Thanks Brian. There is much to be said of the spirit of the club & the members. Ive never been to any event organised by the past or present committee that wasnt fun and there was no serious problems. Max has surely been a spiritual honouary life member ... to some and not to others. The existing club rules are so easy to read, I cant see why the then officers didnt know that Honourary life membership was a matter to be conferred at an AGM ... AGM, no where else. I dont agree with `making up rules, even in good faith. I can give you some good examples of how badly this can go wrong if ya want. So, its a simple rule. Most committee members, after a significant event, usually confer with the rules just to check. OK, maybe Ive been involved with other committees full of boring folk. Life membership doesnt get conferred at an SGM or any other opportunities referred to. AGM only. All it would have taken at any AGM, years ago, last year or tomorrow, is for someone to propose it and the membership vote & confer. Confer ... by majority or unanimous ... hmmm ... funny it doesnt define this. Alternately, if it WAS minuted but the minutes of the AGM no longer exist because they were discarded after a statutory requirement for keeping records had passed, then how do you prove such historical matters? Does the principal of estoppel then apply i.e. it is generally known and sufficient majority behaves as if it is so (including such tangible matters like it is printed on subsequent minutes or AGMs or other material forever onward ... However, I havent heard anyone advise which festival the informal act of conferment took place or whether there was such acknowledgements over time. Im afraid I dont specifically have a memory of Max being a life member, but if anyone had said so Id have believed it !! OK, do Rules rule ? Theyre there for the benefit & protection of members & officers (both of whom have the privilege of limited liability ... unless reckless ... and reckless is a pretty extreme thing, not just what usually happens in a club re- laypeople errors ... including not really knowing the rules). Theyre also there because members seem to wanna be a charity ... which is for the benefit of getting grants off corporates or gamblers pools of funds. Its so often that people are guided by common sense. Id say what you have said, and Dave, is bloody good common sense. And we all voted for the Common Sense party didnt we; Winstons the PM now yeeha ! Truly, you guys have my admiration despite any sense of humour I may show. Id like to to see all parties accept their shortcomings and publicly acknowledge them, apologise to one another ... with cherry red faces n all. Oh yes, even the current committee appear to not really know the rules re- membership exclusion, and those specific rules dont give ANY power to the committee ... it is a unanimous decision required at an SGM for specific offences. The committees involvement would be to organise an SGM on behalf of the members. They would also be the persons to advise the member of the charges and to provide all known information concerning any breaches to that person, including copies of evidence (discovery). Natural justice, civilness, is behind whatever actions are taken ... and must be able to be demostrated if a member challenges the SGMs decision (now thats going a long long crazy way). All this isnt spelled out in the rules, but anyone thinking of such an action would need to consider protocol; and Ive no doubt that that is the committees job. The matter must be proposed and the onus is on the proposal/proposer to prove the offences. The member who is subject to this extreme action has the right of silence. The members are the jury. Brian, whilst you havent expressly considered the existing rules, I think that in considering the rules thus far with what you have said will make it easier for club members going into the future. Ive written some stuff on here in other posts and now I have to ask a question of, and give consideration to, the proposal of the new constitution. Question - what consultation process with members has occurred? Yes, anyone can stump up to the meeting with a proposal, even give notice. Perhaps the AGM can be for the initiating the need for a new one and, if theres a convincing reason for such, to then set up a consultation process to be decided by members at the AGM. I dont think the AGM is the venue to consider the proposal clause by clause and re-write any then & there and have a vote on a final amended document in the same day. ... silence ...
Posted on: Sat, 27 Sep 2014 03:08:46 +0000
Trending Topics
© 2015