Poetry Society EGM
July 22nd, 2011 § 3 Comments
The meeting is over, many have gone home, others are dig
esting the result over a pint. A vote of no confidence was passed resoundingly, 302 to 69 with 11 abstentions. The meeting began with an unnecessary surprise: Laura Bamford, Chair, announced that the Board had decided to resign at the next AGM brought forward to September 12. This was clearly in anticipation of the no confidence vote and did little to inspire any more confidence: why could they not have made this announcement before the meeting? Enough people have been pleading with them to go.
In an opening statement the Board agreed mistakes had been made, but seemed unable to grasp the enormity of their errors, blaming everything on their well meaning attempts to ease a “personality clash” between the Director and Editor of Poetry Review. They had no adequate answers for why they had intervened so radically in a staff matter where no formal grievance had ever been lodged, nor why £24000 had been paid to Harbottle and Lewis to “protect” the Society without any actual legal action having been taken by Judith Palmer.
The vote of no confidence was overwhelmingly carried and the Board agreed to fill the three current vacancies from a list of four, which include Robyn Marsak, Michael Schmidt and Cary Archard. Had two Board members agreed to resign on the spot, two more new members could have been co-opted to replace them, but they refused as a group to resign, despite many entreaties. Had five new members been appointed from the Requisitionists list, this would have been a very strong Board for the interim period.
Will the Arts Council feel confident in this continuing Board, with its three new members? Can Judith Palmer work with this set-up after all that has emerged about their actions?
What it means most of all is that the problems are not over. But without Kate Clanchy and her supporters not even this would have been achieved. This Board still does not see itself as accountable, and is only grudgingly moving aside.
Thanks for this, Polly. Good to see you again yesterday.
I’ve also now blogged in detail at Raw Light about the Po Soc EGM. Having uncovered the dreadful truth, and with an incompetent Board on its way out, what we all need to be discussing is how we can move forward as a Society and reassure ACE that any grant we have been awarded will be in safe hands.
Hi, Polly – your site is allowing me access today.
Who knows Judith Palmer well enough to ask if she is sure she wishes to be re-instated, and whether, given the evidence that PoSoc has Distrustees, she will feel able to carry forward her plans which secured the ACE Grant increase?
I like Jane’s Raw Light account, but am distressed with the mis-reporting of the meeting in The Guardian. Has no other paper (eg. The Indy)shown any interest at all? The Guardian gets its kicks being as snide and condescending as the stand-in Chairperson of PoSoc nowadays.
Thanks for your comment Christopher. As I understand it, JP has said she would be willing to return to her job – this was stated at the meeting. But I am sure the reporting lines would need to be returned to how they were… and like you say the problem of the Board remains. Also open elections for Board members will deliver a Board that is an unknown quantity… that can be good or bad or just different. I know what you mean about the press… I thought the Guardian’s coverage wasn’t quite as bad as you do – a bit snickering indeed, but they did at least include a reasonably full exposition of the failings of the Board. At least it was clear the whole EGM campaign was worth doing, important even… even if as our anonymous trustee friend put it we are all a bit barking.