On 23 June 2011 09:56, Martin Poulter <infobomb(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Nor do I like the idea of viewing the charity
application as being
adversarial, and no, the CC aren't out to get us. That wasn't what I was
trying to imply. However, it is a negotiation process, involving third
parties as well as us and the CC. There are different possible angles to
take - some productive; some counter-productive - and while those
discussions are definitely being had, it doesn't necessarily help for them
to be public discussions. I don't think it would be wise to publicly discuss
"snags", for example.
Sure, but you can keep the membership informed about what you are
doing in general terms. You don't need to go into detail about what
arguments you are or aren't using, you just need to tell us what's
going on. Saying "it's a top priority, trust us" isn't particularly
convincing when it's been over a year since we got the response from
the charity commission to our initial application and it looks like
very little has been done since then. (I'm aware that most of that
year was on my watch, not yours, and that lots of things have been and
are happening, but that hasn't been communicated to the membership.)