BR wrote:Maybe misread. Minimum Committee size is 5. New quorum size is 5.
That could be correct but it would be advisable that there are normally 8 in the committee if 5 is the quorum as that means any decisions taken are taken by a majority of the committee, if you only have 5 in the committee then the minimum quorum is 3.
If anyone wants to get really technical then read Erskine May's Treatise on the Law, Privileges, Proceedings and Usage of Parliament
Take your word for it Roaster.....you seem like an honest sort.
Erskine May's Treatise on the Law, Privileges, Proceedings and Usage of Parliament.......rather read Rum's treatise on exploiting the 3 on 1 overlap by gaslight.
I was involved a few years ago in a disputed committee decision and it is pretty complex but the stated 5 will save any such situations and I would like to hope such a situation would never arise.
Protocols for committee business and such like are fairly complex if someone wants to cause problems so it is best that in something where the office bearers and members are volunteers that any possible chance of problems is covered.
Agreed. The constitution needs to be written by someone with expertise in that area. Other than good manners, there's no real point putting it out to consultation amongst the membership.
Russ wrote:
That's simply a copy and paste job from elsewhere
Once again URSC leadership is amateur
No point reinventing the wheel Russ. Anyway I suspect one or two of the committee have more experience in such things as you, me and most UAFC contributors put together.
BR wrote:Maybe misread. Minimum Committee size is 5. New quorum size is 5.
That could be correct but it would be advisable that there are normally 8 in the committee if 5 is the quorum as that means any decisions taken are taken by a majority of the committee, if you only have 5 in the committee then the minimum quorum is 3.
If anyone wants to get really technical then read Erskine May's Treatise on the Law, Privileges, Proceedings and Usage of Parliament
Take your word for it Roaster.....you seem like an honest sort.
Erskine May's Treatise on the Law, Privileges, Proceedings and Usage of Parliament.......rather read Rum's treatise on exploiting the 3 on 1 overlap by gaslight.
I was involved a few years ago in a disputed committee decision and it is pretty complex but the stated 5 will save any such situations and I would like to hope such a situation would never arise.
Protocols for committee business and such like are fairly complex if someone wants to cause problems so it is best that in something where the office bearers and members are volunteers that any possible chance of problems is covered.
Agreed. The constitution needs to be written by someone with expertise in that area. Other than good manners, there's no real point putting it out to consultation amongst the membership.
Reading it though they seem to have it pretty well covered and a minimum 5 man committee plus a 5 man quorum means if several committee members left down to 5 the everyone would have to agree the way forward and if numbers went below 5 an emergency meeting of membership would have to be called.
I would assume that someone who has legal experience will have read it through before it is put out to consultation and thus don't envisage any changes needing to be made.
“That made me feel very special and underlined to me that Ulster is more than a team, it is a community and a rugby family" Rory Best
Russ wrote:
That's simply a copy and paste job from elsewhere
Once again URSC leadership is amateur
No point reinventing the wheel Russ. Anyway I suspect one or two of the committee have more experience in such things as you, me and most UAFC contributors put together.
A certain gentleman used to keep them in check, alas , he is no longer with us.
“For the liespotter who knows how to listen well, the random words, sounds, and phrases in a person's speech are never as random as they seem. They offer a clear sightline into the liar's psyche.”
Indeed, but I suspect that even he would agree that after this amount of time the constitution should be revisited, with the benefit of experiencing the practicalities of running this particular club.
Fundamentally, the proposal does not alter too much. The emphasis on the club's purpose is altered (and I suspect that reflects the day-to-day work being done by the club - and hopefully a better relationship with UR). And there is the bit about quorums, etc which I would expect is also based on experience of the realities of running the club.
The only other thing that I spotted, is that the committee can now hand out honoury memberships.
Kofi Annan wrote:A certain gentleman used to keep them in check, alas , he is no longer with us.
He never misses a match, speak to him most nights as he arrives at the same time as me usually. Looking well on his new pie free diet.
:shock:Mystic Rooster.............
Nah we are talking at cross purposes here, FC Mike is still with us, the oracle and font of knowledge called Cables did sadly pass over to the other side, though I do still think of him as I come in through the Aquinas gate
“That made me feel very special and underlined to me that Ulster is more than a team, it is a community and a rugby family" Rory Best