[UK-TUG] SEGM no content!

[Chris Weeks]

I do not understand Ian Hammond's suggestion. If motion 3 is passed
then something must be put in place to ensure probity and accuracy.
What is the difference between the scrutineer proposed in motion 4 and
the trusted person proposed by Ian?
Provided some sort of supervision of officials is in place I have no
strong feelings about what sort of supervision that mat be.

Chris

On 2 December 2011 23:25, Jay Hammond <homemade at talktalk.net> wrote:
> Dear UKTUG members,
>
> I think that we should all vote on the motions. No-one seems to have
> commented on them.
>
> Financial oversight:
> see motion3
>
> I'm considering  voting in favour of motion 3 and against 4.
>
> Here is why:
>
> While UKTUG has low turnover, we need to decide what checks we need
> to make on the finances of UKTUG .
>
> we have two obvious options, we can look at the bank statements
> ourselves and satisfy ourselves that the outgoings are what we
> consider reasonable.
>
> This is the mechanism provided by having duplicate statements sent to
> someone independent. as proposed in Motion 4
>
> Given that less than 10% of uktug members bothered to vote or attend
> the AGM,  and that there has been no discussion as yet in this SEGM,
> I doubt that many members will actually try to look at the bank
> statements.  Indeed, who, apart from committee members, feels that
> they personally would? I exclude committee members because the
> financial oversight is to keep the committee honest and protect it
> from malefactors.   If as I fear, no-one checks up on them, there
> won't be any protection for them or UKTUG funds..
>
> Or we can find someone we trust to look at the accounts and give an
> opinion. This is the model we have used in the past. We do not have
> to use professional accountants for this purpose, and in the past we
> did not, generally.
>
>
> I personally will use my best efforts to locate a reasonably priced
> trustable person with some financial skills  to act as scrutineer for
> the accounts if I am asked to do so. I have a good chance of
> succeeding. I think about £100 should cover the fees for a year.
>
> I therefore suggest that the SEGM  request a scrutineer be appointed
> for the financial year 2011/12  tasked with giving an educated but
> not professional view of the accounts.
>
>
>
> Jay Hammond
>
> homemade at talktalk.net



-- 


-------------------------------------------------
Chris Weeks
Downeycroft
Virginstow
Beaworthy
GB - EX21 5EA
(+44)(0)1409 211 346