Personally I think the whole discussion - if a little heated in places -
has revealed a lamentable ignorance amongts the membership (myself
included!) in how CILIP works and how decisions are made, as well as in
what CILIP is doing, to help us all (advocacy, government consultations
etc).
I mentioned in an earlier posting that administering chartership must
cost an awful lot more than the fee that people pay when they submit
their report, however it would be very counterproductive to pass the
entire cost onto the chartering candidates - and would probably bar many
from being able to charter.
CILIP's website has recently been revamped and perhaps we should all
spend a bit of time looking at the information provided there, but
perhaps also now would be a good time for an article in Update (also to
be made available on the website) on "How CILIP works and what it
actually does"??
Cathy
******************************************
Catherine Phillpotts BA MA MCLIP
Teamleader Social Sciences
Senate House Library, University of London
Senate House
Malet St
London WC1E 7HU
020-7862-8449
[log in to unmask]
www.shl.lon.ac.uk
******************************************
-----Original Message-----
From: Chartered Library and Information Professionals
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mcsean, Tony (ELS)
Sent: 05 November 2004 09:21
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Cilip is a member led organisation is it?
As a trustee of Cilip (all Councillors are) I spoke to both someone from
the Charity Commissioners and to the Institute's auditor in connection
with the 2003 accounts and the 2004 budget. This was in particular with
the "Going concern" qualification that was appended to the auditor's
report and the deteriorating state of CILIP's reserves.
I came away from the auditor conversation feeling that we can rest
assured that the accounts are thoroughly and critically audited. I hope
that we can rest equally assured that the soon-to-be-founded Audit
Committee will se promptly and in an open manner all communications from
the auditor, as was not the case when the accounts and the qualifying
letter were presented to Council as separate agenda items widely
separated on the agenda.
The Charity Commissioners do not have the resources to apply thorough
audit and governance style scruitiny to the myriad bodies that fall
under the Charity heading, but do spot checks and monitor what amounts
to a sick and in danger list. This list is fed by feedback from trustees
like myself and also by information from the media, police and other
sources, and my impression was that things have to be very much worse
than the darkest moments in Cilip's history before they get involved
beyond the very useful and helpful advice that I received during the
conversation.
The fact is that the law is set up to ensure that charities are
self-correcting as far as possible. If you are a trustee, you are in
exactly the same position as a Lloyd's Name - you are liable to the full
extent of your assets for any misconduct or inattention. Cilip
Trustees are covered by insurance against losing everything, but this
insurance is void in the case of recklessness or unreasonable torpor in
the face of trouble. We should therefore expect that Trustees should
conduct effective oversight of the action of employees and the executive
board.
My personal view is that for some time at least this has not been the
case in Cilip and that the Council has not been as active as it should
have been in exercising that oversight. I have to say, though, that
this is very much a tiny minority opinion within Council and it may be
that I am being alarmist and am overreacting. However, the questions
which must be asked to all those who have written to this list
complaining about Things are these:
What have you done about your misgivings?
Have you sought to participate as a Councillor so that you can do
something more than just bleat on to Lis-Cilip about it?
Goodness knows there is opportunity - currently one Group has no
Councillor because it can't find anyone willing to serve, most Group
Councillors (including me) have been returned unopposed and often have
to be head-hunted (not including me!); and National Councillor elections
when they happen at all usually only have only one or two more
candidates than slots. Good grief - some years we even have trouble
finding people to be President.
Have you even spoken to a Councillor about your concerns?
Every group (bar one) and every Branch has one, and there are 12
National Councillors available to anyone, and it is easy (for a trained
searcher) to find out who they are on the Cilip web site. We're most of
us approachable even clubbable people, tend by definition to be out and
about more than most. And we have mostly become Councillors because we
care about Cilip and believe in democracy.
If you have done none of these things, haven't you got the Cilip you
deserve?
For all but a very, very few the "too busy" argument is just rubbish.
Most Councillors have full-time jobs, careers to pursue, commitments and
interests outside work. If you care - do something because if you don't
it will damage libraries and information services everywhere and will
long-term mean you and your fellow-professionals never get the
recognition and rewards that many of you seem to feel is our due. On
the whole, you get what you're prepared to fight for.
This may seem an angry rant - it's certainly a bit angry. But I worked
for 16 years as a middle-manager in a professional association where a
considerable number of the membership cared passionately about what went
on. Prospective chairs of committee and Senior Offices worked hard,
lobbying and campaigning, to get elected and Council was a stroppy,
bubbling affair that was capable of putting the willies and more up the
great and the good - eg once requiring the Treasurer to come back
immediately after the lunch break with full costs and detailed process
explanation of a controversial building refurb project - and in general
will not settle for anything less than excellence. The contrast with
Cilip could not be clearer.
So, ladies and gentlemen - put up or shut up, please. Fat chance.
Tony McSean
Health Libraries Group Councillor
_____
From: Chartered Library and Information Professionals
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of C.Oppenheim
Sent: 04 November 2004 16:59
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Cilip is a member led organisation is it?
I'm not sure that the Charities Commission ever undertakes audits -
unless it suspects a charity is being fradulently run. The CILIP
accounts are in any cases audited by external auditors.....
Charles
Professor Charles Oppenheim
Department of Information Science
Loughborough University
Loughborough
Leics LE11 3TU
Tel 01509-223065
Fax 01509-223053
e mail [log in to unmask]
----- Original Message -----
From: Ed Cole <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 4:52 PM
Subject: Re: Cilip is a member led organisation is it?
Well said, Bert !
I remember reading on a CILIP list that some members no longer
criticised because they were afraid of being victimised. On the
subscriptions increases, I am totally unconvinced by the CILIP
arguments. I think that we need to get to the absolute root of the
matter as a letter to Update mentioned, i.e. contact the Charities
Commission to audit the finances. Systems may now be in place but
previous financial management or lack of it , as the case may be, should
be scrutinised by the Charities Commission who would no doubt discover
excellent past and present practice.
Ed
Bert Washington <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
If all senior staff/employees of Cilip are members then
indeed it can be
called 'a member led organisation', however there
doesn't seem to be a great
deal of evidence to support the idea that senior Cilip
management are indeed
member led or consider that this is the case. As an
example: Over the last
few years there have been numerous discussions on both
the Workplace and
Solo lists, some of which have included formal
representation and feedback
to Cilip by members. A number of times members have made
proposals,
including several requests for better information flows
from Cilip about
what they are doing regarding proposals about the way
Cilip is run, plus a
number of new initiatives have been requested and
proposed by members. I
have not yet seen much (if any) evidence of Cilip
responding to the lead
that members have proposed. Some ideas may ! well have
been taken-up by senior
management, however that is no more evidence of Cilip
being a member led
organisation than it is of one where the senior
management being bereft of
positive ideas themselves have used the membership to
achieve this.
Perhaps, if indeed Cilip is a member led organisation,
someone can let this
individual (who is proud to be a member) know the
following...
1 - How many proposals/initiatives have been put to
Cilip from the grass
roots level (over say) the last 5 years?
2 - How many proposals/initiatives in total Cilip have
actually introduced
over that time frame?
3 - what percentage of those proposals/initiatives that
have been introduced
were generated at the grass roots level?
It may be that Cilip does not keep a record of such
things, but then that in
itself is evidence that Cilip does not consider
proposals from it's members
as worthy of noting, let alone acting on.
It may indeed be a laudable aim ! to have Cilip as a
truly member run
professional body but as things stand at the moment that
simply is not the
case in reality as far as I have seen.
Bert Washington.
-----Original Message-----
From: Chartered Library and Information Professionals
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Edward
Dudley
Sent: 03 November 2004 17:34
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: CILIP Subscriptions
Now that the discussion on flat rate subs seems to have
run its course, it
strikes me that many of the questions raised on this
list and elsewhere
should be asked at any time about what CILIP should be
doing with our
money, what are its priorities, and don't need to be
sparked off by a
proposed change in subscriptions. And given that we are
a 'member led'
institution, a little more leadership from the bottom is
needed. And we
have the means, for each of us is a member of a Branch
which has a CILIP
Councillor and most of us o! f two or more special
interest groups, each
with a Councillor and there are nationally elected
Councillors.
On the CILIP website there are the names of Councillors
and of the
Committees of Branches and Groups with addresses and in
many cases email
addresses, all indicating where leadership from the
bottom can start
(you'll find me as a member of the Committee of the
newly formed Cilip in
London). Ask them questions and tell them about your
CILIP worries and
joys.
And at our professional election times an improvement in
the percentage of
members voting (it's usually in the very low double
figures) is another
opportunity for leading from the bottom. It's not a
member led
institution if members fail to lead.
Edward Dudley
[log in to unmask]
_____
ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger
<http://uk.rd.yahoo.com/evt=21626/*http:/uk.messenger.yahoo.com> - all
new features - even more fun!
|
