To All interested in this argument.
The three participants Mark, Bill and Akbal have recently shown only too
clearly why podiatry is regarded as it is by govt. I have tried to
outline why certain decisions have been taken and with what proposed
benefit. Mark thinks that some changes are "shameful", Bill castigates
because I think the Society needs change without throwing out the baby
with the water and wants a new organisation, and Akbal can not
understand why anyone should want to associate with the Society.
Like pushing jelly uphill there is no future in hoping for progress.
If the three of you could agree on what you want let me know, clearly I
will never come up with a method that will satisfy you. So far the total
complaints about the SCP policies amount to 5 contributors to this
mailbase and the SCP website.
As of this day nothing in writing. So that I do not misjudge the
unhappiness masked by apathy all those who have a view please email me
at [log in to unmask] I will list them all in the journal.
Kind Regards
Ralph Graham
Consultant Podiatrist
Witham, Essex, U.K.
-----Original Message-----
From: A group for the academic discussion of current issues in podiatry
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mark Russell
Sent: 06 September 2004 17:24
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: The Reason of Things (Ralph Graham)
Dear Ralph
When I wrote 'you' I was referring in a collective sense i.e. the
Council. Show me one document that has been circulated to the
membership/profession or a journal article or editorial that details the
proposed changes that Council was considering, so that the profession
could deliberate for themselves. I certainly cannot recall any. Can you?
At the risk of being repetitive, it is not the argument that is
important; it is the process by which that argument became reality. You
state your primary goal is unity. I fear your inability to concede this
simple point may engender the opposite of your aim.
The ability for members to use the mechanisms of an AGM is worthless.
The next AGM is in May 2005, nine months away. It would be near
impossible to re-establish membership conditions, even though that was
the majority view. At the end of the day the Council had a debate and
agreed a policy in isolation and without informing the membership or the
wider profession, on a issue of paramount importance to our future. I'm
terribly sorry if you find this strident, but I think your
[collectively] actions were shameful.
Yours sincerely
Mark Russell
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was distributed by the Podiatry JISCmail list server
All opinions and assertions contained in this message are those of the
original author. The listowner(s) and the JISCmail service take no
responsibility for the content.
to leave the Podiatry email list send a message containing the text
leave podiatry to [log in to unmask]
Please visit http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk for any further information
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was distributed by the Podiatry JISCmail list server
All opinions and assertions contained in this message are those of
the original author. The listowner(s) and the JISCmail service take
no responsibility for the content.
to leave the Podiatry email list send a message containing the text
leave podiatry
to [log in to unmask]
Please visit http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk for any further information
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|