10.3 & 10.15 extended nominations

Discuss our Party Constitution and any suggested amendments here

Re: 10.3 & 10.15 extended nominations

Postby tuoni » Fri Sep 23, 2011 12:24 pm

cabalamat wrote:
tuoni wrote:
azrael wrote:curious as to other people's opinion on leader being open for noms longer.
I'd like to think that anyone who was serious about taking any role, whether it be on the board or the NEC would be able to nominate themselves within the timeframe if they have the motivation to do the job.

If anything, I would say the Leader role should be strictly the shortest the most strictly adhered to since we don't want a drawn-out period without a party leader.

That's a good point. OTOH, the last time we had an election for party leader, there were accusations that the NEC was trying to have a deliberately shortened process, in order to favour their preferred candidate for leader (who was at the time an NEC member). If there is internal acrimony, it harms the party and distracts us from our task of winning over the British people to our point of view.
It wasn't quite like that, though. It wasn't the shortened process which riled the membership (of which I was one of the incredibly vocal ones... hell, I even brought it up at the conference!) but I get what you mean and I don't really want to dredge the past for the sake of it.

What needs to be done is just to make sure that the wording is explicit. I don't think making a special case of the leader is a good thing and I think extending the period for nominations for that role is actually a bad thing.
We do what we must because we can...
Everything I say is definitive. Reality is sometimes inaccurate.
User avatar
Party Secretary
Posts: 580
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 11:36 pm
Location: Nodnol

Re: 10.3 & 10.15 extended nominations

Postby scuzzmonkey » Fri Sep 23, 2011 1:34 pm

cabalamat wrote:
azrael wrote:Not sure how much uncertainty there is with 'If no nominations occur then nominations remain open indefinitely.' and 'Should a candidate be nominated after the initial 31 days, nominations must then remain open for at least a further 14 days. '

The uncertainty is here: "The nomination period must remain open for a period of no less than 14 days, and normally no more than 31 days". Say a post becomes vacant. How long is the nomination period? 14 days, 31 days, or somewhere in between? It's impossible to tell from the text. If the nomination period is announced to end at a certain time, and some nominations occurred, can the NEC extend the period?

If the NEC is allowed latitude in how long the nominating period is, or on whether to extend it, then they could fall open to accusations of bias. This would be bad, as it may cause ill-feeling within the party. Therefore I think it would be best if the rules for elections specify as much as possible about time periods (for nominations, campaigning and voting), so that no such accusations can be made.

The reason for the ambiguity is fairly simple - and is exactly as you describe - to give the NEC flexibility BUT to stop anything being forced through in a day. There are many situations and scenarios where having a longer (and lets make it clear, the bottom end is VERY well defined, all this clauses allows is for _more_ time) nominations period is a good thing, Board elections for example.

Whether we have a clause that says 14 days only, or whether we have a clause that says 14-31 day doesn't make any difference, it is still 14 days - and if someone was wanting to force though a preferred candidate then surely they would prefer us to change the clause to have no bottom end, or one much closer to 1 day.
- Will Mac (@Scuzzmonkey)
- Governor (July 2010 - March 2012), PPUK
- "One of the most important things you learn from the internet is that there is no ‘them’ out there. It’s just an awful lot of ‘us’." - Douglas Adams
User avatar
Space Pirate
Posts: 1338
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 4:38 pm
Location: Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK

Re: 10.3 & 10.15 extended nominations

Postby azrael » Fri Sep 23, 2011 2:26 pm

I can see where there could be clarity. Should the nomination period be immediately defined upon opening - or does it allow arbitrary extension within the 14-31 day period even if there has already been a nomination.

I'd be inclined to keep the 14-31 days, but note that the period of duration is determined and published at the point of opening, can not be extended, except when there are no noms when the automatic extension kicks in.

I don't like defining a difference between any position, there is flexibility enough to allow, upon opening of noms, a longer period or not.

When an election is due, the NEC will announce the opening of nominations. Upon opening, the NEC will publish the date and time that nominations close. The duration of the nominations period must be no less than 14 days, and no more than 31 days. This duration may not be altered except as defined below.

Nominations will remain open indefinitely if no nominations are received. Should a nomination occur after this period nominations must remain open for a minimum of 14 days from the date of a nomination being made.

Open nominations must be announced by the NEC at least every 26 weeks.

added the underlined text
Governor of the Board 2010-present
Former South-East Regional Administrative Officer (2010-2011)
User avatar
Party Governor
Posts: 1768
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 12:05 am
Location: Canterbury, Kent, UK


Return to Constitutional Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

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.