tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2787283052819380346.post2179355548650057889..comments2008-09-08T11:16:58.685+01:00Harry Colehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05099597763862011749noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2787283052819380346.post-26978820454507695932008-09-08T10:56:00.000+01:002008-09-08T10:56:00.000+01:00"From what I here there is little in the way of respect for CF from within other Conservative organisations, the people who do have a bright political future tend to stay away from the posturing that goes on.<BR/><BR/>I mean lets be honest. On Tuesday at the CLWCF, the flagship CF group, if you go, have a look around and ask yourself, of this merry bunch, who is a great face for the Conservative Party?<BR/><BR/>Yes, I will be there and I DO include myself in that - hence the reason I have no interest in any kind of Political career what so ever."<BR/><BR/>ummmm so that's why you slate people who write anonymously yet you do yourself. so pathetic.<BR/><BR/>if you want to be chairman then at least have to guts to name yourself.ednoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2787283052819380346.post-18229081733266058162008-09-08T10:51:00.000+01:002008-09-08T10:51:00.000+01:00clwcf is hardly a flagship cf group- it was rigged by hallam and when rock was asked about it instead of a competant chairman asking for a re-election as he would have done to any other branch he simply said that it was fine. we must remember the hallam wrote his manifesto so the two of them are very close indeed. <BR/>cf has never been this badly run ever and even though some of the exec abb, sullivan and may are working hard in their respective areas that were given to them, with a useless chairman what chance does this organisation have?<BR/>as a chairman you sort out disputes amongst the exec internally so they must be seriously hacked off to send e-mails into a public domain. <BR/>rock has shown how incompetant he is and it is such a shame that at the last cf election between the chairman candidates, members had a choice; experience v change and unfortunately all of the new members who hadn't quite grasped what cf is about listened to Rock about his ideas and thought 'wow he comes across well' and voted for him. a chairman candidate should at least have experience of running a branch before he takes up the top job and rock's ineptitude shows this.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2787283052819380346.post-18573849846114984162008-09-08T10:23:00.000+01:002008-09-08T10:23:00.000+01:00Self indulgent kids!Andyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15755490516141328662noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2787283052819380346.post-72290143390006973892008-09-08T01:02:00.000+01:002008-09-08T01:02:00.000+01:00I am confused!!!!!!!!!. are the members of CF are primary school kids? <BR/><BR/>Come on people, just keep the orgarnization as it was. We dont need these reform. This is deviding the CF very badly. Lets implement some good ideas to increase the membership and political campaigns. Micheal and NME's are elected officers and we should respect and work with them. <BR/><BR/>Also CF Chairman should respect the members interest and willing consult with its members about any major decisions becuase all members are volunteering their self to CF.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2787283052819380346.post-14033961552295052762008-09-08T00:32:00.000+01:002008-09-08T00:32:00.000+01:00I don't see why Anonymous 07 September 2008 21:55 it is a shame.<BR/><BR/>Michael clearly states that the NME hasn't grasped the full extent of the proposals.<BR/><BR/>Do you think any leader in the history of anything has had an idea, presented it to the masses, THEN gone to the group that will be helping instigate it and say it is the plan.<BR/><BR/>No, of course not, Michael quite rightly is thrashing out his ideas with the Exec allowing them time to appreciate and understand it, discuss the pros and cons THEN opening up to the rest of us.<BR/><BR/>There does seem to be a communication break down on the Exec, that or some rather intelligent member/s that have seen a probable way to 'stand up for the members of CF' and maybe bag themselves a Nationa Chairman position.<BR/><BR/>The most telling comment Michael makes is "indeed, their declared positions at the last NME meeting."<BR/><BR/>At the very end of the day, there is NO power in CF.<BR/><BR/>From what I here there is little in the way of respect for CF from within other Conservative organisations, the people who do have a bright political future tend to stay away from the posturing that goes on.<BR/><BR/>I mean lets be honest. On Tuesday at the CLWCF, the flagship CF group, if you go, have a look around and ask yourself, of this merry bunch, who is a great face for the Conservative Party?<BR/><BR/>Yes, I will be there and I DO include myself in that - hence the reason I have no interest in any kind of Political career what so ever.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2787283052819380346.post-34340376719531914502008-09-08T00:14:00.000+01:002008-09-08T00:14:00.000+01:00Matt I fully agree with you that people should have the courage of putting there name down in an open debate. I also like to appliges to you for what much be a deep insults to you; that being my spelling. Even thou I put through all my posting and infect any thing I wright (apart from text but some thing tells me I don’t think we be exchanging text any time soon) through word’s spell check and Google spell check, which takes me three times as long to wright any thing to most people. The problem I have is that I am the top end of the dyslexic scale and word normal spell check has no idea what I am trying to say so I take it over to Google which work better if you put it in a sentence. Unforchently what ever I wright will never be 100%, unless some ones prove read what I write (as my reading not up you standards ever) I will not know the mistakes. So Matt I am sorry I do not live up to your high intellect I will strive to have your perfect spelling (Ow between you and I you got a typeo in your posting I think anonymous is not spelt snonymous I guess you should of put it though a spell check, hay what do I know).Nic Connernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2787283052819380346.post-38006003865789752472008-09-07T23:07:00.000+01:002008-09-07T23:07:00.000+01:00Sorry but if you're going to post, at least have the decency to be able to spellchecking before posting. Also to the AC who posted the email that Michael sent at least have the decency to put a name by it. Why are you remaining snonymous in something that is an open debate. Utterly pointlessMattnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2787283052819380346.post-30054659303935525682008-09-07T22:26:00.000+01:002008-09-07T22:26:00.000+01:00This debate is all academic when we consider that it's not going to go through the constitutional committee. Rock should give up now, really. .Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2787283052819380346.post-43593737048429408892008-09-07T21:55:00.000+01:002008-09-07T21:55:00.000+01:00"I think this episode entirely reflects and justifies my reasoning that a wider consultation is not yet worthwhile."<BR/><BR/>Still doesn't want to consult- shame on him.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2787283052819380346.post-25199583028173595082008-09-07T21:28:00.000+01:002008-09-07T21:28:00.000+01:00Great post by rock do you think you could put it on your mane blog page TB so it not mist by any one?<BR/><BR/>NicAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2787283052819380346.post-57648336438410520032008-09-07T21:15:00.000+01:002008-09-07T21:15:00.000+01:00a response finally:<BR/><BR/>Dear All,<BR/><BR/>Christian's post on Tory Bear, which I only hastily read before I left for<BR/>holidays, appears to be the source of much of the discontent. I completely<BR/>hold my hands up to not ruthlessly checking that post as it does imply,<BR/>having just re-read it, that the direct replacement of AC's with Regional<BR/>Chairman is the main driver of the reforms we have so far discussed. <BR/><BR/>This isn't entirely accurate. The three main elements that ultimately have<BR/>to change, by whatever means, are:<BR/><BR/>a) Improving the National Management structure<BR/>b) Improving and increasing accountability<BR/>c) Returning power back to a local level<BR/><BR/>On that basis, which was the backbone of much of my election campaign, I<BR/>instigated a conversation with all of the Executive and laid out my ideas<BR/>that had germinated throughout the election campaign and the first few<BR/>months of my Chairmanship. The greatest failing so far of this executive,<BR/>in my opinion, is the low level of communication with AC's, which I tried<BR/>to address by allocating 6 or 7 AC's to each of the NME at the very start<BR/>of our term. I believe this will continue if we do not change the structure<BR/>of CF.<BR/><BR/>We also have the additional pressure of a looming General Election and a<BR/>short term of office all set against a painfully long and expensive CF<BR/>election campaign. The focus of Conservative Future should always be on<BR/>building branches, offering support for PPC's and MP's and increasing<BR/>membership and engagement at branch level. The proposals I have thus far<BR/>suggested, address the continuing issue of over-representation in the South<BR/>East (we now only have two NME members outside of the London region) and<BR/>how I believe the next Executive can better serve and represent the<BR/>country.<BR/><BR/>The role of the National Chairman fluctuates with each individual, all of<BR/>us have had a different interpretation of what the role should be and the<BR/>focus of CF. I have always been committed to improving the structure of CF,<BR/>decentralising 'power' and making sure we have representation all<BR/>across<BR/>the country. All of my teens and early twenties were completely missed by<BR/>CF, as I didn't live in traditionally Conservative areas: we should now be<BR/>bold and confident enough to genuinely aim for CF presence in every area of<BR/>the country, as many of you already do.<BR/><BR/>My outline proposals were simple:<BR/><BR/>1) Replace the NME with a board of Regional Chairman<BR/>Logic: closer to their smaller members base, more continuity in function as<BR/>the role of each individual would be defined by their region, providing<BR/>better links for the National Chairman<BR/><BR/>2) Allow provisions for greater flexibility with each Region<BR/>Logic: the massive variance in strength and depth of membership across the<BR/>country means that there needs to be diversity in local structure. The<BR/>focus towards regionalising representation for the newly structured<BR/>national body will bring CF closer to the main voluntary party and allow us<BR/>more influence and access to the existing support networks<BR/><BR/>3) Increase autonomy of the regions to strengthen CF in the long term<BR/>Logic: to increase engagement of Conservatives under thirty, convert<BR/>non-Conservatives to Party members and retain those CFers already active,<BR/>there needs to be a local flavour to activities and style. Allowing for<BR/>different formats and structures allow for these regional variations.<BR/><BR/><BR/>I do not feel comfortable forwarding any more details purely because<BR/>nothing is yet agreed amongst the NME, as you will have seen by the<BR/>responses from two of the NME. Unfortunately, I feel both of their<BR/>responses grossly misrepresent the discussions we have had so far and,<BR/>indeed, their declared positions at the last NME meeting. I think this<BR/>episode entirely reflects and justifies my reasoning that a wider<BR/>consultation is not yet worthwhile. I maintain that the changes proposed to<BR/>the NME so far do not affect your positions, as I hope I have clarified.<BR/><BR/>I will endeavour to keep you all posted of any further developments.<BR/><BR/>Best wishes,<BR/>MichaelAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2787283052819380346.post-75507233225157136042008-09-07T20:19:00.000+01:002008-09-07T20:19:00.000+01:00It should be noted that all of this is set against a back drop of ZERO campaigning activity from central CF. In fact Rock himself wrote the campaign's director an abusive e-mail telling him NOT to go campaigning in Tooting with CF.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2787283052819380346.post-81022036624461835172008-09-07T16:35:00.000+01:002008-09-07T16:35:00.000+01:00thank you for making your views clear Patrick. I just hope enough of the NME are wise enough to vote these reforms down.Paulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2787283052819380346.post-13821187496244079022008-09-07T15:58:00.000+01:002008-09-07T15:58:00.000+01:00I think Patrick letter was right and a well rounded and resemble argument. It show that even thou I personally agree with the reforms it should not happen with out the consultation from members. I fill direct democracy and small bureaucracies are conservative ideals. The secrets of the reforms was probably not the best way about it but the leak of them was irresponsible and stared this “storm in teacup“. I would like to think that with out the leak it would have been a more of a gradual coming to the surface of the reform via rounded debates and more personal consultation from the chairman before we engaged in a fall debate. We will never know if that would have happened because of the leeks. The way it has come about has resulted in personal attacks and what seems to be that some people are using this for there own personal agenda (under ‘Anonymous’) to attack an individual instead of the issues in hand. One of the biggest problems in CF at the moment that there is to much scribbling amongst ourselves instead of coming together to posh The Conservative Party over the winning line. Times like these shows which senior CF member and NME stand up to produce a well rounded argument and shows the signs of leadership. I am thankful that we have member like Clare Hilley and Patrick Sullivan doing just that.Nic Connernoreply@blogger.com