AZ018 - 8.5.1 Board -> Other governance responsibilities

Discuss our Party Constitution and any suggested amendments here

Do you accept the proposed change(s)?

Poll ended at Wed Sep 08, 2010 10:41 am

Yes
4
100%
No - I oppose the intent of this clause
0
No votes
No - it needs some re-wording
0
No votes
 
Total votes : 4

AZ018 - 8.5.1 Board -> Other governance responsibilities

Postby azrael » Wed Aug 25, 2010 7:19 pm

Affects 8.5.1

Create 8.5.1
Code: Select all
8.5.1 The Board may have other governance responsibilities that are as yet undefined in this constitution.

Reinstating the old 8.3 – but I am not entirely sure this is necessary. Nothing stops future amendments that add other governance responsibilities, so is it necessary to preserve this clause? An argument in favour would be to prevent ‘other governance responsibilities’ being created and being carried out by some other body than the Board. A weak argument.
Last edited by azrael on Thu Sep 02, 2010 2:59 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Governor of the Board 2010-present
Former South-East Regional Administrative Officer (2010-2011)
User avatar
azrael
Party Governor
 
Posts: 1766
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 12:05 am
Location: Canterbury, Kent, UK

Re: AZ018 - 8.5.1

Postby AndrewTindall » Wed Aug 25, 2010 7:30 pm

Keeping it means that the board can take up further duties if required without first having to pass amendments. i.e if we suddenly find ourselves having to deal with something suddenly that isn't explicitly stated in the constitution.

supported.
Pirate turned Green.
User avatar
AndrewTindall
Space Pirate
 
Posts: 1127
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 1:25 am
Location: Aberystwyth

Re: AZ018 - 8.5.1

Postby scottishduck » Wed Aug 25, 2010 11:01 pm

Supported, unlike some elements of the party, I have a fair degree of trust that such a clause won't be abused.
Member of the Board of Governors. Email me at M.Wood@pirateparty.org.uk
New Job - Vice-Secretary for Whistleblowing at PPI
##Idling or not, I will be on IRC at pretty much any time irc://irc.piratpartiet.se/#ppuk##
Follow me on twitter! @MC_StallmanVEVO
User avatar
scottishduck
1st Mate
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 9:07 pm
Location: Lochgilphead, Argyll and Bute

Re: AZ018 - 8.5.1

Postby M2Ys4U » Tue Aug 31, 2010 12:50 pm

Tentative support here. If the membership-at-large don't trust us with this they can always vote it down.
Jack Allnutt - Deputy Campaigns Officer, Member of the Board of Governors and former RAO for North-West England
Tweet E-Mail
M2Ys4U
Deputy Campaigns Officer
 
Posts: 616
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 5:12 am
Location: Manchester

Re: AZ018 - 8.5.1

Postby glambert » Wed Sep 01, 2010 12:28 pm

As it's already in the constitution, we don't need a membership vote to leave it as it is do we?
User avatar
glambert
Terror of the High Seas
 
Posts: 999
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 4:09 pm
Location: Bury

Re: AZ018 - 8.5.1

Postby azrael » Wed Sep 01, 2010 2:47 pm

dunno. I suppose technically can reword other proposals to insert 'between' etc etc which pushes this into a new place. I went with 'delete' and 'add again' to put it into new place. But you're right Graeme, we don't need a vote to keep this if we want to keep it. Might be good to let the membership vote on it to let them make clear they want all future governance issues not specified to be handled by board (sort of like a mini vote of confidence in us? ;) )
Governor of the Board 2010-present
Former South-East Regional Administrative Officer (2010-2011)
User avatar
azrael
Party Governor
 
Posts: 1766
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 12:05 am
Location: Canterbury, Kent, UK

Re: AZ018 - 8.5.1 Board -> Other governance responsibilities

Postby Gavman » Sat Nov 27, 2010 12:07 am

Can I just understand, is this saying that if the board has to in the future take on a new governance responsibility that is not currently in the constitution then according to this clause, the new governance responsibility MUST then be written into the constitution once it is known about?
* assange () has joined #ppuk
* Obama () has joined #ppuk
* assange slaps Obama around a bit with a large fishbot
User avatar
Gavman
Swashbuckler
 
Posts: 672
Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 9:12 am

Re: AZ018 - 8.5.1 Board -> Other governance responsibilities

Postby azrael » Sat Nov 27, 2010 12:36 am

No. This is simply preserving and relocating the existing clause 8.3 with the exact same wording. It recognises that there could be governance responsibilities that no-one has yet thought of, and that these *may* properly belong to the Board. They can not be written into the constitution by any way other than than 'normal'.
Governor of the Board 2010-present
Former South-East Regional Administrative Officer (2010-2011)
User avatar
azrael
Party Governor
 
Posts: 1766
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 12:05 am
Location: Canterbury, Kent, UK

Re: AZ018 - 8.5.1 Board -> Other governance responsibilities

Postby Gavman » Sat Nov 27, 2010 12:44 am

The use of but the use of 'as yet undefined in this constitution.' implicitly implies that they are to be in the constitution once they have been defined.

I'm not arguing whether all governance responsibilities once defined should be written into the constitution, what I am saying is this clause (and yes the existing one which is the same) while in place means that all governance responsibilities must be written into the constitution.

If you feel this is wrong then I would suggest raising a proposal to change the wording of this clause.
* assange () has joined #ppuk
* Obama () has joined #ppuk
* assange slaps Obama around a bit with a large fishbot
User avatar
Gavman
Swashbuckler
 
Posts: 672
Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 9:12 am

Re: AZ018 - 8.5.1 Board -> Other governance responsibilities

Postby azrael » Sat Nov 27, 2010 12:56 am

Well I don't interpret the wording as you do. But if you want to propose an improved wording, I am happy to consider changing this clause to better say what it is meant to say.
Governor of the Board 2010-present
Former South-East Regional Administrative Officer (2010-2011)
User avatar
azrael
Party Governor
 
Posts: 1766
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 12:05 am
Location: Canterbury, Kent, UK

Re: AZ018 - 8.5.1 Board -> Other governance responsibilities

Postby Gavman » Sat Nov 27, 2010 1:05 am

azrael wrote:Well I don't interpret the wording as you do. But if you want to propose an improved wording, I am happy to consider changing this clause to better say what it is meant to say.


Can I enquire as how you do interpret it?

How about a simple change along the following line?
Code: Select all
8.5.1 The Board may have other governance responsibilities that remain undefined in this constitution.


Also possibly include that a list of all governance responsibilities must be available somewhere (but obviously the list can be updated as necessary).

Do I need to e-mail the Board to suggest a new proposal, or is my idea small enough to be considered and discussed as part of this proposal?
* assange () has joined #ppuk
* Obama () has joined #ppuk
* assange slaps Obama around a bit with a large fishbot
User avatar
Gavman
Swashbuckler
 
Posts: 672
Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 9:12 am

Re: AZ018 - 8.5.1 Board -> Other governance responsibilities

Postby azrael » Sat Nov 27, 2010 10:07 am

This is as good a location for your suggestion as any. I agree with you that such a 'list' should exist. I would hope however that the constitution would clearly outline any and all governance responsibilities that the Board has (and thus be the 'list'). However when it comes to details of those responsibilities, I can see those being detailed outside of the constitution (I think the arbitration clauses may mention something like this later).
Governor of the Board 2010-present
Former South-East Regional Administrative Officer (2010-2011)
User avatar
azrael
Party Governor
 
Posts: 1766
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 12:05 am
Location: Canterbury, Kent, UK

Re: AZ018 - 8.5.1 Board -> Other governance responsibilities

Postby Gavman » Sat Nov 27, 2010 10:34 am

Sorry i'm not trying to nitpick but

I would hope however that the constitution would clearly outline any and all governance responsibilities that the Board has (and thus be the 'list')


In my interpretation of the proposal in the first post, this is what is required (Where a new responsibility is identified it falls under the board first and then must enter the constitution - e.g. you don't have to wait for it to be written into the constitution before you can take responsibility for it, but it must be written in when possible).

It sounds like in principle you agree with me, but there seems to be disagreement as to whether the clause fulfils this wish or not. does that make sense?

What is the view of other members?
* assange () has joined #ppuk
* Obama () has joined #ppuk
* assange slaps Obama around a bit with a large fishbot
User avatar
Gavman
Swashbuckler
 
Posts: 672
Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 9:12 am


Return to Constitutional Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron
X
We use cookies to provide you the best possible experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive all cookies on this website. If you would like to, you can change how your browser controls cookies at any time.
You can also view our Privacy Policy
I understand. Don't show me this message again.