New constitution

[Jim Webster]

several CWP members decided to tactically vote against their own proposal to remove votes for under 16s (by voting for the amendment that removed it) including with proxies they had (if I heard it right) in an effort to ‘save’ the overall constitution vote.

I was one of those who falls into this category, and my rationale is quite simple.

Once the Constitution was published a for debate, quite a lengthy debate took place on this thread.
However proxies had been cast from very early on it was then my personal decision to allow the debate to continue but make a decision based on this thread debate and the discussion at the meeting.
I therefore decided to support the motion for change within section 5, such is free will.

The whole is greater than the sum of the parts

It is also fair to say that I did not see why the constitution proposed should not be acceptable with constitutionally agreed changes from the SGM.



The blanket No votes put paid to that ever happening even although in some cases (I think) the reason for their no vote was on taken on board and incorporated into the proposed constitution.

I will restate that I am giving personal viewpoints above.
Any comments/queries on the meeting proceedings need to be addressed to and answered by relevant CS officials.