[pp.int.general] Fwd: Regarding the status of the statutes

[Glenn Kerbein]

Everyone, this message was initially intended to be sent yesterday.
Apparently it didn't get through to the list.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Regarding the status of the statutes
Date: 	Fri, 16 Apr 2010 13:46:47 -0700
From: 	Brittany Phelps <brittany.phelps at pirate-party.us>
To: 	pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net



Attention fellow pirates:

I hope this finds all of you well. With preperations for the conference
underway, I will make this as quick and to the point as I can manage.

I fully understand that there's a great deal that needs doing for the
conference, and that things get put off, or fall by the wayside, etc.,
in sight of the preparations themselves. Furthermore, I  fully sympathize.

That said, I can't help but be troubled by the method by which the
statutes are being drafted. I have heard for weeks that the statutes
were in various stages of readiness, and yet even today, when the first
events for the conference are to be held, the statutes are not finished.
How is this an exemplary display of transparency? To finalize the
language and put it on the table for voting, all in one day?

I am uncertain as to how other parties are handling party preference in
regards to how their delegates will vote, but the USPP was intending on
having a meeting to go over these statutes and let the party itself
decide, allowing Glenn Kerbein's and my votes to be purely
representative of the membership's intentions. As to how that's going to
happen with the statutes still unfinished, I'm not quite sure yet.

Allow me to reiterate: Brittany Phelps and myself (Glenn Kerbein) are
exceptionally grateful for being a part of PPI. The Brussels conference
is a major milestone that all pirate Parties can revel in. That being
said, as heads of the United States Pirate Party, we are responsible to
our voting membership and to the public at large. Any motion carried by
the International Pirate Party partnership  must be also be carried by
each individual party. As such, we simply must have the proper
information presented to us in order to validate any international
statutes; each statute will (without fail) see our voting bodies so that
they may ratify them as they see fit. In order for democracy to churn
it's wheels, it's best that we all collectively see every by-law,
mandate, compromise, and modicum of meeting action beforehand.

Ladies and Gentlemen, transparency is not an optional function to
international relations. It is a necessary facet of cohesion.

It is my understanding that modes of travel have been severely hindered
by the geological activity in Iceland. I'm glad to see productive
collaboration between participants of the meeting, and saddened by each
loss of delgates. However, the prioritization of transport is
disasterous; it's each delgate's prerogative, and their sole
responsibility. Organizers need to adjust to the situation
appropriately, but their primary function is to ensure a clear line of
communication remains open.

As such outspoken advocates of transparency, we have a strenuous duty to
maintain it during our own proceedings, lest we fall into the trap of
simply paying lip service to the ideal. While the reasons leading to the
current situation are far from condemnable, or so I imagine, the result
for each individual party, and for PPI as a whole, is pretty damning. If
we cannot practice transparency within our own institutions, how can we
dare demand it from our various governments?

Sincerely,

Brittany Phelps and Glenn Kerbein,
Administrator and Operations Officer of the United States Pirate Party