record and that they be adopted”  AGREED2. Matters arising from the branch minutes (numbered below)3. Re Item 7 Head Office Router – EC reply“Please be advised that the Executive Committee considered your resolution at its 3 March meeting, and resolved to inform you that Cde Mark Lansbury is dealing with the matter of the Head Office router.”  NOTED4. Re item 8 Head Office Organiser – EC reply“Please be advised that the Executive Committee considered your resolution at its 3 March meeting. The EC subsequently resolved to ask the Head Office Organiser to delegate, in accordance with the Head Office Organiser’s Terms of Reference, to other comrades to be at Head Office on days that he is not there.”  NOTED5. Nominations for Internet Department & Advertising DepartmentBoth Mark Lansbury and Darren Poynton have accepted the branch’s nominations to the Internet and Advertising Departments respectively.Motion 2. D.Chesham & Mann “That Cde D. Poynton be nominated to the Advertising Department, and Cde M. Lansbury be nominated to the Internet Department”  AGREED6. Future of Branch”It is with considerable regret that I write on the matter of the branch’s future, less than six months after its inception. Our Secretary and Branch Organiser, Comrade Paul Hope, for personal reasons, will be moving to Spain in the very near future. Paul has been one of the branch’s mainstays and faultless attendees of meetings ever since the branch was formed last September.In addition, Comrade Marie Chesham, suffered a fall within the past week which has left her with two fractures of the vertebral column.Without these two comrades, in Marie’s case hopefully only a temporary absence, it is difficult to see how the branch can continue to function as a viable unit of the party.”The three other members present at the meeting indicated that they wished to keep the Branch together for as long as possible.  NOTED7. Report of the Committee set up to analyse Party financesThe committee was set up as a result of a Conference 2011 resolution: “Conference instructs the EC to prepare a report analyzing the finances of the Party and its future sustainability.” The report covers the period 2004-2011 and aims at presenting the finances in an easy to assimilate format, which estimates how long the Party has before its funds run low, and to draw conclusions and points of discussion.Motion 3. Hope & Cox “That member’s study the ‘Party finance report’ and formulate questions in preparation for this year’s conference, and in reference to Item 20 on the Conference Final Agenda” (Item for discussion Lancaster branch) “Should we establish a cap on annual expenditure?”.  AGREED8. Matters arising from the EC Minutes of the 3rd Meeting, 3rd March 2012RE: EC Motion 7 – Head Office Party Sign on shop front“Shannon and Lambert moved that competitive quotes be sought for replacing the Party Sign” Carried 6 for, 1 against, 2 Abstentions.Motion 4. D.Chesham & Hope “Can the EC inform the branch who will be obtaining the competitive quote for the shop front sign, as the EC resolution does not state this, and that the EC shares this information with other branches”  AGREED9. Branch Treasurer – Form ‘C’The branch treasurer Cde Cox produced the completed Form ‘C’ for conference. The form ‘C’ needs to be formally adopted in order that the branch delegate(s) can sit at conference. The period covers 1st January to 31st December. The first branch statement submitted covers from the foundation of the branch to 31st December 2011, and has very few transactions.Motion 5. Mann & D.Chesham “That our appointed auditors Cde Mann and Cde D. Chesham checked the branch statement and submitted the Form C to conference”      Carried 4-010. Branch Treasurer – Supporting statement for the motion below”With hindsight the resolution appears to give members the impression that dues are to be paid annually in April, whereas Rule 2 states that members “shall pay £5 per calendar month”. While there is no reason a member could not pay annually in advance, I don’t think we can insist on that in any way. The Form ‘C’ which the Branch has to submit to the EC each year, under rule 9, is to report on membership and finances for the year to 31st December. The form needs to be audited and formally adopted by the Branch. It would therefore seem sensible for the Branch to use that as its normal accounting date. Rolling the first (partial) year of operation into the first complete year is an accepted accounting practice, and would be sensible as we have very few transactions for 2011, which can easily be identified separately on the form ‘C’.”Motion 6. Cox & Hope “That the 2nd sentence of the 3rd resolution of the 3rd meeting of the branch (08/01/12, item 5, “membership”) be rescinded; That the first financial year of account for the Branch shall run from its date of foundation and end on the 31st day of December 2012; That subsequently (to above) the financial year of the Branch shall be 1st January to 31st December.” AGREED11. Branch Treasurer – Membership DuesThe treasurer reported on the situation regarding the dues, and mentioned that only one member had not yet responded. A member of the branch will follow this up informally.  NOTED12. Literature Secretary – reported on SS sales, etc. since our inception  NOTED                                                                                                                                                                                                                       13. Propaganda – Kent & Sussex stall –Gillingham High Street – Sat 17th March from 12 noon to 3pmWe have now got together a literature display stand, full of various SS, pamphlets and leaflets. Rob Cox has a table to bring along to stand this on. So far we have Paul Hope, Rob Cox and Hannah Dutton interested in supporting the stall for three hours on a Saturday. We felt it better we have the stall during milder weather in March. Please would all confirm attendance nearer the day, in case of inclement weather  AGREED14. Propaganda Meetings at Head OfficeFor your information the following meetings will take place at The Socialist Party of Great Britain HO at 52 Clapham High Street London SW4 7UNSunday 18th March, 3.00 pmBEYOND THE GLASS CEILINGSpeaker: Pat DeutzSunday 1 April, 3.00 pmAPRIL FOOLSSpeaker: Paddy Shannon                                                                                                                                                                     Saturday 14 April, 3.00pm                                                                                                                                                                   THE CONSUMER                                                                                                                                                                          Speaker: Glenn MorrisSaturday 28 April, 4.00pm                                                                                                                                                       ELECTION MEETINGPlease note the earlier starting times for these meetings. A warm welcome awaits if you are able to come any of these meetings. There will be opportunity to take part in discussion, and also to enjoy an informal chat over refreshments.15. Conference 2012 – Friday 6th April and Saturday 7th April at Head Office from 10.30am each dayMotion 7. Hope & Chesham “That the following delegates are appointed to Conference: – R. Cox, D. Chesham, E. Mann and P. Hope”  AGREED16. Final Agenda for the 108th Annual ConferenceThe delegates have been requested to read through the Conference Agenda, and the Reports of Party Officers and the EC. Then discuss these online via email beforehand, so a consensus on the items can be met between the branch delegates.17. Branch Meeting dates15th April, May 13th, June 10th, July 15th (please note that the first and last dates are third Sundays in the month)Meeting adjourned at 6.45pm

    #87297
    J Surman
    Participant

    Comrade Marie Chesham, suffered a fall within the past week which has left her with two fractures of the vertebral column. Dave, Please give Marie my, and Alan’s, very best wishes for a speedy recovery and a pain-free convalescence.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 270 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.