Re: [council] e-mail votes v3

[Alexander Svensson <alexander@svensson.de>]

Hello Philipp,

At 06.03.2002 17:31, Philip Sheppard wrote:
>Harold, before we add in a possible override for the NC with respect to a GA vote we need to understand what this paragraph intends.
> 
>1. The GA can vote whenever it wants, however it wants at any time if it organises itself to do so. The GA does not need the NC's permission.
>2. If however the GA has a vote of sufficient importance that it wants to use the DNSO secretariat as returning officer and the DNSO software for the vote, then this rule requires it to check with the elected chair of those who pay for those resources. The rule says if its still in the budget, the answer is expected to be yes. 

The problem is that the rule is very vague:
"The NC chair will not ordinarily refuse a request for a vote 
from the chair of the GA for a GA vote, so long as there is 
no cost implication from overtime or other costs above that 
expected in the annual DNSO secretariat budget."
--> When is "not ordinarily"? 
--> What is "no cost implication"?

>3. In the rare case that it is outside of the budget (eg the 50th vote the GA has asked for this year!!) the answer may be different. But if the answer is No, and the GA chair thinks that unreasonable, the GA chair can today choose to lobby any NC member or indeed propose it himself as an NC agenda item. If discussed then a simple majority of the NC could authorise the vote.

If it's a rare case, why should there be a cumbersome
approval process at all? Shouldn't it be the other way --
in the *very* rare and unprecented case that the DNSO
budget should be eaten up by GA votes, the NC would
have to deal with the situation? 

I think the NC would be well advised to leave GA votes out 
of the NC internal rules.

Best regards,
/// Alexander