8 July 2015
I listen to a webcast about the Bye-laws. At CIPA HQ, the Bye-laws rewrite has been a major issue over the last twelve months. It appears, however, that ordinary Institute members are not quite so interested. Bye-laws are about quorums and casting votes, they think, and casual vacancies and annual general meetings and paperwork and official seals and blah blah blah. People are just fundamentally not very excited about this sort of stuff. The webcast features a lively debate among the four people in the front row seats at CIPA Hall. The three panellists gamely join in with the liveliness. Eventually, it becomes clear that the front row seats are the only occupied ones. Also that the questions which are supposedly streaming in through the interweb are only streaming in from four people, some of whom are related to the people in the front row anyway, and that Mr Davies is having to make up some extra questions just to make it look as though the subject is not the most tedious thing that people have forgotten to tune into since the last sheep dog trials qualifier. I am disappointed to say the least. I think people should care more about their Bye-laws. Because actually the rewrite could change major things like who we allow in to CIPA and what they can call themselves. And who gets to be President. And what to do when it goes wrong and the President starts shedding straw all over the place. And maybe there is a new Bye-law hidden somewhere that allows Council to be voted in at the Battle of the Bands every year: people ought to check these things. If nothing else, someone should be looking out for typos. And lack of antecedent basis. And mutually inconsistent cross-references. You cannot leave all of this to Council. I think it may be time for me to make another of my famous speeches in which I say very little about the Bye-laws but sound enthusiastic about them. It’s certainly worth a try.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Archives
July 2019
Categories |