September meeting with Defra?

[Elton]

I've just been sent these links. Not sure of the validity of the data, but it may stop you whining, Steve

 

http://s3.supload.com/files/default/minutes1.jpg

http://s3.supload.com/files/default/minutes2.jpg

http://s3.supload.com/files/default/minutes3.jpg

[glennk]

Attendees :

 

Leon Roskilly - SACN

 

I thought he had retired from SACN ?

[Leon Roskilly]

I've just been sent these links. Not sure of the validity of the data, but it may stop you whining, Steve

 

Elton,

 

They are the draft minutes sent out by DEFRA for comment by those who attended.

 

The final version (there have been comments!) will be published on the DEFRA website.

 

(Arrangements are also being made to publish the RSA Strategy sub-group minutes and papers on the DEFRA website).

Edited February 14, 2009 by Leon Roskilly

[Elton]

Glenn,

 

Those papers may be works of fiction for all we know. I also saw it stated that Angling Trust members fish exclusively on a catch and release basis. In my opinion, these are either minutes that haven't been agreed, and therefore amended, before publication, or somebody having a laugh. Maybe someone who was there will clarify.

 

 

 

{Edit after original post: see Leon's note, posted at the same time as mine}

[glennk]

Ah right, sorry. Ill wait for the official minutes to see if Leon was really there.

[Steve Coppolo]

Oh, so things do get discussed at these meetings, then? I was beginning to think that they all just sat there and stared at each other for a few hours, then went home, from the information that we get from the misrepresentatives who attend. Mind you, looking at some of that, I can see why they would want to keep it all secret. But how long do they think they can keep pulling strokes behind the backs of the anglers they are misrepresenting?

 

Like Glenn, I'll also be interested to see if Leon was actually there. I'll also be interested to see whether Richard Ferre did actuallly say that Angling Trust members exclusively practice catch and release.

 

What's the story with these draft minutes, anyway? Either they are a true account of what was said, or someone has just made it up. Which one is it? Or does releasing draft minutes give people a chance to withdraw certain comments they made, that they don't want to be made public? It all sounds a bit like an arse covering excercise to me.

 

When I see things like those papers, it makes me realise that I am right to keep asking questions and doubting the ability of those who insist on speaking for us all.

[glennk]

Its seems to be how things are done Steve. A true version of events is circulated amongst those who were there. They are then given the opportunity to have them changed so they dont like they told a pack of lies. Then the unreal version comes out and noone has a clue what really went on.

 

No quite sure how you get out of telling everyone youve retired then continuing as before.

[Elton]

What's the story with these draft minutes, anyway?

 

All we're ever entitled to see is a sanitised version of events, unfortunately*. We rely on the transparency of those who represent us to give a full account - we'll never get it from the Government. I imagine that the angling club representatives there will provide such an account, as they have to stand face to face with the members they represent (and probably poll their opinion before attending any meetings).

 

I did ask Defra about the selection criteria for RSA representation at their meetings a little while back, but was told by Julie Fitton that, "decisions on the structure of the group i.e. who should be invited to the meetings have not yet been taken." She copied Anthony Hynes in on our conversation, but he chose not to elaborate on this. (December 15th, 2008)

 

I intend to make future requests formally through the Freedom Of Information Act, as I fear it's the only way of being included 'in the loop'. I recommend that others do the same.

 

* Bearing in mind that the person taking the notes can make mistakes, that's not always a bad thing. For example, I'm sure that RF didn't really suggest that all sea angling Angling Trust members fish exclusively on a catch and release basis. That wouldn't just be stupid, it would be an out-and-out lie.

[glennk]

* Bearing in mind that the person taking the notes can make mistakes, that's not always a bad thing. For example, I'm sure that RF didn't really suggest that all sea angling Angling Trust members fish exclusively on a catch and release basis. That wouldn't just be stupid, it would be an out-and-out lie.

 

Now that is funny

 

Wasnt it forrest gump who said stupid is as stupid does.

[Leon Roskilly]

* Bearing in mind that the person taking the notes can make mistakes, that's not always a bad thing.

 

 

Especially when the minute taker really isn't au fait with what's being discussed, or the background and terminology, and trying to follow conversations, often when people are talking across one another, interrupting, disagreeing ,or seeking information and clarification.

 

Minutes are not a transcript of the entire meeting, but record the major relevant points and decisions.

 

That means that the minute-taker has to try to filter out what they consider to be relevant from the irrelevant etc.

 

(This meeting, like most meetings, was over a couple of hours of intense debate, and would probably result in a huge pile of paper if everything said by all was recorded)

 

That's why draft minutes are usually issued to attendees first, and those attending have the opportunity to pick up on mistakes and important ommissions on what was actually said before the minutes are published. (Many minutes in a series of meetings are not published until after the following meeting agrees them).

 

Anyone using the opportunity to attempt to amend what was actually said would be on a loser, as that certainly wouldn't be agreed to by other attendees.

 

So, draft minutes are an unreliable guide.

 

Even more so probably a particular individual's own biased recollections of the meeting.

 

Ask any attendee of any meeting to write down their own recollection, and you'd probably begin to wonder whether they had all been at the same meeting at all!