Unfortunately CISV's motions are still quite a bit of a read, but since we still haven't made it to motions in SMS format, as suggested by Nic/GBR ("'CISV GB MVS 2 CUT PPR W8'), I worked myself through the rest of the bunch:
Mtn05-AIM10 IJB
APPROVE.
I have nothing to add to the IJRs rationale, it just all makes more sense this way.
Mtn02-AIM10-BRA Travel Insurance
ABSTAIN.
This really depends on what other NAs are experiencing. In any case, I would always prefer more constructive motions. Here, it would have been great, if Brazil had researched into and presented alternatives instead of delegating this to the IRMC.
Mtn06-AIM10 IEC Restructure of ERC
Mtn08-AIM10-IEC Restructure of ODC
APPROVE.
Even if I agree with these motions, I'm having a hangover concerning restructuring projects. So much depends on the specific projects being carried out, the transitional needs and of course personal, I'm tired of an ongoing process of restructuring the committees into subcommittees and now departments. Does all this resorting and rebranding really make a difference? I doubt it. More than ever at this point in time, we are in need for great leaders, that are inspirational, real hockey players and good communicators, as the latest wave of resignations shows quite clearly. New structures won't solve this problem.
Mtn07-AIM10 IEC Insurance Company
APPROVE.
The idea of self-insurance has been around for more than 10 years, and I'm so very glad people have finally walked the talk and things are happening. Thanks to Brett/USA seems to have worked the lion's share, from my (limited) view.
Mtn11-AIM10 COL Development Policy
REJECT
In 2002 I myself got a motion approved that made the IEC analyse reasons for programme growth and decline. The results were interesting, but in the end underwhelming. As much as I try to do statistically valid research into CISV, I just don't believe the results of such a retrospective analysis will yield and useful results. CISV is a complicated beast and its developments are mostly chaotic. Still, I think the rationale behind this motion is that our development policies have mostly failed, or better: We don't even know what we are doing. But once again, I would prefer a more constructive motion that suggests more specific measures on what to do instead of delegating a problem to a new working group.
Mtn12-AIM10 COL Interchange Junior Leader
APPROVE
Compared to any other CISV programme Interchange has the worst leader per participant ratio. Even if families are involved, it is a necessary step in the right direction to improve the educational content of one of our weaker programmes.
Mtn13-AIM10-ODC-IEC Annual Revision of C-15
APPROVE
I've just always been wondering if any NAs ever get downgraded (from A). Also I'd love to see a color-coded chart some day, of all current category A NAs, I'm sure there'd be a lot of red areas...
Mtn05-AIM10 IJB
APPROVE.
I have nothing to add to the IJRs rationale, it just all makes more sense this way.
Mtn02-AIM10-BRA Travel Insurance
ABSTAIN.
This really depends on what other NAs are experiencing. In any case, I would always prefer more constructive motions. Here, it would have been great, if Brazil had researched into and presented alternatives instead of delegating this to the IRMC.
Mtn06-AIM10 IEC Restructure of ERC
Mtn08-AIM10-IEC Restructure of ODC
APPROVE.
Even if I agree with these motions, I'm having a hangover concerning restructuring projects. So much depends on the specific projects being carried out, the transitional needs and of course personal, I'm tired of an ongoing process of restructuring the committees into subcommittees and now departments. Does all this resorting and rebranding really make a difference? I doubt it. More than ever at this point in time, we are in need for great leaders, that are inspirational, real hockey players and good communicators, as the latest wave of resignations shows quite clearly. New structures won't solve this problem.
Mtn07-AIM10 IEC Insurance Company
APPROVE.
The idea of self-insurance has been around for more than 10 years, and I'm so very glad people have finally walked the talk and things are happening. Thanks to Brett/USA seems to have worked the lion's share, from my (limited) view.
Mtn11-AIM10 COL Development Policy
REJECT
In 2002 I myself got a motion approved that made the IEC analyse reasons for programme growth and decline. The results were interesting, but in the end underwhelming. As much as I try to do statistically valid research into CISV, I just don't believe the results of such a retrospective analysis will yield and useful results. CISV is a complicated beast and its developments are mostly chaotic. Still, I think the rationale behind this motion is that our development policies have mostly failed, or better: We don't even know what we are doing. But once again, I would prefer a more constructive motion that suggests more specific measures on what to do instead of delegating a problem to a new working group.
Mtn12-AIM10 COL Interchange Junior Leader
APPROVE
Compared to any other CISV programme Interchange has the worst leader per participant ratio. Even if families are involved, it is a necessary step in the right direction to improve the educational content of one of our weaker programmes.
Mtn13-AIM10-ODC-IEC Annual Revision of C-15
APPROVE
I've just always been wondering if any NAs ever get downgraded (from A). Also I'd love to see a color-coded chart some day, of all current category A NAs, I'm sure there'd be a lot of red areas...
Can we get an update of what passed and what didn't and why?