Guy Incognito - Board of Governors Nomination

[guyincognito]

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

I recently stood as a candidate for PPUK in Leicester (gaining 113 votes) for those that don't know me see below for my bio:

I’m 26 years old, and originally from Burnley in Lancashire (up the Clarets) but I moved down to Leicester in 2001 to study Business at De Montfort University. I live in the west end of Leicester and have done for pretty much the last eight years. I work full time as an IT Auditor but I’m also studying for my masters in Computers Security. In my spare time I manage Leicester’s most popular 5aside team (The Beardfaces) and also warm the bench for local Sunday League side CSKA Carnabys.

I have always had an interest in politics and have spent many a long Sunday in the local putting the world to rights. I have been increasingly frustrated as the main political parties sell our rights to the lobby group with the most cash. The main parties it seems have forgotten who they represent, the people of this country not big business.

I've been getting some good feedback in Leicester and some good publicity on the radio and in the newspaper and I'd like to get more into helping out with the Party in the background.

When I heard about the Pirate Party UK I signed up straight away and have been keen to help in any way I can since

If anyone has any questions I’m happy to answer them so just post them on the forum or drop me a message.

Cheers

Shaun

P.S. Feel free to second me...

[glambert]

Shaun, what would you rather do? Campaign as a candidate or sit on the board? I can't second you because I think you'd be better as a candidate.

[guyincognito]

I'm not sure if the party would want me to stand again. I'd be happy to stand again but I don't want to miss out on helping the party if I'm not going to be asked to stand again. Is it not possible to do both? It's going to be a while until the next election.

[JohnB]

Shaun,

I will second you for this, I was lucky enough to meet you in person when I visited Leicester to campaign, and was impressed by your performance during the election.

There is presently ongoing discussion about what is or isn't a conflict of interest at the moment, and there is no absolute prohibition. Certainly at this stage the NEC see no particular issue in applying both for a governor position, and wishing to stand as a candidate, which was discussed in our weekly meeting today/you'll see in our minutes in due course.

There are perhaps more contentious combinations, and I will be making a submission on my own behalf to the governors, once appointed, regarding particular offices which I believe should be regarded as an automatic conflict; this, however, isn't one of them.

For now, however, it's a matter for discussion and further review, and I believe you would be an excellent governor.

[guyincognito]

Thanks John much appreciated.

[epriezka]

There is presently ongoing discussion about what is or isn't a conflict of interest at the moment, and there is no absolute prohibition. Certainly at this stage the NEC see no particular issue in applying both for a governor position, and wishing to stand as a candidate, which was discussed in our weekly meeting today/you'll see in our minutes in due course.

I think the execs have this right. Elsewhere I've been extra keen to distinguish politicians (e.g. candidates) from administrators (e.g. the exec) with the sole exception of the Party Leader who is both. But good governance is not about separation of duties. It is about balanced and thoughtful analysis of what is in the best interests of the party. That means we should have some politicians on the Board, though I'd be keener that we have people who intend to keep up the responsibility even whilst standing as a candidate, instead of treating it as a job that they pick up and later put down. The Board should also have execs, elders of the forum, and even ordinary members who never seem to do anything - so long as they can be trusted to do what's best for the party (admittedly that's hard in the last case, but if I said a doctor who is also a former head of their PTA wanted to be a Governor, then perhaps you can understand why it's still possible). In short, the real trick for the party is to find a suitable balance of decent, earnest people who represent a spectrum of interests whilst all having the party's best interest at heart. I believe the Tories very deliberately attain balance by picking people who represent different camps. We're not as sophisticated as that, but hopefully people will try to find some balance when voting (or even when putting themselves forward).

Anyhow, from the brief time I spoke with Shaun, if he wants to be a Governor and a candidate, I think he'd do both jobs well.

[JohnB]

The Board should also have execs, elders of the forum, and even ordinary members who never seem to do anything

My own view is that the board should have former execs, but not current execs, and that is the main reason I would not consider putting myself forward at this time. Conflicts of interest (and how to handle them) are something the board will need to consider, and that's one I'd like to see us thinking about.

My reasoning is twofold:

• Current executive members ought (IMHO) to be too busy with operational demands to take it on
• The board will be considering constitutional amendments to put to the membership, some of which may affect the functioning and conduct of the NEC. Therefore I do not believe that it is appropriate for current exec members to also be on the board.

On that note, as an active Pirate member in long standing, and as a former exec, I notice that you haven't put yourself forward for that role Eric, which surprised me a little...? Was there any particular reason you didn't want to do so?

[glambert]

On that note, as an active Pirate member in long standing, and as a former exec, I notice that you haven't put yourself forward for that role Eric, which surprised me a little...? Was there any particular reason you didn't want to do so?

This. I've been waiting for it!

[epriezka]

On that note, as an active Pirate member in long standing, and as a former exec, I notice that you haven't put yourself forward for that role Eric, which surprised me a little...? Was there any particular reason you didn't want to do so?

Thanks for asking... but let's not hijack Shaun's thread

[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?

[guyincognito]

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.)

We had certain amount of autonomy in the election campaigns and I think it worked quite well so as long as we all agree on the core issues there should be some movement in certain areas.

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

I think we should just have one party leader, but we could have key contacts or something in areas.

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

There is only one party so it would be decided centrally. Like I've said above though there can be a certain amount of give for regions to do good work for their specific areas.

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?

No I think it just says what our aim is,it doesn't even mention policies.

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

No I think it's OK it doesn't say we can't have other policies, it just states the aim of the party which I think hasn't changed.

6. Should PPUK have policies outside our core policies?

I think as long as we keep our core policies it wouldn't hurt to have some others. However, we shouldn't let them dilute our focus or we could be seen as a party without direction.

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

I think it's OK curently but Im happy to discuss other peoples ideas.

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?

I think initially we should keep it as focused as possible and once we have a strong working group then we could move forward with any other duties we need.

[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!

[guyincognito]

I spent a year on the board of a local disability arts charity in Leicester (27a Access Artspace). This was a very challenging role working along with a number of strong minded individuals. I helped the charity through one of it's most turbulent times, finding a new home after the building they were renting was sold.

At 27a there were some big personalities and it was sometimes difficult to reach agreements but we always got there in the end. At work i regularly resolve disputes and give uncomfortable news so I think I have some useful experience I could share.

Minute taking is not my strong point I'll be honest but I'm willing to work at it if required.

I'm not currently on http://identi.ca/ and while I think a number of businesses have significant influence over politicians I'm not a conspiracy theorist.

I hope this answers your questions.

Shaun