United Kingdom: ME Association news

Apparently the members' magazine did not arrive in this morning's post.

If the magazine does arrive on Monday, this will mean that members have been given just 6 clear days' notice, instead of the required "21 clear days".

(All members are expected to be provided with the AGM notice + agenda + any other materials, not just those who are writing to the MEA to request a copy to be sent to them by email.)

Last year, 7 days before 11 December 2023 AGM, Neil Riley published a pre AGM Chairman's statement:

https://meassociation.org.uk/2023/12/the-me-association-annual-general-meeting-chairmans-statement/

Can we expect a chairman's AGM statement this year or will Riley be keeping his head below the parapet?

MEA on Facebook remain silent around this AGM despite busily posting and commenting on other issues. There have been no comments replied to on MEA Twitter/X for weeks.

 

I'd like to state my position at this juncture:

I do not support the encouragement of members to attend an invalid meeting. In my view, attending an invalid meeting is legitimising the MO of a board that intends to knowingly proceed with an unconstitutional meeting.

The meeting should be postponed and rescheduled for next year.

 

Might be worth turning up just to point out that it's an invalid meeting, though, and then leave...

 

The board knows it's invalid. Riley has claimed that the notice in the Autumn issue (p71), which gave only the date was "notice". BS.



The board includes two former lawyers who will be quite capable of reading their Articles of Association.

 

And why are Charles Shepherd and the rest of the board permitting Riley to proceed with an invalid meeting?

 

Interestingly, the email I had with the AGM agenda specifically links to the Chairman's Report 2023. Wonder if this is a [deliberate] mistake.

 

Perhaps a by-product of such lengthy tenures is that they think things like the rules no longer apply, or they have just been able to get away with being a bit lax on things as there's not been much scrutiny to date and the members are just grateful for their existence and all their efforts.

Thing is, if a complaint goes to the charities commission about this process, what are they going to do? Slap on the wrist (if that) for not allowing enough time etc. for the AGM. Suppose it might be enough of a wake up call that people are paying more attention to how they operate now.

 

I wasn’t sure if I had dreamt seeing something saying MEA had said they were not going to comment further on the editorial, but stumbled across the Tweet again just now (reassured that my brain isn’t completely useless. Every cloud and all that);

https://twitter.com/user/status/1862884193262330203


https://twitter.com/user/status/1862884196513103910


“the Chairman has issued a statement and at this time there are no more statements planned to be issued from the Chairman or Board Of Trustees”.

That’s all folks, Neil has spoken.

 

I wondered about this, too. It's not a report or summary of the proceedings of last year's AGM but a statement published by the chair on 4 December prior to last year's meeting, which was held on 11 December.

Not known whether Neil Riley is going to be publishing a pre AGM statement before this year's meeting, scheduled for 9 December.

MEA on FB and X remain silent on the forthcoming AGM.

 

https://twitter.com/user/status/1863241448872611913



Peter W
@mediumwhite

Hi
@NickyProctor
@lammas_leaves
- Neil Riley, Chair of
@MEAssociation
says you have accepted the exclusion of the motion at the AGM on 9th Dec. Is this correct? I would be grateful for news / details about this... a bit "puzzled" tbh.

 

I'm wondering whether it was meant to be a copy of the Minutes from the 2023 AGM rather than a copy of the chair's pre AGM 2023 statement:


https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...arities-and-meetings#types-of-charity-meeting

 

Thank you @Dx Revision Watch and @Fainbrog for keeping us up dated on these issues.

 

You're welcome, Peter, it's beginning to feel like the 2004 era all over again - the lack of accountability, the lack of transparency, the dodgy AGM...

 

Presumably now members concerned about the inadequate notice for the AGM and about the Agenda could raise a point of order at the meeting, though I don’t know if the Chair is constitutionally obliged to recognise points of order or it is rather just a general social convention that such points are listened to as in such as Parliamentary debate or formal meetings.

 

Apart from my concerns about members travelling to and participating in an invalid in person meeting, some members will be participating via Teams.

If someone indicates they want to speak on a virtual platform by clicking on the hand symbol (or whatever the equivalent is on Teams), it's a lot easier for the facilitator/moderator to ignore them and fail to bring them into the meeting. Easier I would have thought than ignoring a member indicating that they want to speak from the floor during an in person meeting, or someone present who has submitted a question prior to the meeting.

Nothing has been published by the MEA about how virtual and hybrid AGM meetings will be managed and they have not amended their governing document to provide for virtual and hybrid meetings and their management.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...d-meetings#ways-you-can-hold-charity-meetings

Virtual and hybrid meetings

 

What I don't understand is that from the wording of the article alone he must have expected there to be lots of complaints so why would he want to deliberately stir up this sort of internicine conflict in the first place? What does he gain by doing it and is there an ulterior motive?

Longstanding governance issues aside, at risk of sounding paranoid I'm worried that making a furore may be exactly what he as an individual wanted for some reason . It does unfortunately play into the BPS narrative of "activists" (cringes as I type that, sorry) and this is all timed precisely as the government’s ME delivery plan goes through it's completion.

 

It’s is all a bit bizarre isn’t it? If I were working there I’d be concerned about how Neil is carrying out his role - red flags everywhere.

 

https://twitter.com/user/status/1862659550823764422


This is the notice of the @MEAssociation AGM.
If you want the Teams link to attend them you are advised to email admin@meassociation.org.uk
For further details.

 

That's good to see, but having attended no end of hybrid meetings via Zoom and found that those of us online have been treated like children of a lesser god, I'd recommend immediately posting a message in chat asking how the organisers will make sure that those too sick to attend in person are going to have their questions and comments treated on an equal basis to those in the room. It's so easy to be ignored.

[ETA] I'd also insist on questions/comments in chat being read out verbatim. Otherwise, they'll be paraphrased to suit someone's idea of what you said.

 

Looking at the agenda online it does not look as if the draft minutes of the previous meeting are being made available in advance.

I may be being over critical but an AGM agenda with only the minimum necessary items on it is often what you see when a committee is seeking to control the situation and restrict members’ input.