HOME PAGE | FACTFILES | QUOTES | COMMENT FORM |

Rawson's reasons

What's here? The portrait of a blinking idiot
Presenting me with a schedule! I will read it.
The Merchant of Venice, Act II, Sc ix.

It was moving, and not a little surprising, to read that many will be upset by Chris Rawson withdrawing his nomination as Deputy General Secretary. We had no idea that this was so but then, of course, we had been misled by hearing that the Chairman had read out at a GC meeting a formal statement of the EBGC that "it would be highly inappropriate for him to hold office due to his past dealings" - and then it came to our ears that his proposal as DGS had been "widely, but not universally, derided." (Not everyone knows what is going on, of course. Remember that Japanese soldier they stumbled on a few years ago who thought WW2 was still on, even though he had noticed it had been a bit quiet for a while?) Anyway, it has been useful to be able to read the Rawson reasoning in his recent statement.

First of all, he says, "ill-informed e-mails" had begun to circulate. Funny how so many e-mails concerning Rawson, or Stuart-King, or the defectors to ICUS, are always either ill-informed, or hate-filled, or both. Why is that? Why were they wrong this time? Rawson is silent about this.

Then postings started to appear "on a certain website." A little vague but we think that may have been ours. We thought the idea of proposing someone with Rawson's record for Deputy General Secretary - for any ACU&S office, really - was just absurd and bizarre. So we said so. Is that undemocratic? Or indeed wrong?

Raking over old coals, he says, just discredits everyone. Not so. It discredits those who let down and nearly destroyed the Association by deliberate financial jiggery-pokery. Further, Lord Griffiths urged us all to draw a line under events. True, but perhaps His Lordship is accustomed to people behaving honourably by resigning when they are caught out.

Apparently Rawson has heard from some thinking a "vocal minority" have "seriously undermined the democratic process." Again untrue, because it is Rawson's own action in withdrawing his candidature that has denied members the chance to vote for him, not our remarks. While on democracy, just how democratic is it that he has become an "elected" member of General Council without a single vote being cast, because he was, in fact, the only candidate standing? That may be democracy in Zimbabwe or Guinea, but last time we looked it was slightly different here.

As members will recall, Rawson could not accompany his wife to the last AGM. This was a pity, because we had some questions to ask him. The questions remain and, with any luck, the democratic process will fare better at the AGM this year. Surely he will not miss two in a row, particularly as he is an "elected" member of General Council. Towards the end of his statement Rawson says, "I remain happy to discuss Association matters with any member." Some members may wish to take him up on this.