11-08-2015, 08:33 PM
WBuchanan Wrote:Thanks for these thoughts Ian - but as it’s totally opposite of what has been said before can you please obtain a firm statement from Hamish or Andy?Its not the opposite to what I have been saying If you want a soundbite from Andy or Hamish just ask them directly
WBuchanan Wrote:Can we hear from Andy and Hamish - Or are you speaking for them?
Hi Walter
Please let me clarify this. Anybody who knows me knows I am never a mouthpiece for anybody. If I am speaking either for the CWP or anyone else I will say so at the time. Any statements from the CWP will be properly designated and indicated as such
sorry my comments are entirely my own based in the previous AGM I intended. I am a bit of a loose cannon when it comes to this so please read this and remember this is not the part of me who is a member of the CWP . This is my view and my view alone. Let me eloborate further;
The constitution is a major and complicated document. If mistakes have been made in the process then the idea that it can be approved and/or concluded by a short SGM may be one of them. There is my doubt in my mind that few people are interested in it other than the parts that affect them directly. Therefore there is a need to discuss and consult each section individually as part of the whole and that takes time, not just a few minutes. I agree with the concept that most of it is OK and can probably pass as read. I also accept that considerable time has already been spent on it but my argument is that we are getting there, lets get it right and exhaust all counter arguments. Whats the rush? There is no way it can reasonably be in place for this year's AGM so lets take the time required to get it right. The focus right now must be on the AGM and moving forward after that. I implore to everyone that continued respect is given tto he CWP, Chess Scotland , the constitution AGM's and SGM's. Having said that I value everyone's views on this and through discussions such as this, I believe we are getting there