Re: [nc-intake] committee composition

["Philip Sheppard" <philip.sheppard@aim.be>]

Roberto makes some good points.

I believe the intake committee should:
- prioritise the agenda
- composite items together with a common theme
- reject items and pass them onto more appropriate bodies if they are not
true NC issues

I still think this can be done with a few people.

I cannot imagine a situation were one constituency's important issue is
proposed to the intake committee who reject it for no good reason and then
that constituency says nothing more! Would they not raise a point of order
at the start of the NC meeting? Would they not lobby the NC chairman
beforehand? Would they not scream to the entire NC list?
Of course they would.  So, what is served by having a large intake
committee?

The danger of  a "representative" intake committee is that it becomes a
forum for substantive discussion and removes power from the NC itself. The
key debating ground becomes the intake committee not the NC.

My vote goes to leaving the committee the same size as it is now - i.e.
those receiving this e-mail!
----------------------------------------------------
And I really believe that the "last supper" staging of NC meetings has to
stop. This was a request I made in Egypt but to no avail. The problem is
that hotel banqueting staff will do their standard set up unless they have
direct instructions to do something different.

The seating set up should facilitate communication within the NC meeting,
with the chair given a direct view of every NC member. The usual set up
facilitates communication from NC to observers - a strange idea as observers
do not participate. We know this, the hotel staff do not.

A alternative set up would be a circular table (or seminar square) at the
centre with observers on all sides.
Philip