Daniel Jitnah <[email protected]> wrote: > In reality, strictly speaking, all of the above will be untrue, if LUV is > dis-incorporated there will be NO LUV. It > will not be possible to have any reference to LUV in the future. There will > be no LUV to "not be an independent > organisation", or to "be part of a national organisation". There will be > nothing to "own anything", hence any > reference to "our something", eg: our administrative overhead, or "us" as > such, "having more say in Country affairs", > will be impossible. There will be no LUV to be a Member of. > > There will be a branch of LA (/subcommittee) whose role will be to continue > some of the activities currently carried > out by LUV in the short term at least, and deal with VIC specific issues when > they arise "on behalf of LA". While > the newly formed "subcommittee" may notionally have a sense of "us" at the > beginning, this will most likely disappear > later on, because they will not exist as an entity. > > In terms of having a more direct input into country-wide affairs, nothing > really changes. All Members of LUV are > entitled to be Members of LA and will be able to remain so. LUV's existence > does not reduce their input on national > affairs. The same applies to LA Members from Victoria participating more in > VIC activities (... in fact its the > participation of a LA Member from VIC that has started this current > discussion in the first place!! ) .. What > determines their participation is their ability to do so given their other > commitments in their lives. That will not > change.
I haven't seen anything in the thread so far that would make me inclined to vote for dis-incorporation. I'm assuming there will be an online poll of members - let me signal that I'll be voting "no" unless someone comes up with a really good case in favour. _______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list [email protected] http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main
