Dexter Cattle For Sale Discussion Board

Posted: **Thu Nov 15, 2007 2:11 pm**

Although this is an open site, I think it is a suitable place to float some thoughts on possible modifications to our constitution. I'm avoiding using the phrase "New Constitution" as I do think that it is essential that we build on the past rather than make a completely fresh start. Emotive language has been used to describe what went on a the last Council meeting, but it is certainly true that our Society is entering a dangerous phase. All students of History will be able to recognise this!

I think that the heart of the debate is the make up of Council. Let's be honest, the majority of members know nothing about most of Council. Postal ballots usually lead to well known candidates being elected. These candidates may or may not have the qualities needed to be a good Council member. We need to consider new ways of electing our Council.

Here are my thoughts:

1. We should consider having Council elected in 2 parts.The 1st part would be representatives from the regions. I know that this would give us some challenges as some regions are more active than others. Would Devon and Cornwall each get a rep whilst Scotland only had one? Perhaps a region would need a certain level of activity (Shows etc) to qualify for a Council rep. There might need to be a little rejigging, but let's think about it. This would mean that the debates would spread out into the regions to a greater extent than now.

2. The other part (half?) of Council would be elected from the wider membership. We should consider having this election only at the AGM with no postal vote. Perhaps atendees might be able to cast a smal number of proxy votes on behalf of members who could not atend. These proxies could be strictly limited. In this way, voters would have the chance to assess the candidates. They could be on a small panel (just like the BBC Question Time) and asked questions from the audience.

3. Co-option should be allowed but co-opted members have no vote. Co-option is a valuable tool and,for example, could be used to invite some younger Dexter keepers onto Council for the occassional meeting.

4. As to the revolving nature of Council: I don't have strong opinions. Many societies cannot survive if their active members are forced to stand down, but it does lead to changes at the top. I do think we should consider making the Chairman's post a 2 year appointment. Or rather, making it possible for the Chairman to stand for a second year. One year isn't really enough.

5. You will notice that I referred to a Chairman rather than President. This is deliberate. I think we should think about splitting these posts. The President is someone who represents the Society and presents the prizes etc. A Chairman is there to help set the strategic direction. Different posts requiring different skills. The Chairman would be the line manager of the paid staff (representing the Council and therefore the Society) whereas the President would have no authority in this.

6. Relationships with paid staff. All councils are political (small p) No-one should involve the paid staff in any political debate. i.e. Do we keep the dwarf gene? To help maintain this seperation, Council should appoint it's own secretary, from its members. The Breed Secretary is there to carry out policy, not to be involved in the making of it.

I think that this site is a good place to discuss these matters, but they will not be resolved here. That's the job of the steering committee. I think it is worth asking those contributing to sign off with their real names and to confirm that they are members.

Thanks for reading this far.

Peter Thornton - member from Cumbria

Posted: **Thu Nov 15, 2007 2:26 pm**

Hi Peter I agree in the main with what you say but I think if you have reps from each group area/ region that would be enough as most who are active will know them in their area. Voting at the AGM i feel would not be of much benefit as most people would be strangers to the others or at the most aquaintances. Also I would like to see the secretary take the minutes at Council instead of second-hand from the minutes secretary. Obviously they are only there to record and would have no input to the meeting.

Rob H 32350
:blues: incognito

Posted: **Thu Nov 15, 2007 2:34 pm**

Peter, may I be the first to thank you for your views. This is what all on the Steering Committee want, constructive idea's leading to a constructive debate using reasoned arguments.

Martin. Medway Valley Dexters.

Posted: **Thu Nov 15, 2007 2:36 pm**

One thing that really stood out for me in reading about the issues involved in this was the Secretary's position; being
pulled and pushed in a variety of directions.

I therefore wholeheartedly agree with point 6 - keep the
Secretary out of the politics. We might then get one who
stays for a decent period of time.

Nick Robinson

Posted: **Thu Nov 15, 2007 2:47 pm**

Rob, in answer to your about the secretary, we have a Breed Secretary who is in place to run the office and carry out policy made by Council/Society. In my view this does not include acting as a minute taker at meetings that may discuss amongst other things his/her salary and contract of employment. He/she should report to Council on matters concerning the office etc. and voice any concerns that they may have, it could then be difficult to take minutes when debates about their report takes place.

Martin. Medway Valley Dexters.

Posted: **Thu Nov 15, 2007 5:34 pm**

Just ideas from an outsider:

In the Canadian Dexter Cattle Association we have:

1. A paid secretary/treasurer/registrar who also takes minutes. He is very efficient and professional. That is his job.

2. Voting is by ballot (by mail) including constitutional changes. Each candidate has to provide information about him/herself (and in the case of the Shetland group, answer some specific questions). This is also done by the North American Shetland Sheep Breeders Association. When you have a wide-flung national group you really need to involve the membership and receiving only a newsletter doesn't quite do that. I will never make it to any meetings of either society but at least I feel I can participate and that, I believe, is very important. I have dropped out of Rare Breeds Canada because if you couldn't make it to the meetings, you had no vote and no say in anything (even as a director, very little attention was paid).

3. Minutes from every board meeting are mailed out to the membership (several in one mailing). This keeps each member informed and makes board business open to all.

Other thoughts: Continuity is really important so most groups favour a two to three year term with the terms staggered so the whole council/board doesn't renew together.

In the BC Sheep Federation, if your local group has 6 or more members, you can join the federation and get one vote. They are considering changing this to regions but there is always the problem of representation. ie. a small number of producers will have the same vote as a larger group in a different region. I think that is the way Canadian politics works.............

Being a director is usually a pretty thankless task and hopefully doesn't attract too many big egos trying to push their own agenda for their own purposes. Most groups go through a rough period but most pull through.

Been there, done that.
:p

Posted: **Fri Nov 16, 2007 12:48 am**

Just a thought.
Why are we a Charity? I would not have thought that the tax benefits were that great. We do not raise money by public appeals other than the heifer raffle and there varieties of not for profit companies that may be more appropriate to the emerging commercialisation fo the Dexter.

Alastair Cook
North Yorks/Lancs/Westmorland corner

Posted: **Fri Nov 16, 2007 12:49 am**

I take on board your point but i feel second-hand news to the Secretary is not helpful or would the Minute Secretary produce the minutes for the membership? and the Breed Sec would then be working in isolation!

Posted: **Fri Nov 16, 2007 8:22 am**

Hi Alastair - I believe the charity status brings in roughly £5000-7000 p.a. and also means that DCS does not pay tax on any surplus, which generally it makes, saving possibly a further few thousdand a year. Other than those, I am not aware yet of any other benefits. All societies I know of have charitable status including Angus, Hereford etc.

Posted: **Fri Nov 16, 2007 9:12 am**

All societies I know of have charitable status including Angus, Hereford etc.

The Angus society is also a Company Limited by Guarantee, and whilst having charitable status still seems able to promote the breed, encourage beef marketing schemes, the sales of Certified Angus Beef etc etc, so the charitable status shouldn't be something that holds the society back.

Posted: **Fri Nov 16, 2007 12:52 pm**

My apologies in advance if this post is slightly off topic, but has the society ever considered separating the function of managing the breed i.e. registrations, membership etc. from the society?

Is there not an opportunity for the breed secretary and admin staff to be run as a private company for either an annual fee agreed in advance or a % of the registration income? Such a company could also provide registration services to other breed societies, especially those with fewer registrations, thereby gaining economies of scale. Employment issues would be the responsiblity of that company, not part-time volunteer members of the society

This would prevent any interference from the committee in the day to day running of the office and allow those in the office to focus on what they should be doing.

Similar examples exist in the commercial world, for example I used to participate in a pan-European trade association. The association was run on behalf of the members by a private company which was a subsidiary of one of the accountancy groups.

Posted: **Fri Nov 16, 2007 8:20 pm**

[quote]

The Dexter Soc has been down that route and that appeared not to suit some members of the council, which resulted in the person not renewing her contract with the DCS unfortunetly in those days we did not have the dexter discussion board available to save this very much liked and respected person.

Posted: **Fri Nov 16, 2007 8:27 pm**

bjreroberts wrote:My apologies in advance if this post is slightly off topic, but has the society ever considered separating the function of managing the breed i.e. registrations, membership etc. from the society?

Is there not an opportunity for the breed secretary and admin staff to be run as a private company for either an annual fee agreed in advance

Hi this should have been in my previous posting, hope it works this time

Posted: **Fri Nov 16, 2007 8:28 pm**

Bingo Crack the system

:D :D

Posted: **Sun Nov 18, 2007 5:28 pm**

Peter,
As a matter of suggestion to a newly elected council--should they ask my opinions--I would suggest that our council should be as simple as possible with representation from the regions at major council meetings (I have suggested that this should be only once a year).
I have no real interest in the location of the council members only that they do there best for the DCS as a whole--one member one vote seems to work well in other areas.
As to size of council--I am told that it is difficult to get people to stand therefore lets be lead by what we think we can get--I would of thought about 9 is correct with a quorum being possibly 7. The head of the council--President or whatever should have a nominee who acts as the line manager for any permanent staff.
This though I think is a job for the future--lets use our current constitution, elect a new council and then look at the situation--if the steering group wish to carry on as council and are elected by the members then they would have my full support--at the moment I think we are putting the cart before the horse.
I take great heart though from the interest shown in all this politics from such a small society. We obviously have a very interested membership or is it only a few stalwarts--I haven't counted the number of posts but the viewings are quite high?

Dexter Cattle For Sale Discussion Board

Modified Constitution Part One - How should we modify our constitution