Why would membership of the SPGB be refused
- This topic has 259 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
"there are those who think that given similar circumstances he could well do it again." There it is again, "think it could happen again. No proof just "gut feeling", that is no way to base a decision on, especially in a Party, where openness and logic are so valued.Also gnome, you are aware that it is not Vincent Maratty placing these posts, so why would you say that your "fellow branch members might be right after all"? Are you now to base conclusions re Vin, on the posts of "others". "Others" in this instance, who are not even branch members!This is getting more and more surreal but in a funny way, clarifying what is, in fact, going on!!!
Nice one Gnome, I like that reasoning. Thank you for pointing it out.In that case the same could be said of Ed. In similar circumstances he may kick off again. How does the party know he can be trusted? Just using the same logic. What we have here is an issue everyone thought was done and dusted. Yet another EC decision keeps it boiling. When will you lot learn? To top it all off, this has a potentially disastrous effect for the North East Branch getting back on its feet. Vin would have made the Branch quorate I believe. Why would any member, at this time want to scupper another Branch?
Well YMS, at least your post above, is a move forward. For that, at least I,m grateful.Your Comrade Steve Colborn.
Steve,well, discussing procedures, Ed made up his mind, and that is procedurally valid.To take a hypothetical (based in part on fact) there was a relatively famous libel case involving a woman in Hackney who moved from the Labour, to Respect, to the Tories in a short space of time. If she applied, I'd support the EC refusing her membership, based on her recent fickleness. I'd say the infamous "balance of probability" test applies.As I've said, though, part of democracy is that this process isn't finished. There are other points to be raised, at the appropriate place and time.
Steve, that is a good point. Yet more illogical nonsense, as now they are basing Vins pre determined guilt on stuff I am saying, it gets better. Smacks to me of minds already made up long ago. Or perhaps there are mind readers or clairvoyants in the party after all.Anyone ever seen the film Minority Report?
This is a panto and I am being forced to come on hear and defend myself from silly accusations.Let us take one of the accusationsI am being refused membership for saying that the party is undemocratic. Does that mean that LBird and Socialist Punk should not bother applying? I do not believe that the party is undemocratic and I have made that clear. But I do believe that it is possible for members of the EC to fail to understand the nature of a democratic movement. Has there ever been a summer school on that? What does the SPGB think my motives to join are? I enjoy being hated by you? Or perhaps it is the ridicule and humiliation at becoming last at all elections? Or perhaps I like being called nuts and utipian?I want rejoin to bring about a qourum in the NERB and continue with the job I was doing during my previous life and perhaps to encourage a few socialists who are not members to come to a meeting. I had intended to represent the party at Durham Miners Gala as I have done on many ocassions over my 37 year association with the SPGB. https://uk.groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/NEB-SPGB/conversations/messages. I can't believe that this farce has been allowed to continue for so long
SP "Or perhaps there are mind readers or clairvoyants in the party after all."Already answered way back at Message #143 by myself "We are not sooth-sayers and cannot foretell a person's future, nor do we hold a person's past against them. We argue that people can change. We judge them on what they say, but more importantly, on what they do, in the present now. "And regards to YMS comment that we decide some matters on the balance of probabilities, i reached my decision based on several months of satisfactory internet behaviour in debate on these forums by Vin and as i said in that message, particularly when he was vehemently disagreeing with others, which i think satisfies YMS test for probability and should others.
gnome wrote:You'd like to make out it was that simple but it's not, is it? We're talking here about an ex-member who, whilst still a member, slagged off the Party on a social networking site and there are those who think that given similar circumstances he could well do it again.You know, you're doing a fairly good job of convincing me that my fellow branch members might be right after all. Keep it up.Are you suggesting that my application be judge on what Socialist Punk says on this forum? Are members of the SPGB barred from criticising the party on other forums? There is a conference resolution on that which defends the right of all member to criticise the party and as all meeting are open to the public then that by implication means public criticism. Should we judge people on past sins anyway. Did you have any problems re-joining? If you did I would not bring them up on this forum. That would be very destructive.Do you have the ability to move on and stop your attacks on me?I ask you again, take my hand in comradeship and lets move on. There is stuff to be done.
Vin Maratty wrote:Are members of the SPGB barred from criticising the party on other forums? There is a conference resolution on that which defends the right of all member to criticise the party and as all meeting are open to the public then that by implication means public criticism.Indeed if anyone can direct me to this resolution and the three members of the EC rejected my application to rejoin on the said grounds then it would appear that they have ignored or were unaware of the party''s instruction to them.
Young Master Smeet wrote:well, discussing procedures, Ed made up his mind, and that is procedurally valid.It would be extremely undemocratic for an administrative committee to make up there own minds about what to do. But I don't think you meant to say that. It would be simply absurd to have party rules, conference decisions and party polls and then elect an EC to make up their own minds.
Vin Maratty wrote:Are members of the SPGB barred from criticising the party on other forums? There is a conference resolution on that which defends the right of all member to criticise the party and as all meeting are open to the public then that by implication means public criticismI think that just about nails it Vin. If it is ok for members to criticise the party, then this was a non starter long ago and should not have gotten this far.By the way Vin, when is the Durham Miners Gala? And would it now be too late for you to represent the SPGB there if you are let back in by next months EC?I want to say I am far from happy with myself for bringing the past up in criticising Ed. We buried the hatchet long ago and now I have burnt my bridge. Thats what happens when issues are left unresolved. So often we wade in fists flying forgetting there are people at the centre of it all.For what it's worth I offer my sincere apologies to Ed and Vin.
Hi SP,you need not apologise to me I know it was sincere. The Gala is on Saturday 12th July. You thinking of going? Conference Resolution 1973“This Conference reaffirms that nothing in the Party Rules should be understood as to prevent any member or members from expressing criticism of the Party verbally or in writing.”As all party meetings are open to the public then this by implication means ‘criticise in public’.The only question left to be answered is can EC members ignore conference decisions?
Vin Maratty wrote:It would be extremely undemocratic for an administrative committee to make up there own minds about what to do. But I don't think you meant to say that. It would be simply absurd to have party rules, conference decisions and party polls and then elect an EC to make up their own minds.Erm, no.I believe it was conference 1935 pass the following resolution:"The EC shall stand and turn thrice widdershins if a black cat walks across head office roof during an EC meeting held on a Tuesday or a Thursday in an even month, unless there is a dog in Edgeley Lane."The EC members would have to make their minds up:1) Whether a black cat had walked across the roof.2) Whether it was a qualifying day/month3) Whether there was a dog in Edgeley Lane.Before deciding whether to stand and turn thrice widdershins. They would also have to decide how fast to turn widdershins. They might decide whetehr or not to designate someone to watch the roof durign qualifying meetings in case there's a cat, or should they ignore it unless a cat makes its presence known?
The trouble with this turn in the thread is that there is a confusion between a wrong or ill-advised decision and a constitutional or democratic one. It is quite possible for an ill-advised decision to be taken democratically. I'm sure there will have been many others as well as the case in point. In any event no decision is final and irrevocable as procedures are provided for to change or rectify decisions.While I'm posting it occurs to me that the EC's Standing Orders are of relevance to this discussion. Note in particular Clauses 7,13, 14-17, and 30.
Quote:Standing Orders of the 111th Executive CommitteeSocialist Party of Great BritainAgreed at the 4 January 2014 EC MeetingAt the first meeting of a new Executive Committeethese standing orders shall be considered foradoption and/or amendment:1. The regular meeting of the EC shall be atHead Office on the first Saturday of themonth at 13:00; if urgency or workload requires,additional meetings shall be held.2. It shall be the duty of the General Secretary,Assistant Secretary, or failing them,any member of the EC to call the meeting toorder immediately a quorum of five, eitherin person or via teleconferencing, is presentand to place before the Chair a copy of theStanding Orders and Party Rules. The ECmembers shall make every effort to attendin person.3. In the event of no quorum being present at13:15 in the EC room, those present shalldeal with any urgent business and their actionsshall be presented for ratification tothe next properly constituted meeting of theEC.4. Special Meetings: Any five members of theEC or the General Secretary and any fourshall have the power to call a special ECmeeting. All members shall be informed.5. The General Secretary shall be responsiblefor keeping the attendance book.6. The EC meeting may take a break midway,and aim to finish at or before 17:00.7. The presence at Conference and ADM of ECmembers is required.8. EC members may not smoke at the EC table.9. Normal order of business:(a) Election of Chair(b) Minutes of the previous meeting, businessarising therefrom and the GeneralSecretary’s raising of Notices of Motionand Business from previous meetings(c) Forms A and F(d) Treasurer(e) Reports of party officers, party appointees,subcommittees, and departments;discussion of advertising, campaigns,and the Socialist Standard(f) Matters outstanding from previousminutes(g) Correspondencei. Matters of urgencyii. Correspondence from or concerningBranches, the Party in generaland membersiii. Correspondence from CompanionParties and Groupsiv. All other correspondence(h) Any other business(i) Nomination of Chair for the next meeting10. When an item is before the EC, the Chairshould have discretion to allow a generaldiscussion before accepting a motion.11. Urgency: Any member of the EC may at anytime during the meeting raise an item byway of action of urgency. The member raisingthe matter shall be asked by the Chairto state briefly what the matter is, and whyurgency is requested. The member requestingurgency shall then state to what thematter relates and why urgency has beenrequested. The Chair shall then take a voteas to whether urgency should be granted.If a majority vote in favour of urgency, thematter shall be dealt with forthwith.12. The EC will normally consider only correspondenceand papers received on or beforethe Monday preceding the EC meeting butlate papers will be considered if the EC decides.13. All motions dealing with a matter of policyshall be recorded by a division. An ECmember may call for a division (recording ofnames) on the voting of any motion beforethe EC.14. A Notice of Motion must be seconded beforebeing accepted by the Chair and recorded inthe minutes. [Conference Resolution 1980]15. The Chair shall ensure that a written Noticeof Motion placed before him/her shallbe read and recorded before the meeting adjourns.16. A Notice of Motion shall take effect at thenext EC meeting and each member shall beadvised.17. An EC resolution may not be rescinded exceptby a Notice of Motion as in x16 above.In exceptional circumstances the proposalto rescind may be considered immediatelyif at least a quorum of the EC votes for urgency.18. Notices of Motion which embody supportiveor contentious statements shall be ruledout of order by the Chair and shall not berecorded.19. Notices of Business: If a member of the ECgives notice that he/she will raise a “questionfor discussion” it shall be treated in thesame manner as business under x16 above.20. The Chair is not permitted to move any motionbut may second and vote on any motionexcept as indicated in x21 re a Vote of Direction.21. In the event of any ruling from the Chair onprocedural matters being challenged, an ECmember may move or the Chair may call fora Vote of Direction without further discussion.The Chair shall accept the direction ofa simple majority of the EC.22. The Chair is not permitted to move or secondor to vote on a “Vote of Direction” motionbut may call for such a motion as providedfor in x21 above.23. Subsequent amendments to these StandingOrders may be only be made by way of Noticeof Motion (as per x16).24. A EC member shall speak when invited todo so by the Chair noting a raised hand.Any member not conforming to this StandingOrder shall on a majority vote be requiredto leave the EC table for the remainderof the meeting.25. All contributions by EC members shall belimited to three minutes but may be extendedat the discretion of the Chair.26. Any procedural matters or matters relatingto the conduct of EC members not coveredby the Standing Orders are to be taken ascovered by Conference and ADM StandingOrders.27. There shall be a review of Departments’ andSubcommittees’ Terms of Reference everyfive years starting from 2013.28. The January EC shall consider the renewalof our registration as a political partyand shall review and update a register oftrustees and bank signatories.29. Reports of the Treasurer and Auditors notpresented to the EC prior to Conference orADM shall be presented to the EC at itsmeeting following the Conference or ADM.30. Any EC member who has a financial interestin any matters before the EC shall declarethat interest.Young Master Smeet wrote:Vin Maratty wrote:It would be extremely undemocratic for an administrative committee to make up there own minds about what to do. But I don't think you meant to say that. It would be simply absurd to have party rules, conference decisions and party polls and then elect an EC to make up their own minds.Erm, no.I believe it was conference 1935 pass the following resolution:"The EC shall stand and turn thrice widdershins if a black cat walks across head office roof during an EC meeting held on a Tuesday or a Thursday in an even month, unless there is a dog in Edgeley Lane."The EC members would have to make their minds up:1) Whether a black cat had walked across the roof.2) Whether it was a qualifying day/month3) Whether there was a dog in Edgeley Lane.Before deciding whether to stand and turn thrice widdershins. They would also have to decide how fast to turn widdershins. They might decide whetehr or not to designate someone to watch the roof durign qualifying meetings in case there's a cat, or should they ignore it unless a cat makes its presence known?
Am I to take it that you have overdone your medication
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.