Reinstate Elected Council - Resignation

[justmalc]

I am sorry that I wasn't at the meeting and that the Council felt the need to re-sign.

As in all situations I expect that this issue is not black and white. Clearly Yvonne felt uncomfortable in her role and her complaints may, or may not, have been justified. I don't know and neither do most others. I have absolutely no complaints with Yvonne's work, simply with the absence of information and the fact that the vast majority of members are not aware of the issues leading to this situation.

I also understand that Council members were advised not to discuss the resignation at the meeting because of legal issues and were therefore hamstrung and unable to present their position.

I do find it regrettable that the steering group are now running the Society, not because I have any issue with any member - most seem perfectly reasonable from comments on these pages - simply because they are unelected and represent one point of view on these issues.

If people had complaints with the way things were run then I believe these concerns should have been passed to Council and it is they who should have reviewed the constitution.

It remains my firm belief that the Council should be re-instated and that they should carry forward reform where necessary. Skeletons need to be dragged from closets and grievances aired in the proper forums. I do not expect all Council members are entirely beyond reproach - how many of us are? But the Council were elected by the membership and have that authority which the steering group - however well meaning - do not.

I would repeat. I have no issue with Yvonne, who has always been courteous and professional in her dealings with me, or with the Steering Group, few of whom I know. My issue lies with the processes followed and the fact that good people have felt the need to resign, largely because the potential for litigation prevented them from defending their position openly and frankly.

I call for the re-instatement of the elected Council coupled with an acceptance of the need for constitutional review.

[Chris Downward]

Whilst I agree with most of what justmalc has to say, I would suggest that we hold new elections before we do anything. I would like a group elected by the membership to run our society not a group suggested by a tiny portion of the membership. Am I missing something or aren't we supposed to have a society that is governed by members elected by all the society, who are then placed in position to work for the majority of the society. At the moment we don't seem to have that, who is actually running the society at the moment? Who is actually taking responsibility for the affairs of the society? as I understand it --it is an "unelected" steering group--I wish them well but surely the way forward is new elections before any change.

[groubearfarm]

One cannot turn back the clock. For some time now the council has not been going forwards and because of fundamental disagreements amongst members there was stalemate. The black cows were hardly mentioned and their best interests and those of the membership were not being served. The Council could not manage itself and consequently the Breed Secretary was working for twelve bosses, she found it impossible to continue in that role. The two newly elected members had both served on council very recently so there were no real changes. The Council resigned because they could not agree on a way forward. The council had every opportunity to discuss the situation during its meeting and as you will see from the minutes, which are now on the DCS site, this was not done. To be honest the vote to resign was the first unanimous vote for a long time and the situation will never alter while that same group of people are involved. It would therefore be impossible for this group of people to negotiate changing the constitution under these conditions.

It is a mistake to think that this present situation was caused by any one person. It was caused by a Council which was unable to manage itself, unable to agree on anything (apart from resigning) and this state of affairs had been going on for a number of years. The charity cannot run under these circumstances. We all have the best interests of the Dexter Society at heart and no decision was taken lightly, however legally the charity has to be managed. A constitution has to be agreed upon and an election held and to get to that point we want to involve ALL the membership, ask for their help and ideas and that way the Society can go forwards into this new century to face all the problems that keepers of livestock will no doubt face.

[groubearfarm]

Fiona Miles
Groubear Herd
Steering Committee

[Chris Downward]

The point that I think groupbear misses is that we don't decide on a constitution and then have an election, we have an election and then work on a constitution.
When we have a constitution then we put that to the membership to vote on.
Having a steering organisation which wishes to get everybody involved is very laudable but it is still an unelected group--why couldn't another group suddenly decide to do something else?
Lets have elections and then lets talk about changes.

[welshdexterboy]

So Chris what you suggest--- is we get rid of the steering committee-- get everyone who is a member to suggest what, if anything, we change in the constitution and then have elections? The reason I say this you either have the steering committee to run things for now or you go back to the old group who apparently, as I don't know, are as much use as a chocolate teapot. ???

[Broomcroft]

Chris - A new constitution would be proposed, not imposed and the members will accept or reject it. I would hope we can propose and actually produce an example in the not too distant future based upon one that has been tried and tested and is up to date, and includes the main ideas that members have, but don't quote me on it!

I think you mentioned the main thing being a society that does the basics well, and I couldn't agree more, and to do honest it's my only concern. I think that's the one thing we have right now and I don't know of any problems with the basics. The office is very well run and I was really impressed when I spent a day there last week. They're an excellent team at Stoneleigh.



Edited By Broomcroft on 1195238531

[Rutherford]

My computer has been out of action for four days, I have surfaced to wonder about dates. The fireworks in these columns would be the envy of any November 5th enthusiast.
Since the previously elected Council selected the members of the caretaker committee, I cannot see why there should be any complaints regarding democracy.
I am surprised that there is such ignorance about the basis for dissatisfaction. The most obvious is lack of communication with the membership. Since my own presidency in ’94, I for one have been battling to obtain earlier publication of the minutes. Members of Council are prohibited from discussing subjects of the previous meeting until the minutes have been approved. Until now this has not occurred until the next meeting, three months later, i.e.- turning it into a ‘secret Society’.
Some eight years ago I put forward proposals for an Elite Bull scheme, provisions were introduced with continual tweaking at the edges, It would appear that far from producing a genetically elite animal it is still highlights no more than a glorified show specimen, not a great justification for six years effort. Now the committee had finally decided after some six years it still needs radical reorganisation! .
These days with such emphasis on beef, I welcomed the advent of the new Smithfield show, and contacted several members of the Council suggesting we should have a stand there, with no response. Finally I contacted Fiona Miles, with little enthusiasm from the Council, she and Phillippa Laing organised an excellent exhibit. Delighted, I assumed this year Council would be putting a real effort into persuading members to show some live animals, again a deafening silence. Although Fiona had again arranged to have a stand, it was probably as well that it followed the fate of most shows, and was cancelled; there would have been no Dexters at the biggest national annual beef show.
I could go on, the fact is that a large proportion of Council time was engaged in domestic disputes, leaving little resource for the betterment of the breed, and no discussion could properly take place with the society membership while the minutes were kept in limbo. It would also appear that lack of business acumen means other important matters have not been taken into proper consideration and are now coming to light. Recruitment of Council members obviously needs considerable thought, and I have put forward my ideas to the caretaker committee.

[Chris Downward]

I agree with all the thoughts and aims of those who have replied but you all miss the point--we need elections first and changes second. The steering group or whatever keeps the DCS running but has no remit as far as I can see to produce changes or constitutions--that is for a newly elected council to decide and it's ideas are then put to the membership--not to an AGM or similar.

I also don't like the idea of council members being "recruited"--stand for election or don't--if we don't have anybody that wishes to stand then we don't have a society.
I would hate the DCS to be run by a suggested team.
I also note again that it is said that " the previous council spent much time on domestic disputes" --what disputes? I've never heard of them.
Is there anybody who will state what went wrong in specific terms rather than generalisations with the previous council?

[Broomcroft]

Chris - I think I've just answered your first point in the other topic. With your last question above, I think the answer is probably, no they won't because this is an open forum to the world and his uncle.



Edited By Broomcroft on 1195322299

[welshdexterboy]

there anybody who will state what went wrong in specific terms rather than generalisations with the previous council?

I wouldn't have thought anyone would be dull enough to do that. You would end up liable for slander Chris. Or the heavies could call round one night :blues:

[Chris Downward]

The difficulty in not knowing "what went on" and the reason that it could be libelous is that all we are in fact left with is "gossip and inuendo". This is not the best way to "carry things forward".
I would suggest that as a matter of urgency we have new elections, that is the only way to give creedence to any sort of organisational governance. What is the problem with setting a date now?
If we allow a steering group to decide when to have elections then we run the risk of yet more divisions.
I suppose the crux of the matter is --do we/are we to be run by a body selected/elected by a small group or are we to be run by a body elected by the whole group?
At the moment I don't really have the confidence that the system we have in place is morally correct. Lets forget about constitutions and have elections.
Chris

[Rutherford]

If you had gone to the meeting, you would not be ‘left with gossip and innuendo’. Who are you going to elect, and what are you expecting them to do? Part of the problem, particularly in recent years, has been folks did not volunteer, and at least they knew what they were volunteering for. Unless you have made your money, and are semi-retired, you probably haven’t the time anyway. We haven’t had sufficient numbers to provide for an election for several years until this, and they were the same folks who had only been off a year or so. Thank your lucky stars, the members of the steering committee were prepared to be ‘press ganged’ into it, for the sake of the future of the Society, and let them get on with it, and pray that they can come up with some sensible answers.

Beryl

[Chris Downward]

Rutherford
I wish to elect a council with the task of doing what the steering commitee is doing now----this cuts out all the "gossip and inuendo"--it gives creedence to a group of people to act on the memberships behalf. At the moment I for one don't feel that that a steering group without a council is the correct way forward.
Your comment that if I had attended the meeting I would know what the gossip and inuendo was--is probably why the societies meetings are badly supported--I am not interested in Gossip and inuendo, I am not really interested in the finer points of the DCS "magna Carta"---what I am interested in is "Dexter cattle"
Why all this effort on the politics, if we have a society that is not well supported then we don't have a society and we should start all over again. If people won't stand for election then we don't really have a society all we have is a registration organisation--perhaps this is what people want? I don't want "press ganged people" looking after things no matter how well meaning--I would prefer them to be elected on on a council.
Your comment on who has the time is well made but surely this is for council to decide--one meeting a year is surely enough to set guidelines and decide policy--some major PLC's only have board meetings every 4 months and I don't think we are a PLC yet!
The only real way to clear the air is to have an election and see what happens.
Chris

[Broomcroft]

Chris - Just one question. Would you like us to stand down?