Marilynn wrote: >Why could there not be a voting category of non-branch members representing >a geographic area?
While part of me sympathises with the HQ members because they do not have
representation, I cannot help thinking that having / not having voting
rights at the AGM is a bit of a red herring. Have you seen what is voted on
at AGMs? Because of the numbers it is even worse than the Exec as far as
having a discussion is concerned - it can only be a debate, and then only on
the proposals and amendments - people make very good points and then in the
main the delegates vote as they have been instructed by their branches.
HQ members do need a way to make their voices heard, but Strathspey and
e-mails to HQ seem to work very well. (The fact that little change seems to
occur as a result is just the way the Society changes - very slowly - and
this is one of the reasons that it is being re-organised)
If overseas members want a quick fix to having a lack of representation at
the Exec / AGM, then they only need to join a branch; I would suggest that
they select one that is prepared to send them their books etc without
charging them any more than they currently pay, and it would probably be
advisable to select one that is based in the UK and send delegates to both
the Exec and the AGM. If all the HQ members did this (? 2,000), and spread
themselves out amongst all the branches it would work out at about 10 per
branch, and if they confined themselves to UK branches it would work out at
about 20 per branch.