draft minutes of woodcraft folk annual conference … minutes of... · paul horobin (chair of...

Draft Minutes – Annual Gathering 2012 1

Draft Minutes of Woodcraft Folk Annual Conference

Scout Park, Bounds Green, London, 28th April 2012

Conference Co-Chairs: Phin Harper, Pat Hunter, Imogen Probyn-Gibbs, Lloyd Russell-Moyle

Minutes taken by: Sarah McDonell

1. Opening Session

Pat Hunter and Lloyd Russell-Moyle chaired this section

Formal opening of conference

Lloyd welcomed everyone and spoke of a year of transition for the Woodcraft Folk and the country in general. Some highlights included CoCamp and young people’s involvement in campaigns, running children’s activities at the TUC March, and activities around the right to strike. Woodcraft have improved relationships with Unions and have more educational resources than ever before with the support from the TREE programme.

Lloyd outlined priorities for the year ahead were supporting leaders & groups and growing groups. In the current climate Woodcraft Folk can find its place.

2. Guest Speaker

Lloyd introduced Jeremy Corbyn MP.

Jeremy thanked Jon Nott (General Secretary) for inviting him to speak, wished Woodcraft the best and spoke of how Woodcraft fits in the present day and times. Shared interests include the Western Sahara, Stop the War coalition and anti-austerity marches for which Jeremy thanked Woodcraft for their support.

Noting that we are in the middle of the UN International Year of Co-operatives, Jeremy spoke about young people’s aspirations and the Rochdale Pioneers. He noted how, now more than ever, we need to invest in education, young people, sustainability and co-operation. People are looking for a different way of doing things based on co-operative principles.

Jeremy thanked Woodcraft members for all they have done.

3. Annual Conference Business

Lloyd thanked Jeremy and introduced the following EVS volunteers currently in placements with Woodcraft:

Pavla Čiháková - Pionyr, Czech Republic

Elvis Ngolle Ngollebong - OGCEYOD, Cameroon.

Angelica Mancipe - Colombia

Eko Manurung - Indonesia

Lloyd welcomed & introduced International guests Marc Cases Martin (President Esplac, Catalonia) and Dewi Koning (Woodcraft Folk Nederland).

Marc thanked Woodcraft Folk for inviting him to conference and announced Esplac will be applying


for membership of IFM-SEI. He echoed Jeremy's thoughts and agreed that we share common principles and goals.

Dewi thanked Woodcraft Folk for inviting her to conference and said her organisation were inspired by Woodcraft Folk.

Pat read out the obituaries for the past year asking members to also remember victims of the Norwegian massacre on Utøya.

Conference held a minute’s silence followed by the Envoi.

Review of 2011

The General Secretary explained that Zoë Waterman (CoCamp Chair) would be presenting the CoCamp final report and Richard Robertson (Treasurer) would be presenting the national accounts.

The General Secretary welcomed new members & new groups and thanked a great General Council and the staff team for all their work over the past year.

He also thanked staff who left the Organisation in the past year, Dan Ellis and Beth Swain employed in 2011 to help deliver CoCamp. Caspar Osborn for his work on PlayOut London. And paid tribute to Gail Wathen who after 23 years of dedicated service as a staff member had retired.

The General Secretary welcomed new staff members Nicky Harris & Linda Norris (Lockerbrook Outdoor Centre) and Verity Jones (Development Officer, mentoring) and presented a short film about the mentoring project.

The General Secretary spoke about the changes in the law surrounding safeguarding in 2010, how Woodcraft had improved its systems & procedures around this which had led to increased reporting, evidencing that Woodcraft Folk take safeguarding seriously. He thanked all those involved in creating safeguarding plans in their districts.

He announced the following initiatives had been launched:

Partnership with Co-operative Energy - if you switch through Woodcraft Folk, Co-operative Energy will donate £50 to Woodcraft.

The Courier, our new members’ newspaper.

The option to renew membership on-line and paying membership by direct debit.

Folk Supply on-line coming soon.

He spoke about the huge success of CoCamp, other highlights of the year included;

Practice sharing weekends with other organisations.

Leading for the Future resource pack.

Right to Strike education pack

The Big Camp Guide, funded by PCS Trade Union.

Working with Co-operative schools and Co-operative College on a pilot of the National Citizen Service scheme, based around co-operative leadership skills.

The “Hands In” quilts, encouraging groups to think of the wider organisation.

CoCamp presentation

Zoë gave a big thank you to everyone who made CoCamp possible. She spoke of the Co-operative


vision every step of the way culminating in creating a living breathing co-operative community.

The CoCamp Coda (final report) has been designed as a tool for the future and is available to those who would like it. A condensed Coda is also available.

The camp made a small surplus, 10% of its budget, due to no spending of the contingency and additional income from a large number of late bookings. This will be split between legacy work to build on the co-operative focus of CoCamp and a small donation back to the core budget to support the big plan and growth.

A short film of extracts from CoCamp news was shown.

Announcement: Lloyd announced nominations were re-opened for 18-24 and lay places on General Council and for Standing Orders Committee.

Accounts

Richard Robertson (Treasurer) presented the accounts and thanked the CoCamp board in particular Zoë and Richard Lace (CoCamp Treasurer) for their control of the finances.

Last year Annual Gathering received the poor results for 2010 and General Council announced a plan for growth.

The results for 2011 are better and show we are on our way to achieve the growth target. It had been hard to attract grants, however Woodcraft have a lot to offer. Richard explained what is included in the income and noted in the future groups and districts will be included.

Core activities show a deficit, but overall we achieved a surplus of around £15,000 due to more groups, an increase in membership and the success of CoCamp.

Centres over all had made a deficit; Richard presented an analysis of all centres.

Questions

1. Paul Horobin (Chair of Lockerbrook Management committee) raised concerns that conference might misunderstand the situation at Lockerbrook on the basis of the raw figures and needed to understand historical factors and major repairs that recently taken place. He emphasised that Lockerbrook was a vibrant and viable centre.

2. Paul Ticher (Leicestershire) asked what proportion of the £1.6million on the balance sheet is restricted?

3. Linda Osborn (Southwark) congratulated the Treasurer for his hard work and the improvements made. She asked if members could see the 5-year financial projections and raised a concern that Project Koodoo was announced before the movement had a chance to vote on it.

Richard responded to questions as follows:

1. General Council value Lockerbrook and are working with the Centre Manager and Management Committee to understand the issues faced and find sustainable solutions.

2. Reserves are shown on page 15 of the accounts and show the reserves are made up of £147,385 general funds, £944,697 designated funds (mainly Folk Office), and £582,506 of restricted funds (the majority of which represents the value of our outdoor centres).

3. The 5-year plan as presented last year is currently available on the website. It will be revised and sent out again when completed. The General Secretary reminded conference that a motion written by General Council on Project Koodoo was on the agenda for members to consider today.

The Treasurer noted there was a short window to prepare and present the accounts. In addition to


himself, Jeremy Hudson (Finance Manager), Donatus Enibe (Finance Administrator) and other volunteers had worked really hard to achieve this and we are now getting better information earlier in the year.

4. Eric Lucas (Bath) asked about growth. On page 18 of the accounts, group registration and membership doesn't look like it has grown.

5. David Neibig (Newcastle / Manchester) asked a detailed question about DF finances. 6. Danny Rowe (Boveney) asked if Direct Debit was up and running and, if not, when it would

be? He also asked that groups be notified earlier of reporting requirements.

The Treasurer and General Secretary responded to questions as follows:

4. Jon explained that new groups do not pay registration for the first 6 months so there is a lag between growth on the ground and seeing the related income in the accounts. Richard added that the accounts only included registered groups, at the end of 2011 there were some groups who had still not paid their registration fee.

5. Richard explained that the DF finances were complicated and it was difficult to answer in detail without having been given the question in advance, but he was happy to address the question in writing after the meeting.

6. Jon reminded conference that Direct Debit forms were available at reception and that online direct debit would go live shortly. Richard explained that he had been working with staff to simplify and make clearer the forms sent to Districts and confirmed that the response rate for financial returns had been higher than in previous years.

DECISION: Conference noted the annual report and accounts

Minutes of Annual Conference 2011 and Matters Arising

DECISION: Conference accepted the minutes as an accurate record

Standing Orders Committee (SOC) report

Daniel Thompson (SOC Chair) presented the SOC report, and explained the Single Transferable Vote system, reminding delegates that details of how to vote were also on the top of the ballot papers.

The ballot box opened at 12.20pm and would close at 3.45pm.

Conference required a quorum of 100 delegates or 1/5th of conference to be delegates, Daniel confirmed conference was well past that figure.

Daniel noted there was a full agenda, therefore each person would have 3 minutes to speak & other than the proposer having the right to reply no one can speak twice on a motion.

Motions 1, 4, 5 & 7 require two-thirds of delegates to pass.

The note at the end of motion 1 should be at the beginning of the amendment for motion 1.

Motion 1 - amendment accepted by the proposer.

Motion 2 - amendment accepted by the proposer.

Motion 10 had been withdrawn to save time for more pressing issues.

Motions 14 & 23 were submitted in error and had been withdrawn by the proposer.

Motion 24 had not been proposed by a registered group so cannot be included in the agenda, if anyone wanted to propose it from floor they could, if not it will be withdrawn.


Challenges to the SOC report

1. Julie Thorpe (Hebden Bridge) what was the justification for why motion 24 should be on the agenda.

Daniel explained most groups were not registered at the time of submitting motions and the group’s status was double checked closer to conference.

2. Monica Eady (Ealing) queried the order of motions regarding group registration and requested motion 28 to be taken directly after motion 6.

Daniel confirmed SOC were responsible for the order of this motion and explained there were lots of motions and SOC chose and order which took into account the gravity of the motion, how recently conference looked at the issue, and put new issues further up the agenda.

Conference moved to a vote.

Motion 28 - to be moved behind motion 6

DECISION: Fell

Motion 24 - to be removed from the agenda

DECISION: Carried

DECISION: Conference adopted the SOC report

Motion 16 - Linda Osborn (Southwark) requested motion 16 be removed from agenda. Park Farm Committee had not been consulted. The site had a good committee and the motion was not helpful to the site or Woodcraft Folk.

Seconded - Richard Kirkwood (Hackney)

Clare Connolly (Bradford) felt the motion needed discussion.

Conference moved to a vote.

DECISION: Count: 60 for, 45 against. Motion 16 stays on agenda paper

Appointment of Tellers & Scrutineers

Tellers (count votes in plenary) – up to 4 required.

Ghee Bowman Paul Horobin Verity Jones

Scrutineers (count ballot papers) - need 4, preferably observers or visitors.

Pip Todd Jess Cawley Pat Dowson Kit Jones

Announcement: The smoking area is by the tree outside the Sheridan hall.


4. Appeal by ‘F’ against termination of membership of Woodcraft Folk

Jess Cawley chaired this section at the request of General Council.

Tobit Roth (SOC) explained the procedure for the appeal and explained it was the first time an appeal had come to conference. SOC have written a policy to be used today. Both General Council & the appellant have agreed to work with this policy.

SOC felt they could not recommend who should hear the appeal and make the decision on the appeal but that this should be decided by conference.

Tobit reminded conference to respect and maintain confidentiality.

Tobit clarified what conference was being asked to decide on. Members could question procedures and decide if the procedure so far had been correct.

If conference decided to reject the appeal the termination would stand.

If conference accepted the appeal the membership would be reinstated.

If conference voted for the appeal to be handled by a Jury, SOC had already pre-selected a jury.

If conference voted against a jury it would be taken in plenary and would be open to all.

If anyone wanted to step out of conference for this item they could.

Questions

Richard Kirkwood (Hackney) If conference decided to take the appeal in plenary, would plenary be closed to delegates only?

Jess explained if that is what conference wished.

Tony Berwick (Boveney) If conference decided on a jury will the appellant appeal? Has the appellant agreed to accept either method?

No what conference decide is final and yes the appellant has agreed to accept either method.

Melissa March (Leicestershire) Should under 16 year old delegates be included?

The General Secretary confirmed they could. Central Woodcraft Folk did not think they were in a position to make that decision so informed leaders who were in a better position to support their young members.

Chloe Darlington explained a range of open space activities had been planned for delegates who chose to step out if a plenary was chosen or for the majority of delegated if the jury option was chosen.

Danny Rowe (Boveney) stated in the constitution it says a member can appeal to conference, not a select committee. If a jury it could have done it before, what is the definition of an appeal to conference?

Julie Read (Reading) expressed concern there would not be enough time.

Conference moved to vote for the appeal to be taken in plenary or in private by a jury randomly pre-selected from eligible delegates.

DECISION: Conference agreed the appeal should be heard in private by a jury.

Members of the jury are called to the Standing Orders table.

Coffee break

Plenary moved to Open Space


The minutes of jury session are confidential. The outcome of the jury session is reported in item 7 (below).

5. Introduction of Candidates for election/Ballot Box Opens

Close of nominations from the floor

Ballot box opened

Lunch

6. Motions

Phin Harper & Pat Hunter chaired this section

The Chair explained delegates would have 5 minutes to propose a motion. 3 minutes would be allowed for all other speakers.

Any members wanting to speak need to complete a speaker’s slip and hand it to the chairing team.

Motion 1 - Making a branch structure a reality

Proposed by: General Council

Seconded by: Danny Rowe (Boveney)

The following spoke for:

No one spoke for

The following people spoke against:

No one spoke against

DECISION: Amendment accepted by the proposer.

DECISION: Amended motion carried

Motion 2 - Safeguarding panels

Proposed by: Danny Rowe (Boveney)

DECISION: Amendment accepted by the proposer

The following spoke for the amended motion:

Danny Rowe (Boveney)

The following people spoke against the amended motion:

Tom Gower (General Council)

DECISION: Motion fell


Motion 3 - Safeguarding Review

Proposed by: Jorge Bornemann (Exeter)

No one spoke for or against.

Amendment 1

Amendment withdrawn

Amendment 2



Tom Gower (General Council)


No one


Motion 4 - Membership categories and safeguarding separated

Proposed by: Ralph Sleigh (General Council)


Jenny Thompson (Bristol) Richard Kirkwood (Hackney) Paul Ticher (Leicester)


Susie Billig (Waltham Forest)

DECISION: Motion carried

Motion 5 - Annual review of registration fee

Proposed by: Richard Robertson (National Treasurer, General Council)

Amendment 1:

Proposed by: Paul Bemrose (Brighthelmstone)

The following spoke for the amendment:

Keith Lomax (Hebden Bridge)

The following people spoke against the amendment:


DECISION: Amendment carried


No one spoke for




Right to reply: Richard Robertson (National Treasurer)


Motion 6 - Group registration fees 2013

Proposed by: Richard Robertson (Treasurer, General Council)

Amendment 1:

Proposed Paul Bemrose (Brighthelmstone)

Point of information requested: does this mean the child registration fee (£5 per head) remains the same?

SOC understood it to mean that.


No one spoke for

The following people spoke against;




Jenny Thompson (Bristol)




Motion 7 - Add to AP&P section on Trades Unions

Proposed by: Paul Bemrose (Azania Pioneers)

Josie Tothill (Bradford) requested a point of information: Is there a conflict, can we be political & still a charity?

Yes as long as not we are not party political, and in line with our aims & principles.


Lee Sprake (Portsmouth) Julie Thorpe (Hebden Bridge) Richard Kirkwood (Hackney)


Sophie Holden (Leicester) Melissa March (Leicester) Daniel Thompson (Bristol) Lily MacTaggart (Bradford)

Right to reply: Paul Bemrose (Brighthelmstone)



Motion 8 - Workers of the world, unite: building stronger relationships with our Union comrades

Proposed by: Kieran Ford (General Council)

Amendment 1:



No one spoke for




Motion 9 - Publish election procedures and results

Proposed by: Monica Eady (Ealing & Hammersmith)


No one spoke for




Motion 10 - Project Koodoo

Proposed by: London Region

Removed from the agenda (See SOC report)

Motion 11 - Project Koodoo: Co-operative Campsites

Proposed by: Kit Jones (General Council)


Gwen Grey (Stanley) Daniel Thompson (Bristol) Monica Eady (Ealing & Hammersmith)





Motion 12 - Ceremonies

Proposed by: Ellie Ferguson (Luton)


Jake Taylor (Central Barnet) Danny Rowe (Boveney) Paul Ticher (Leicester)


Tanya Harris (Spelthorne)


Motion 13 - District Fellows (DF) Movement Events



No one spoke for


Louise Delmege (DF committee) Laurie Cannell (Bradford) Emmeline Aves (Exeter) Martha Julings (Southwark)

Right to reply: Danny Rowe (Boveney)


Announcement: At break scrutineers called to the SOC table

Ballot box will close at 3.45pm

Motion 14 - Folk History


Motion 15 - Membership fees

Proposed by: Ruth O'Sullivan (Brighton Hill Fort)


Maddy Williams (Brighton Hill Fort)


Lloyd Russell-Moyle (General Council) Adam Fidler (Ealing & Hammersmith) Gwen Grey (Stanley)



7. Appeal by ‘F’ against termination of membership of Woodcraft Folk

Jury decision

Jess Cawley chaired this section

DECISION: The jury agreed to uphold the appeal by a majority verdict (8 to 1)

Jess read the following statement from the jury.

Grounds

There were flaws in the procedure which was followed and parts of it were unfair.

Recommendations to General Council

Initiate a new investigation into the allegations on an urgent basis, following Woodcraft Folk’s complaints procedure.

Convene a new panel who have not been involved previously in the case where possible.

Whilst investigations are on-going the appellant’s full membership should be suspended and should remain so until the matter is resolved.

This matter should be concluded as quickly as practicable.

8. Motions (Continued)

Pat Hunter & Imogen Probyn-Gibbs chaired this section

Motion 16 - Park Farm

Proposed by: Alex Moor (Luton)



No one spoke for


Rob Sherwood (Tolworth & Kingston) Pip Todd (Tolworth & Kingston) Lee Sprake (Portsmouth) Lloyd Russell Moyle (General Council) Linda Osborn (Southwark) Danny Rowe (Boveney) Rhiannon Breed (Glasgow Southside) Right to reply: Ellie Ferguson (Luton)


Saskia Neibig (General Council & Tyne) presented a video about growing groups and encouraged members to get involved with mentoring.


Motion 17 - Support the Co-operative group’s anti-fracking campaign

Proposed by: Saskia Neibig (General Council)

Seconded by: Emma Jagne (General Council)


No one spoke for



DECISION: Motion carried.

Motion 18 - Visas

Proposed by: Tom Dunnill (Ealing & Hammersmith)

Seconded by: Emma Laws (Ealing & Hammersmith)

Amendment 1:

Proposed Jess Poyner (General Council)


Kieran Ford (General Council) Phin Harper (Banbury & London)


Tom Dunnill (Ealing & Hammersmith) Danny Rowe (Boveney) Sarah Susman (Brighton Central & Hove)



Keith Lomax (Hebden Bridge)



DECISION: Amended motion carried.

Motion 19 - A right to meet

Proposed by: Monica Eady (London Region)

Amendment 1:



No one spoke for


Steve Grey (Stanley)


Paul Bemrose (Brighthelmstone)

DECISION: Amendment 1 fell

Amendment 2

Proposed by: Jess Poyner (General Council)


No one spoke for



DECISION: Amendment 2 carried.


Sarah McGovern (Stanley) Tanya Harris (Spelthorne) Julie Thorpe (Hebden Bridge)




Motion 20 - Childcare at events

Proposed by: Cathy Brown (Leicestershire)

Seconded by: Greg Ahrens (Leicestershire

Point of information: Rebecca Mattingly (Youth Empowerment Officer) explained the current procedure.

The following spoke for the motion:

Lee Sprake (Portsmouth)

The following people spoke against the motion:

David Neibig (Tyne)

Right to reply: Melissa March (Leicestershire)


Motion 21 - Elfin & Pioneer-friendly large camps

Proposed by: Richard Robertson (Cambridge)

The following spoke for the motion:

Zoë Waterman (London) Kieran Kirkwood (Hackney) Jane Howson (Bradford)

The following people spoke against the motion:



Right to reply: Isabelle Stewart (Cambridge)


Motion 22 - Financial management when organising events

The Chair announced this would be the last motion to be taken

Proposed by: Melissa March (Leicestershire)


No one spoke for


Danny Rowe (Boveney) Emily Crane (Oxford)

Right to reply: Paul Ticher (Leicestershire)


Challenge to the chair extend conference and take motions for a further 15 minutes

Conference moved to a vote

DECISION: Conference agreed to take motions for a further 15 minutes

The Chair explained that conference would vote without extended debate from motion 25 onwards.

The proposer can move the motion, two speakers will be allowed then conference will move to a vote.

Motion 23 - Kinsfolk & Leaders


Motion 24 - Support the District fellows movement to become and independent organisation


Motion 25 - Enabling Volunteering



No one spoke for


Kieran Ford (General Council)


Saskia Neibig (General Council)

Right to reply: Linda Osborn (Southwark)


Motion 26 - re-affirm non-use ‘How’



No one spoke for




Motion 27 - Dietary Requirements

Proposed by: Adam Fidler (Ealing & Hammersmith)


No one spoke for


James Holmes (Brighton Central & Hove) Armando Allen (Central Barnet) Nathaniel Cooke (New Barnet)


Motion 28 - Group Registration System

Motion withdrawn by the proposer

Emergency Motion 1 - Enforcing Suspension of Hamahanot Haolim from IFM-SEI



Kirsty O'Neill (Camden) Kit Jones (General Council)





9. Election results

General Council (18-24 years old category)

Tom Brooks

Jack Brown

General Council (Lay category)

Laurie Cannell

Kerry Frankland

Pat Hunter

Melissa March

Sarah McGovern

Tom Dunnill (1 year term)

Standing Orders Committee (SOC)

Andy Flinn

Richard Kirkwood

David Neibig

Samir Rana (1 year term)

Pat Hunter gave the closing speech thanking Lauren Karstadt & New Barnet Woodcraft Folk for providing the catering, Tracy Cleveland & volunteers who helped run the crèche, Beth Swain who volunteered on reception, Janet Davies for volunteering on Folk Supply, Jeremy Corbyn, General Council, Staff and all those who made Conference possible.

Linda Osborn led conference in singing the Manchester Rambler to mark the 80th anniversary of the mass trespass on Kinder Scout.

Conference closed


Appendix 1: Election results and explanation of the voting system

This appendix has three sections:

1. How does STV work? – Overview provided by the Electoral Reform Society 2. A more detailed Introduction to STV (Single Transferable Vote) – by David Neibig (SOC) 3. Results of the 2012 elections, including an explanation by David Neibig (SOC)

1. How does STV work? – Overview provided by the Electoral Reform Society

1. The ballot paper lists the names of all the candidates. Voters vote by putting a ‘1’ next to the name of their favoured candidate, a ‘2’ next to the name of their next favoured candidate and so on. They stop allocating preferences when they cannot decide between the candidates – they do not need to vote for them all.

2. At the count, the number of votes which candidates need in order to be elected (the ‘quota’) is calculated by dividing the total number of valid ballot papers by the number of people to be elected plus one. For example, with 100 valid ballot papers and 3 places to be filled, the quota would be 25.

3. The ballot papers are sorted into piles according to the first preferences – the ‘1’s. If any candidate has more first preference votes than the quota, they are immediately elected.

4. The next stage is to transfer any surplus votes for these elected candidates, i.e. the difference between their vote and the quota needed to be elected. To avoid the problem of deciding which of the votes are surplus, all ballot papers are transferred but at a reduced value so that the total adds up to the number of surplus votes.

5. After all the surpluses have been transferred, we look to see whether all the places to be elected have been filled. If they have not, then the candidate with the fewest votes is excluded and his or her votes are transferred to the voters’ second preferences.

6. This process of transferring surpluses and excluding candidates continues until enough candidates have reached the quota to fill all the places to be elected. Although the counting process is more complex than with FPTP, it can be done by, or with the help of, a computer and it is a small price to pay for improving the voting power of every single elector.

2. A more detailed Introduction to STV (Single Transferable Vote) – by David Neibig (SOC)

There are two key parts to Single Transferable Vote (referred to as STV for the remainder of this explanation) the first is the single part. That means that each voter has one vote in which they rank the candidates in order of preference (1, 2, 3…) until a voter can no longer express a preference between two candidates. The second part that merits explaining is the transferable part; this is the part, by which the election determines the carrying of votes once a candidate has been elected or a candidate is eliminated. This is done by means of a transfer value, if a vote is carried from one candidate to another after a candidate has been eliminated the vote is transferred to the next preference at full value as the vote has not been used to elect a candidate . However, if a vote is transferred from a surplus of an elected candidate the transfer value is the ratio of the surplus divided by the total amount of votes received by that candidate, as shown in Equation 1.

The reasoning behind the system of transfers and transfer values is that once a candidate has received enough votes to be elected to a committee the votes above and beyond what they need


can be used to elect further candidates based on the preferences of those who voted for the elected candidate. The votes, whose further preferences are used to elect further candidates could be taken at random from the votes cast for the elected candidate however, by transferring the votes at a fraction of their full value allows the preferences of all the voters who voted for the elected candidate to be taken into consideration while always leaving them with enough votes to be elected after any transfers. The number of votes that are required for a candidate to be elected, known as the quota, is one more than the valid votes cast divided by one more than the size of the committee to be elected as shown in Equation 2. A quota can involve a fraction of a vote, e.g. 27.4

(2)

The example below demonstrates the use of the transfer value and the quota. Consider a committee electing two members from four candidates (A, B, C, D). Assume that 100 votes are cast. The quota to be elected is therefore 100/3 + 1, i.e. 34 and a third Consider the following spread of first preference votes: Candidate A: 50 votes Candidate B: 20 votes Candidate C: 18 votes Candidate D: 12 votes Candidate A has received more first preference votes than the quoted needed to be elected. Therefore Candidate A has a transferable surplus of 15.66 votes. The transfer value of the excess votes is therefore 15.66/50 equals 0.3132. Assume that 30 votes for Candidate A list a second preference as candidate B, and that the remaining 20 list candidate D as the second preference. Taking these votes at their transfer value gives candidate B 29.396 votes and candidate D 18.264 after the transfers the candidates have the following votes: Candidate A: 34.34 votes therefore elected. Candidate B: 29.396 votes Candidate C: 18 votes Candidate D: 18.264 votes Note that on second preferences candidate D has now overtaken candidate C as the third ranked candidate. No further candidates have reached the quota to be elected therefore the lowest ranked candidate, Candidate C, is eliminated and their votes transferred based on second preference. Since the votes of Candidate C have not been used to elect Candidate C, the votes are transferred at full value. Assume that 10 votes of the candidate C list the next preference as candidate B and the remaining votes do not list a further preference. Candidate B now has 39.396 votes which exceeds the quota to be elected and candidate B is therefore elected as the second and final candidate concluding the example election. 3. Elections to General Council held at Annual Conference 2012

Because we have two categories (reserved places for 18-24 year olds and 'lay' places that anyone can stand for), we need to first count the votes for those in the 18-24 category.


Election of two 18-24 members of General Council to serve for two years

Date: 28 April 2012 Number to be elected: 2

Valid votes: 113 eSTV Reg. 82471 (1.49j)

Invalid votes: 12 Election rules: ERS97

Quota: 37.67

Candidates First

Preferences

Redistribute Surplus of

Jack Brown Round 2

Exclusion of Kirsty

O’Neill+RON Round 3

Jack Brown 79 -41.33 37.67 37.67 Elected

Kerry Frankland Not eligible

Pat Hunter Not eligible

Melissa March Not eligible

Sarah McGovern Not eligible

Tom Brooks 18 17.64 35.64 0.98 36.62 Elected

Kirsty O'Neill 5 8.82 13.82 -13.82

Laurie Cannell 11 14.7 25.7 10.88 36.58

Tom Dunnill Not eligible

RON 0 0

Non-transferable 0.17 0.17 1.96 2.13

Totals 113 113 113

Jack Brown has 79 first preference votes, which is more than the quota of 37.64 votes that he needs to be elected he therefore has a surplus of 41.33 votes that can be transferred at a value of 0.52. The votes are distributed, reducing Jack Brown's vote tally down to the quota needed for election, but Tom Brooks is still just over two votes short of quota. The lowest placed candidate, Kirsty, is now eliminated and her 5 first preference votes are transferred at full value, the 8.82 votes transferred from Jack’s surplus to Kirsty are re-distributed at their fractional value. Because 2.13 votes were non-transferable, the quota at this stage is reduced to 36.60 votes and the round three count has elected Tom Brooks as the second candidate, completing the election in this category. Election for five lay members of General Council to serve for two years (see table, overleaf) As per Woodcraft's General Council election procedures all candidates not elected in the 18 to 24 category are entered into the count for the lay members. Jack Brown and Tom Brooks are excluded from the count as they've already been elected in the 18 to 24 category. Based on first preferences, Pat Hunter is elected with a surplus that is transferred at a value of 0.53, based on second preferences. The transfer of Pat Hunter's surplus is enough to elect Sarah McGovern in the second round count following the transfer and her surplus can be transferred prior to round three of the count at a value of 0.27. Following the transfer of Sarah McGovern's surplus, the lowest ranked candidate is eliminated this is the re-open nominations candidate. However, since this candidate has received no votes the next lowest candidate, Kirsty O'Neill, is eliminated with her votes transferred at full value since they have not been used to elect her. Melissa March as the next highest polling candidate is elected as is Kerry Frankland who is also exceeded the quota. The higher vote count for Melissa March as compared to Kerry Frankland means that her surplus is transferred first, which is enough to conclude this election by electing Laurie Cannell.


Election for five lay members of General Council to serve for two years




Quota: 19.84

Candidates First

Preferences Surplus of Pat Hunter

Stage 2

Surplus of Sarah

McGovern

Stage 3

Exclusion of Kirsty O'Neill +

RON Stage 4

Surplus of Melissa March

Stage 5

Jack Brown Already Elected

Kerry Frankland 8 7.92 15.92 4.14 20.06 20.06 20.06 Elected

Pat Hunter 43 -23.16 19.84 19.84 19.84 19.84 Elected

Melissa March 24 24 24 24 -4.16 19.84 Elected

Sarah McGovern 14 13.2 27.2 -7.36 19.84 19.84 19.84 Elected

Tom Brooks Already Elected

Kirsty O'Neill 7 0.66 7.66 0.46 8.12 -8.12 - -

Laurie Cannell 11 0.66 11.66 0.92 12.58 5.46 18.04 3.12 21.16 Elected

Tom Dunnill 12 0.66 12.66 1.84 14.5 2 16.5 1.04 17.54

RON 0 0 0 - -

Non-transferable 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.66 0.72 0.72

Totals 119 119 119 119 119


Usually the election ends after these two counts but this year, due to a resignation, we had to fill a lay post for the remaining year of that post and so ran a third count.

By-election for one lay member of General Council to serve for one year




Quota: 31.5

Candidates First Preferences

Jack Brown Already Elected

Kerry Frankland Already Elected

Pat Hunter Already Elected

Melissa March Already Elected

Sarah McGovern Already Elected

Tom Brooks Already Elected

Kirsty O'Neill 27

Laurie Cannell Already Elected

Tom Dunnill 35 Elected

RON 1

Non-transferable

Totals 63

Votes in the 18 to 24 category, as well as in the main election for five lay members to serve the two years, that do not state a preference beyond the candidates who have already been elected are considered to be invalid. This election therefore has 63 valid votes to elect one candidate. Where transfers based on other preferences from those candidates already elected at higher preferences are possible they are done before the first round of counting. This leaves Tom Dunnill with enough votes in the first round of counting to be elected, thereby concluding the by-election. Standing Orders Committee would welcome any feedback on how to improve the narrative accompanying the published election results.

draft minutes of woodcraft folk annual conference … minutes of... · paul horobin (chair of...

Documents