I don't understand why committee members took offense to the suggestion of independent counting being required. I pointed out the reason many posts ago
Post does go astray and if the votes were being counted by the current committee, the result would be open to accusations of being 'biased' or tampered with.
Nothing about personal trust of them - just being above reproach. After all, MP's are 'trusted' to run the country - but imagine if they wanted to count their own votes
As I see this thread, there are three main issues,
1) - it seems generally agreed that the CPS web site leaves much to be desired. It needs to be kept up to date AND as importantly, the CPS committee needs to actually use it
to put important information on and so inform ITS MEMBERS - preferably as the FIRST place they put information, rather than the last - if anyone can be bothered and after people have complained that it isn't on there.
2) - voting for committee posts. I think it is already quite clear (feel free to disagree), that most members are voting for online voting, with (quite rightly) the option of postal voting for those who can't use the internet. This shows that the membership is fair and want an inclusive voting system, rather than just the few able to attend AGM's.
However, it has been made quite clear by the committee, that any voting will likely be irrelevant, as there would be no vote unless two people contested the same post. And I don't believe that most members have any issue what so ever, with MOST of the current committee.
Now Phil pointed out the consequence of 'voting out' certain committee members, but neatly avoided the posts of most concern Steve & Paul. But much earlier he said
Well with all due respect I think you're wrong Vic!
If you had any idea about how a committee works you would realise that committees can and do reach decisions every day without the input of the chairman. In fact the only special voting and decision making that a chairman has to make is that he or she has the casting vote in the event that the committee is unable to reach a majority vote. Certainly the chairman and (sic) vice-chairman have no authority to prevent the committee from taking a decision. The committee works as a democracy.
So it looks as though there would actually no consequence of 'deselecting them'.
Which seems to be the 3rd point.
3) - a vote of confidence in Steve and Paul. And their absence in this debate has been very obvious, even though there are several CPS members raising issues here, the CPS Chairman has said not one word.
Now despite the Vic / Phil W. issues, I don't think most (if any) members have any problems with Phils work, but if he wanted to, I'm sure he'd receive a full vote of confidence.
But again - no one seems to really be questioning Steve and Paul being Show organisers - it has already been said they do a good job. It is just the Chairman's post and 'apparent' vice Chairman.
And it does seem to me that CPS members are now calling for a vote of confidence.