Below is the latest draft of the proposed campaign structure, including comments from the February 11th national meeting and developed a little further.
First, THIS IS NOT A PERMANENT CONSTITUTION. It is a way to work for the rest of 2006, during which time we see how it goes. Nothing is cast in stone.
Second, THIS IS A CONSULTATION DOCUMENT. We need to know what people think of it.
NATIONAL COMMITTEE
A national committee made up of about 55 people:
10 people elected by London meeting.
One person each elected by local groups (some grouped together)
Brighton
Oxford and Wantage
Reading
Norwich
Manchester
Bristol
Cardiff and Bridgend
Swansea
West Midlands
Liverpool and northwest
York, Scarborough and Hull
Newcastle and northeast
Edinburgh
Glascow
Dundee and Aberdden
Sheffield
Portsmouth and Southampton
Bangor and Aberyswyth
Exeter and Plymouth
Surrey and Sussex
Barnsley and Docaster
Derby and East Midlands
Kent
Gloucester and Cheltenham
Swindon
All these people will be selected by the local or regional groups in ways that make sense to them. If the person cannot make the meeting, an alternate can be sent.
Sectional representatives from organisations or netowroks
A question mark means we are not sure they will want to do this
We anticipate that these numbers will increase as more significant organisations become seriously involved. For the moment:
Green party (2)
Respect (2)
Sera (labour party)
Green Lib Dems
Christian Ecology
Ifees
FOE head office ?
FOE local groups (2)
Greenpeace local groups
Road block ?
Cyclists ?
People and planet
NUS
Unison
Another union
Advisory group (mark lynas)
Scottish socialist party
Socialist resistance
(Not on this list, but they will want one, is globalise resistance)
Again, the organisation or network chooses the representative. If they cannot make a meeting, they can send an alternate.
The national committee meets quarterly. The committee decided itself whether they meet in or outside of London.
This is the body that makes decisions between annual conferences.
Officers committee
An officers committee will be in charge of the day to day running of the organisation, but it shall be subject to the decisions of the national committee. It will meet every two weeks.
Five of the officers will be elected by the annual meeting in June.
Coordinator
Treasurer
Chair
International secretary
Secretary
Those five will be the officers committee, along with one person chosen by each of the following subgroups:
Media
IT
Events
Outreach – unions
Outreach – ngos and campaigns
Outreach – students
Outreach – faith
That would be an officers committee of 12. They could also ask reps from other subgroups to come as they think fit.
The five nationally elected officers will attend the national committee meetings, but will not vote, unless they have been elected to it in their own right.
METHOD OF VOTING AT ANNAUL MEETING
In future, the annual meeting voting may well be on a delegate basis. This year, we are not in a position to do that.
Anyone can present a motion to the annual meeting, but they need five signatures.
The composition of the national committee will be approved by majority vote. People may propose other balances, and they will be voted on.
Aims and Objectives Statement
We have tried to incorporate the feedback from February 11th here as well. If you have more suggestions please try and make them concrete! Thanks
The Campaign against Climate Change exists to push for the urgent and radical action we need to prevent the catastrophic destabilisation of global climate.
The destabilisation of global climate has become the very greatest threat to our planet and everyone on it – with the possible exception only of all-out war with modern weapons of mass-destruction. We do not know how much irreversible damage we have done already but we know that if we do not act now the effects will be many times more devastating still.
1/ The CCC exists to secure the action we need - at a local, national and, above all, international level - to minimise harmful climate change and the devastating impacts it will have. To that end the CCC seeks to raise awareness about the gravity and urgency of the threat from climate change and to influence those with the greatest power to take effective action to do so with the utmost speed and resolution. Where ignorance, short term greed and vested interests stand in the way of the action that is urgently needed, the CCC exists to fight against all of these things.
2/ In particular the CCC brings people together for street demonstrations, designed to get together the greatest number of people possible, and to create a mass movement to push for our goals.
3/ The CCC seeks a global solution to a global problem and aims to push for an international emissions reductions treaty that is both effective in preventing the catastrophic destabilisation of global climate and equitable in the means of so doing. To be effective such a treaty needs to secure such reductions in the global total of greenhouse gas emissions as are deemed by the broad consensus of qualified scientific opinion to be necessary to prevent harmful climate change. The CCC aims to campaign against those with the greatest responsibility for preventing or delaying the progress we urgently need towards an international climate treaty.
4/ The CCC recognises that the issue of the destabilisation of global climate has enormous implications in terms of social justice and global inequality. The damage to the earth’s atmosphere has so far been done mainly by the rich nations but it is the poorest who will suffer the greatest and most immediately. The CCC recognises that any solution to the problem must be as fair as possible, incorporating principles of social justice and not exacerbating global inequalities
5/ The CCC aims to bring together as many people as possible who support our broad aims of pushing for urgent action on climate and reducing global emissions. The CCC does not therefore campaign on the important but more detailed questions of how best to achieve these emission reductions and recognises that supporters will have different and deeply held views on these issues.
Formal structure very large
It is a good that CCC wants to have a 'Constitution and Structure'. The structure was widely discussed among a group of London activists in February by email and in a couple of meetings. The changes made to the proposed structure prior to the February meeting were an improvement.
However the size is a fundamental problem for me; a structure including a national steering committee of 55 people will put a enormous burden in terms of cost and time on a small, stretched organisation.
Also I don't like the idea of having two formally elected bodies. Jonathan has made a reasonable effort to explain how matters would be referred from the officers' committee back to the national committee but I think this is a hornet's nest. The national steering committee might decide that the officers committee is simply insubordinate or incompetent but it cannot replace one or all of its members.
I think that the reason for some disagreement about the formal structure is that different people have entirely different reasons for having one. The reasons that I have heard expressed are 1) to set campaign strategy 2) to encourage wider participation in demos 3) to occasionally overrule Phil 4) to stop the organisation or campaign being hijacked by another group.
So here are my suggestions:
The Constitution and the Formal Structure
A constitution of some form should be formally presented and approved at the AGM. AFAIK the constitution as such has not yet been written; what was presented in February and reproduced above is just a structure with suggestions about what might be included in the constitution.
We are a campaign group and not a political party and there are currently no paid staff. 75 minutes have been granted on June 3rd for all AGM matters and that's probably far longer than most people want to spend on this. As few structures and committees as possible should be defined in the constitution.
I think we should have one small formally elected committee. It must include a chairperson. It could be the national campaign coordinator (Phil) but it probably ought not. Some funding organisations like to review constitutions so we might want to have a formally elected treasurer. That's it. Having others is fine but not necessary.
For sheer simplicity, it is hard to beat 'one person present at the AGM, one vote'. I would like to know the benefits of voting for a slate, I prefer to vote for individuals on merit. I doubt if we will ever get the choice of two slates. In any case, alternative voting schemes and other changes to the constitution can be proposed and debated at subsequent AGMs.
The Informal Structures
We might well want to create a national committee that coordinates national demos, we might also want to create outreach roles, we might even want to have a campaign strategy group but these decisions can be delegated by the formally elected committee to the national campaign coordinator or some other committee. These are not matters that must be formally discussed at the AGM.
John
p.s. Here are some websites about constitutions that I found back in February.
General advice:
http://wiki.ehow.com/Write-a-Constitution
http://www.charitiesdirect.com/Article.asp?type=news&id=229
Permaculture Association
http://www.permaculture.org.uk/mm.asp?mmfile=constitution
These next 3 are less interesting.
Man United supporters association
http://www.imusa.org/constitution/index.php
British carbon group
http://tc.cpes.susx.ac.uk/BCG/constitution.shtml
Cambridge cycling campaign
http://www.camcycle.org.uk/about/constitution/
Constitution
I too have lots of reservations about a large national superstructure. While the campaign is working (obviously) the organisational expression of it (in terms of structure, constitution and national meetings) does not seem to function. To be honest I dont think I want to go to national meetings (except to argue for them not to happen). It would be better to have something small and acountable. Part of the accountability is having a proper communications interface.
National Committee attendance
Some people suggested to me after the Conference that it may be possible to look at audio conferencing, rather than trying to get 55 people in one place.
I cannot imagine that people from Scotland would want to travel to London four times a year. I spent two whole days on the train just to get to the Conference (and that was a great event and really worth it) - I would not put myself through that just to attend a business meeting. Nor would anybody else in Aberdeen (we discussed it). Even moving the venue would not make much of a difference. We simply are many hundreds of miles apart, no way round that.
On the other hand, if meetings and communication did not have to involve travelling, I am sure groups from all over the country would want to be involved and keep up the links with the national organisation!
Almuth