Alexander Young - Board of Governors Nomination

[alyoung]

I would like to put myself forward for the position of Board of Governors member.

My name is Alexander Young: I am eighteen and currently working my way through a Politics and Philosophy degree at the London School of Economics. Naturally, being at such a hotbed of political discussion and policy making over the last year has helped to spur on my interests in the political process and further my actual involvement in politics. The nature of the LSE of being an institution of being a university of rich international students funded either by banking or media fortunes has done nothing to dampen my beliefs as to the moral inadequacies of UK intellectual property law as it currently stands. I will be starting a job in the IT department here in the Summer and will hope to be able to shape policy in favour of more open software aside from Moodle.

My beliefs include an individualistic conception of rights, and the shift away from the current concentration on group rights which is embodied on the statutes; a universally binding commitment to free speech along the Evelyn Beatrice Hall's characterisation of Voltaire; a right to free information; and a belief that the media industries should realise that their economic model too has died, just as that of Keynes has since WW2.

Having been a member of the party for only six months and not participated as strong as I may have, I realise that this may count against me in these nominations: I would not wish for it do so would hope that you would give me the opportunity that I so sorely desire to help designate the course of the only political party which can be said to represent me over the coming years. I feel that I could bring a certain resoluteness to the board: an unflinching dedication to my aims (to follow) in the Millian and Popperian tradition of exposing a theory to full criticism in order that its true truth status be established. This is not political 'power grabbing', merely an attempt to be a part of something which embodies so well my beliefs.

My aims as a Governor would be to:

• Ensure a consistent and comprehensive manifesto.
• Proliferate the Party name in order that it not be reported (as I saw on the BBC on Election Night) as a joke party along the lines of MRLP.
• Engage the Party in educational enterprises re: copyright and IP, and the detrimental effects that they have without proper moderation.

Thank you for your time.

[AndrewTindall]

the constitution currently holds that governors deal so far only with the constitution itself, why do you feel that you need to be a governor to help shape the manifesto - and indeed, for any of your listed aims?

[alyoung]

Simply, constitutional matters serve to define what the party as a whole will do: it defines what the party is and what it shall be in the future. Cicero's conception of a constitution being perfected by evolution through the additions of many forms the basis of my reasons for wanting to be able to shape it. As it stands, the sole constituted aim of the party is that of patent and copyright reform: my views of education and increasing awareness of such issues seems somewhat incompatible with this as it stands: party constitutions aren't interpreted in the way of liberties (absences of duties not to do things), but rather positively. Equally, the consistency of the manifesto is always going to be dependent upon the aims of the party as listed in the constitution.

[VJ]

Simply, constitutional matters serve to define what the party as a whole will do: it defines what the party is and what it shall be in the future.

You've convinced me, I'll second you because although I'm running myself, this is exactly my view .

[borgs8472]

Hi Alexander

* Where do you see the party in 1 years time?
* What do you imagine as your role within the board and party within the same period?
* Can you list your activities involving the party up til now please?
* Do you have any contingency plan if you were unable to spend the same hours or less with the party in the future? e.g. after uni, full time job.

[alyoung]

The first question, I feel, needs to be divided into the ideal and the realistic. Ideally, in a year's time, the party would have achieved a fair amount of penetration and perhaps almost be considered a 'household name,' divorced from the current state of ignominy we enjoy as a fringe party. Realisitically, I'd be satisfied if even a simple majority who have heard of the party knew of its policies beyond the aspersions which are immediately cast upon us due to our name. I'd like to see the party involved with all variety of open society and free culture programmes, be those of an educational nature or one of lobbying.

My role within the party, irrespective of whether I become a governor, will definitely grow in this time: I would aim to associate myself with the party's press team more closely, with a view to aiding its role of spreading the Pirate message as it truly is. As well as this, I aim to start a Pirate society at the LSE in the coming year (subject to approval). As a governor, I'd strive to liase with all departments of the party (press, volunteer co-ordination, treasury etc) in order that the needs of the party could be manifested within the constitution. Naturally, elements of the constitution should form a hard-line spine from which no-one should deviate, but it should also be a living document in order that changing needs of the party are met with a changing prohibitions.

Unfortunately, my activities involving the party directly have been relatively scant. I have, however, written to my MP over DEAct and ACTA over the past years. My involvement with the party has been that solely of unofficial advocacy on Campus.

My contingency plan would be one of amending the constitution to provide a mechanism for dealing with the resignation of a governor due to time/other constraints: perhaps an STV election for a replacement. However, it is likely that I'm to be in education for the next five years and that this is thus unlikely to be a real issue for myself.

[cabalamat]

I have some questions I'd like to ask of the candidates standing for the Board of Governors:

1. What level of autonomy should regions of the Pirate Party have? (I'm thinking particularly here of Scotland, but the same issues apply to other parts of the UK with devolved administrations -- Wales, London, and Northern Ireland.)

2. Regarding Scotland, if there is a devolved party, should there be a Scottish leader?

3. What about policies/manifestos for Scottish elections; should they be decided by the Scottish Party or the whole of PPUK?

4. Regarding our manifesto, the constitution says (2.1): "The principal aim of the Party is that the United Kingdom reforms its copyright and patent and privacy laws in a manner consistent with the opinions of the Party’s members." In your opinion, does this preclude us having policies outside these areas?

5. Does this part of the constitution need changing? If so, what to?

6. Should PPUK have policies outside our core policies?

7. What other constitutional changes, if any, would you like to see?

8. According to the constitution (8.3): "The Board may have other governance responsibilities which are as yet undefined in this constitution." what other responsibilities do you think the board should have?

[alyoung]

1&2&3) I don't much think that, as a party with our aims, there's much need for regional devolution: the party's aims aren't those of regional issues but those of a completely national one. With copyright law being uniform between England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, I can't really see a benefit in giving local arms of the party any real executive power. It may be that certain Scottish Nationalists would only vote for a party with the word 'Scottish' in it, but that demographic is likely to be very small. Thus, manifesto and policy should be uniform between all arms of the party.

However, I do accept that areas such as Hackney/Islington (with the silicon-based industries around there) need a little more care in how they're appoached by us, and thus the London (in this case) arm of the party should be able to campaign to our advantage in such areas - but in keeping with party policy.

4&5) This part of the constitution can't be said to 'preclude' us authoritatively from engaging in other activities, but it doesn't serve to lay down any sort of limitations on how this aim be achieved either. To use an extreme (and, admittedly, patently ridiculous) example, it wouldn't make a violent coup immediately admonishable by the party. As well as this, the lack of any other aims being defined in the consitution does allow for fluidity, but at the cost of direction for the party: an addition of aims such as education and lobbying may serve to give the party some needed structure in its activities. As a party of our size, it seems incredibly useful for us to have aims outside of outright electoral reform.

6) I think that having policies outside of our current core policies will be necessary for us to gain electoral traction, once we are known as a non-joke party. This, however, wouldn't be feasible currently due to a lack of economists, health experts etc etc within the party, and what I will assume to be a lack of funds available to employ them. Essentially, we should act, in my view, to increase the renown of the party and lobby for our core policies until the point where we could seriously field candidates with an expectation of taking seats.

7&8) Ideally, I would desire to see the constitution take a structure (which it is almost already) of a tripartite separation of powers. As it stands, the members can call the NEC to account through no confidencing: I'd like for the Board to be able to do such a thing on the basis of a simple majority, this decision to be voted upon by members (on the basis of the Board being closer to the NEC than most members are likely to be). Equally, I'd like to see amendments allowing for the no-confidencing of Board members by the NEC or members: a check on either side of the administrative side of the party. A two-year term may also be better for the Board in order that new blood may be brought into the job in case of stagnation. A stronger definition of the roles of the Executives would serve to bolster their efficiency, due to a stronger knowledge of expectations.

[tdobson]

Week to week administration and ongoing tasks to keep an organisation running is by no means glamorous and requires a good deal of stamina, patience and persistence - quite different from the cut and thrust [no pun intended] of an election campaign.
If you've not mentioned already, what experience do you have sitting on committees and boards in the past?

Not everyone on the board will always agree with your take on things.
What makes you think you have the patience and self restraint to be able to continue to work harmoniously with board members who hold different opinions?

Detailed and concise minutes are crucial to making sure the outcomes of any series of meetings are recorded and pushed out to those who attended as reminders.
Bearing this in mind, would you be willing to take minutes for meetings you have?

Lastly:
Do you have any opinions that this government or legal system has a conspiracy going on or anything?
and:
Are you on twitter or identi.ca?

If ever need advice about anything I can help with, my door/email is always open/td[at]tdobson[dot]net.

Best of luck!