Thread

strathspey@strathspey.org:44905

Previous Message Next Message

  • Angus Henry

    Angus Henry March 30, 2006, 5:39 a.m. (Message 44905)

    Re: The RSCDS Constitution

    I share Keith's concern -- we need to get well away from dynastic  
    appointments!
    
    Angus
    
    On 30-03-2006, at 12:55 , Keith R Bark wrote:
    
    > Most of the changes in the constitution appear to be clean-up and  
    > trying to
    > make the committees more efficient (by reducing size and ensuring some
    > continuity of management).
    >
    > The one topic that we do need to consider though is that of Society
    > Examiners and membership of the Education and Training Committee.  The
    > proposed change is that the Management Board will appoint two  
    > examiners to
    > the E&T Committee but not allow examiners to stand for elected  
    > positions on
    > the committee.  I agree that we need examiners on the committee but
    > appointments are always risky as the current Management Board will  
    > appoint
    > examiners who are in agreement with their opinions.  As the board  
    > changes,
    > so the appointees change.  It is somewhat like appointments to a  
    > Senate or
    > to a House of Lords rather than an elected body.  I think it would  
    > be better
    > to have the wording such that if the elected members of the  
    > committee does
    > not include at least two examiners, then the Management Board  
    > should appoint
    > examiners to make the number of examiners on the committee up to two.
    >
    > What are other people's thoughts?
    >
    >
    > Keith R Bark
    > Mississauga, Canada
    >
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: strathspey-bounces-barkk=xxxxxx.xxx@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx
    > [mailto:strathspey-bounces-barkk=xxxxxx.xxx@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx] On  
    > Behalf Of
    > Andrea Re
    > Sent: March 29, 2006 3:52 PM
    > To: SCD news and discussion
    > Subject: Re: The RSCDS Constitution
    >
    > john.m.sturrock ha scritto:
    >
    > Hi there,
    >
    > funnily enough almost at the same time as John's posting I got an e- 
    > mail
    > from Martina (IB & Central Germany) asking what I thought of the  
    > proposed
    > changes to the constitution.
    > I have accessed the RSCDS website and, following John's  
    > instructions, I
    > found the relevant file (I confess that I couldn't find it  
    > before....).
    > People will be glad to know that I don't have the time for a long  
    > message at
    > this moment in time, so I shall ask only one question:
    >
    > why should I care about the proposed changes? I am not terribly  
    > into RSCDS
    > politics at high level and certainly my understanding of the pro's  
    > and con's
    > of having so many members on the Education committee or whether  
    > there should
    > be a position of Management Committee Convenor elect is non  
    > existent. I am
    > sure that these proposals along with the others are indeed worthy of
    > approval, but how is that going to affect my life as a dancer/ 
    > teacher in
    > Dundee one way or another?
    >
    > Andrea (fae Dundee)
    >
    > PS
    >
    > John highlights the problem of, for example, the dwindling  
    > membership, but
    > what has got to do with the proposed changes? I leave John's  
    > message here
    > for reference.
    >>
    >> I had expected this to prompt a lengthy debate on  strathspey.
    >> Instead, almost at the same time, a discussion started regarding
    >> chords. This took on a life of its own, lasting a week, to the
    >> exclusion of most other topics. While very interesting in itself,
    >> nothing that was said was ever likely to change the future of SCD  -
    >> as one correspondent remarked, it is always likely that each area  
    >> will
    >> stick to its own customs.  Now that that discussion has run its
    >> course, perhaps we might turn back to the topic that could be
    >> significant to the future  -  the re-writing of the RSCDS
    >> Constitution.  Membership of the Society has roughly halved over the
    >> last 16 years, and we must be coming to some sort of crunch.   
    >> Added to
    >> that, my own observations of dancing in many places lead me to
    >> estimate that less than 10% of those dancing regularly in the  
    >> Milligan
    >> tradition, are actually members of the Society.
    >>
    >> The current Constitution was ratified less than 17 months ago, and  
    >> the
    >> previous Constitution only 24 months before that.  Given the current
    >> situation of the Society, one has to wonder if constant re-writing is
    >> in its own best interests, if the new one will prove any more  
    >> workable
    >> than the old, and if limited management time would not be better
    >> employed facing problems within the bounds of the existing
    >> Constitution(s)?
    >>
    >> The proposed new Constitution can be found on the Society website by
    >> logging in as a member, in the top right hand corner, BEFORE clicking
    >> either 'What's Changed'  or  'News'.   Among other things, it appears
    >> to grant future responsibility for future Constitutions, to a newly
    >> shrunk Management Board.
    >>
    >> I think debate could be very illuminating.  Someone, somewhere,
    >> perhaps far from Scotland, might just bring up something that changes
    >> the course of SCD...
    >>
    >> John M Sturrock
    >> Cupar UK
    >
    
    
    *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *      
    *     *
       Angus & Puka Henry:– 4 Eagle Court, Wulagi, DARWIN, NT 0812,  
    AUSTRALIA
    PHONE: (International) + 61 (0)8 8927 9203
    FAX: available: phone first to arrange.
    Website: <http://www.users.on.net/~anguka/>
          

Previous Message Next Message