11 April 2011

DM - a personal account from a first-timer

Final speech at DM

The NUJ DM in Southport 8-10 April 2011 was an initially bewildering but ultimately energising experience - 2.5 hard days of relentless speeches and voting. Here is my personal account, as a first-time delegate. I can't wait to get the next Journalist to see what actually was decided!

First: why DM? Well, that was answered in the very first motion that called for the Delegate Meeting to be made Annual again. Speakers against used the cost card and it was defeated 77 to 63. The discussion went on so long that the rest of the Order Paper was ruled out of time by the SOC (Standing Orders Committee). To understand what is going on we needed a mountain of paperwork: the Final Agenda booklet, the Annual Report and the Order Papers given out each morning and afternoon that outline any composite motions etc worked out by the 'horse trading' going on in back rooms. Any motions out of time were mopped up at the end of later sessions, and nothing was left out by the end.

In between motions we were treated to various presentations, including Members of Honour awards and an emotive address from Columbian journalist Claudia Julieta Duque. Most motions were carried unanimously; some spectacularly failed. One was a tie, the first in DM history. It was motion 144, proposed by the Irish Executive Council and calling for the workings of the Editorial Advisory Board of The Journalist to be reviewed. After a recount it was announced that under Standing Orders, the 54-54 tie would fail.

One motion that will directly affect our branch was no. 136 that amends rule 3, so that election to the union be no longer subject to a vote of hands at a branch meeting. All we can do is test that applicants meet the objective membership criteria as outlined by Rule 2 and they are in. Another interesting motion was no. 110 that ensures that only news (or information) gatherers are entitled to hold a press card - and that a new photo should be supplied on renewal. As someone pointed out, in the old days, everyone got a press card - I still get sent one, and the photo on it is ancient. Motion 91 condemning the actions of Newsquest will have relevance to our Argus members.

The 60+ group (I went along to their fringe meeting) was recognised for the first time in motion 69, although an amendment to pay expenses to meetings was defeated. In another motion 139 a plea to reduce the eligibilty for Life Membership to 30 years from 40 failed, again for cost reasons. The figure of £435,000 to implement this was disputed and it was also pointed out that people in the 'retired' category are not allowed to hold Branch offices or attend DM - something that will have to be looked into.

The DM was livened up by the presence of several student members sponsored by various branches, tweeting and making speeches. Internships versus work experience was a hot topic and motion 133 recommended ways we could attract more students into the union. London Freelance Branch's Cashback for interns campaign was praised, and the passing of Motion 128 could make membership easier in that you may only have to show you earn a quarter of your income from journalism, rather than half (subject to consultation). And no. 135 encouraged branches like ours to recruit more internet-related workers into the NUJ.

So, the message is: go out and recruit!

That's a quick round-up. I'll bring the paperwork along to the next meeting if anyone has any other questions.

Some other write-ups:

http://littlemiss-angelabrooks.blogspot.com/

http://londonphotographers.org/2011/04/nuj-delegate-meeting-report/

http://blogs.pressgazette.co.uk/wire/7721

http://www.bristolnuj.org.uk/2011/04/11/dm-2011-what-happened/

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Alas, the motion on changing from 50% to 25% was changed by the amendment to a consultation on changing it rather than a rule change itself.

Andy Smith said...

I would have thought the decision by the branch to admit a new member would still be by a show of hands.

If the vote is against then the membership secretary would contact membership either to explain why the branch took this view or, more often I would guess, to ask for more information before reconsidering.

fredblog said...

Thanks for the corrections - I was a bit bewildered! 'm hoping the Journalist will spell everything out in due course!