Conservation DistList Archives [Date] [Subject] [Author] [SEARCH]

Subject: Convergence of UK conservation organizations

Convergence of UK conservation organizations

From: Tina Marshall <tina>
Date: Thursday, June 24, 2004
    The posting by Jane MacAusland and her co-signatories is to be
    greatly regretted, as it adds nothing to a constructive
    discussion of convergence. The letter they submitted to IPC for
    publication was rejected on the advice of our solicitor as it
    contained a number of factual errors, misleading statements and
    innuendoes, some concerning third parties who raised objections
    to its publication. It also alleged malpractice by a past
    Committee during the process of accreditation and by the present
    Committee. The letter was not refused as quoted in the posting
    'due to criticism of its content'--there is no such phrase in
    our letter of refusal.  We would be happy to post the full text
    of our letter.

    IPC Annual General Meeting held on 25 March 2004 gave every
    opportunity for members to express their opinion and concerns
    about convergence and they did so.  The Notes of the Discussion
    very fully record the questions raised by a number of people,
    including the signatories of the letter.  The Notes have been
    circulated with the June edition of Paper Conservation News and
    are now available at <URL:> Earlier
    correspondence on convergence, including that from some of the
    signatories of the posting, can be found on our web site.

    Members have also been able to express their views in response
    to the Convergence Consultation Document and Feedback
    Questionnaire, sent to every member of IPC (as well as to
    members of other conservation bodies).  Such a consultation
    constitutes guidance from our members. This document is
    available on our web site.  Members may also find
    'Convergence--a Factsheet' on our web site.

    The signatories (seven of who regrettably have not been at the
    AGM and one who is no longer a member of IPC), are well aware
    that extensive discussions are taking place on all aspects of
    the new organisation and the proposals are undergoing major
    revision in accordance with members' expressed wishes. The
    importance and preparation of a Business Plan, which includes
    staffing requirements, was extensively discussed by the
    consultant at the AGM and covered in the Notes.

    The IPC is a charity and its elected Trustees are bound to act
    within rules set by the Charity Commissioners and by IPC's own
    Statutes.  The requirements of a Notice of an EGM and voting are
    clearly set out and binding upon the Trustees. In addition, as
    in previous matters, our solicitor will provide guidance.

    Finally, we are pleased to note that the signatories are no
    longer "against some sort of convergence per se"; four of them
    have offered to be part of a team to read  draft proposals on
    the financial and operation autonomy of the special interest
    groups within the new organisation. IPC welcomes all informed
    debate and constructive suggestions from every members to enable
    all of us to face the 21st century, the challenges of which are
    so different from the one IPC faced 27 years ago.

    IPC Executive Committee

Tina Marshall
Institute of Paper Conservation

                  Conservation DistList Instance 18:3
                  Distributed: Thursday, June 24, 2004
                        Message Id: cdl-18-3-002
Received on Thursday, 24 June, 2004

[Search all CoOL documents]