Graham Clark":2hg9rf9i said:The involvement of Professor David Wheeler in the consultative process and the evolution of the the mission and constitution of the GAS Board is most welcome. Hopefully, the commitment to transparency and independence will reassure the suspicious and doubtful.
Despite some of the unnecessary 'management speak' the process does offer the opportunity to properly constitute a supervisory body that can hold the main Board to account.
However, to properly fulfill that role I would constructively suggest that some further clarification is required.
Is the whole process, including the final recommendation to the main Board to adopt, to be within the gift of Professor Wheeler, including if necessary elections supervised by a body such as the university (rather then the Trust)?
David Wheeler is going to lead on this project but the hope and ambition is that at the end of the process all stakeholders (which will be identified in meeting one) will buy into both the proposed process and the election format - whatever that may turn out to be.
The process seems unnecessarily dependent on Internet access. It is imperative that the process is advertised wider than just on the official PAFC website and Pasoti. It has long been debated that perhaps a minority of supporters regularly use these mediums for Argyle information. I assume the intention is to broadcast the process on Sparksy and the Herald / WMN / Independent but a statement of intent to do this would be welcomed as would a Pre-match announcement or leaflet explanation for the game on Tuesday night.
The process willl be advertised on Radio Devon and using the local press. The Club already had a leaflet planned for tomorrow night and given its importance (racism) it is vital that one single message is delivered on that night.
I would hope the limit to 15 attendees is not an absolute for the first meeting. It is more important that the fullest individual and group representation is achieved and that may mean an expansion to numbers. It shouldn't mean an unwieldy meeting as long as it is appropriately
Chaired.
Graham, this is a meeting to look at what groups / individuals may need to be considered for the make-up of the GASB. It isn't deciding policy or getting into detail, merely setting the boundaries. If we have 5or6 from all the supporters branches/trust etc leaving 10 places for individuals, surely thats enough to simply identify the various groups / individual needs?
Finally, whose decision will it be whether an individual or a group are appropriate to attend. For instance we could have more than one person claiming to represent the season ticket holders. Can more than one person legitimately representing a group attend the initial meeting? Would anyone claiming to represent a supporter's website be welcome to attend?
An individual attending would be representing that said individual and nobody else. If later on in the election process somebody wanted to run and position themselves for example as the ST representative then that is their business at that time.
I reiterate that I fully welcome the first moves to a supervisory board which could be the first in the Football League and if properly constituted with a wide and embracing representation could become a milestone and benchmark in supporter representation. It is just that in the first instance a little more clarification may be helpful
Hopefully picked up on those points, Graham.
Chris