{news} FW: USGP-INT Reminder: Discussion period ENDS tonight on IC Proposal: Draft Statement on Gaza/I-P Conflict

[Amy Vas Nunes]

Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 18:23:40 -0500
From: jdt at itol.com
To: usgp-int at gp-us.org
Subject: Re: USGP-INT Reminder: Discussion period ENDS tonight on IC Proposal: Draft Statement on Gaza/I-P Conflict


Hi Michael,

An SC subcommittee and staff are working on just such a uniform format and procedure for position papers.  We have had several meetings upon it already.  We even used statements that have come out of the IC to help us figure stuff out, but we have a ways to go yet.  On our last call we decided that we need a proposal to put before the NC asking delegates what they think the threshold should be, and giving them several choices.  We haven't written the proposal yet - it is just in discussion phase, but we do want the decision to be that of the NC for threshold - there are varying opinions about what it should be, and it should bring forth a great discussion.

There were two proposals that Mike Feinstein wanted to go before the NC about the IC - they were a sort of coordinated effort.  

 Mike did write up some P&P's, and the put a proposal before BRPP that they vote to put them before the NC, after holding a hearing to which we were all invited, but just 2 of us participated - Mike and Amy Van Nunes.  I don't know what the vote of the BRPP committee was - whether they voted to put it before the NC or not, or whether the vote was scheduled to happen after the SC statement, and then was dropped.  The SC has made a statement that BRPP cannot write P&P's "for" a committee, so we are all good with that. 

The California proposal was written by Mike Feinstein, and put before CA to vote upon and CA passed it.  An individual cannot submit a proposal before the NC - he/she must get a sponsor for it.  It will come up for discussion this next Monday.  I will pass it on when it is time for it to go to the NC for discussion.  I hope that all members of the IC who are on the national committee will participate in that discussion, as it should be quite lively!  We will want more than one view represented in that discussion, and your diverse views will be welcomed.

I hear you about the emails!

Jill Bussiere, co-chair, GPUS

Quoting Michael Canney <alachuagreen at gmail.com>:

> *I support the draft as a policy statement to be circulated by the IC. *
>
> I have some concerns about the process issues that have been raised, that
> are (or should be) separate from any consideration of the content of this
> particular statement.
>
> One is the question of how any document developed by the IC or any other
> committee is vetted for release as a GPUS position paper. This is a valid
> concern that must be addressed, and a policy must be clearly defined that
> applies to ALL position papers developed by ALL committees.
>
> The other concern is the proposal to treat the IC as a "rogue committee" and
> render it inactive until another committee writes new P&P's for the IC and
> has them approved by the GNC. I view this as a hostile and unnecessary
> proposal that should be soundly defeated and replaced with an offer by the
> BRPP to assist the IC in developing the committee's new P&P's in a friendly
> and cooperative manner.
>
> I have a question about the proposal to impose P&P's on the IC: Was it
> approved by the California delegation and submitted as a proposal by the
> state party, or was it submitted by an individual delegate? I'm sorry for
> asking what might me a dumb question, but I have a hard time keeping up with
> all the emails.
>
> Michael Canney / FL
>
>
> 2009/3/27 Justine McCabe <justinemccabe at earthlink.net>
>
>>  Dear all,
>>
>> A reminder: Our one-week discussion period on the Draft Statement on
>> Gaza/Israeli-Palestinian conflict ends today, Friday, March 27 at 10 pm
>> PDT.  The proposal is pasted below.
>>
>> Note Well:  The proposal under consideration does NOT include the
>> Background section which is only there as reference for the statement's
>> positions.
>>
>> Again, such proposals are a big part of the work of our committee.
>>
>> So please comment--affirmations, opposition, friendly amendments, etc. In
>> accordance with our bylaws (pasted here) at the end of this discussion
>> period (tomorrow) we will call for consensus, and move to a majority vote if
>> necessary:
>>
>> “7. CONSENSUS. Ideally, at the conclusion of the
>> discussion period we will ask for, and usually
>> achieve, consensus. This call for consensus gives
>> members a "final" opportunity to express
>> concerns, which we handle in a flexible way,
>> depending on circumstances. We (the Co-Chairs)
>> may consult privately with the proponents, or
>> those with concerns, suggesting ways to resolve
>> the impasse; the proponents may suggest changes
>> to the proposal to meet concerns; or (and this is
>> the ideal case) those with concerns may suggest
>> specific wording changes which preserve the
>> spirit of the original while correcting any
>> deficiencies they perceive.
>>
>> 8. VOTING. If it turns out that any member simply
>> can't support the wording which emerges from the
>> discussion and early-consensus period, and
>> expresses a "blocking concern," the procedures of
>> the IC call for moving immediately to a majority
>> vote. Not every Green party uses this kind of
>> impasse-breaking vote, but we have found over the
>> years that it works best for us, and this is our
>> Committee's official procedure. After the
>> extended discussion which precedes any vote, and
>> the typical revisions each proposal experiences,
>> we have found that a strong majority for or
>> against the proposal has by this point been
>> crafted; the impasse-breaking vote allows us to
>> demonstrate existing support, and take action,
>> without returning again and again to brokering
>> and bartering. It allows us to move on, if and
>> when a proposal has achieved majority support.”
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Justine
>> =======================================================
>> PROPOSAL: Draft Statement on Israeli-Palestinian Conflict for endorsement
>> by International Green Parties
>>
>> PRESENTER: International Committee, GPUS
>>
>> CONTACT: Justine McCabe justinemccabe at earthink.net
>>
>> SUBJECT:  DRAFT Green Party Statement on Gaza Crisis and the
>> Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: A Call for Boycott, Divestment Sanctions
>> Against Israel
>>
>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20090327/72f6f3af/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: ATT00000
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20090327/72f6f3af/attachment.ksh>