| BST Response to Fans Parliament Proposal 22:04 - May 25 with 4523 views | BFCSupportersTrust |
The decision by the Club to set up a Fans Parliament has been met with understandable cynicism. Supporters question the owners’ commitment to consultation and power sharing, given their recent track record in both categories. Their antagonistic and dismissive attitude towards fans has led to supporters leaving the Club in thousands, not because of poor results but because of the owners’ behaviour.
Blackpool Supporters’ Trust shares these concerns. The current owners of the Club have refused to speak to the fans’ democratically chosen representatives for more than two years and have acted so badly that even BSA, their own Supporters Association, would have nothing more to do with them
However, a Fans Parliament could conceivably be an opportunity for profound change in the relationship between supporters and the Club if it is implemented in the right way. If this is truly the point at which the owners wish to reverse their position and start to put football first, then for that aim to be achieved the following constitutional principles need to be applied:
1) An interim Parliament of 12 should be appointed as soon as possible from among the applicants, with selection being made by a truly independent fans panel comprising the BSA Chairman, the BST Chairman and one non-aligned candidate chosen by these two Chairmen.
2) One member of this Fans Parliament will be elected by supporters to sit on the club board and will have the equivalent voting rights of someone owning 20% of BFC Limited shares.
3) The interim Parliament selected by the independent panel will be charged with ensuring that a full democratic election of all Blackpool supporters takes place by November 2015 with anyone, season ticket holder or not, able to put themselves forward for the fully elected Fans Parliament
4) The Fans Parliament will meet formally four times per year with the Chairman of the Club, directors, football and departmental staff.
5) Prior to these formal meetings, members of the Parliament will meet with delegations from BST, BSA and other fans groups to agree agenda items and topics for discussion. The Parliament will also hold four public meetings for all fans to attend where further agenda items and topics might be agreed.
6) The Fans’ Board representative will be delegated by the Parliament to engage with the Club’s Board on all matters concerning the club and its business. He/she will report back to the Parliament and, excepting for issues requiring confidentiality, the actions and decisions of the Board and the Parliament will be made public within five working days of meetings taking place.
We believe that adherence to these six principles is the only way in which a Fans Parliament will ever have any credibility or opportunity to succeed, and more than that, is the only way in which the enormous rifts in our club might begin to be healed.
In addition we insist on an armistice for those who invaded the pitch at the Huddersfield game. It should be agreed forthwith that Club and fans together take responsibility for the situation.
This is not just about the democratisation of the club; it is about rescuing it from the abyss. Our club is dying and radical action needs to be taken if it is to be given life again. If the owners are really serious about continuing to be part of our Club than this is the very least that they need do.
Alternatively, they can sell the club when BST tables its offer and the Trust will implement all of the above principles on behalf of all supporters, in the interests of good governance and in line with our constitution and mandate.
|  | | |  |
| BST Response to Fans Parliament Proposal on 22:26 - May 25 with 4505 views | ribble |
Not a cat in hell's chance of being adopted but other than point 3 (which would raise major governance difficulties as it reads), I'm pretty much with you. | | | |
| BST Response to Fans Parliament Proposal on 22:31 - May 25 with 4496 views | TwelveAngryMen |
| BST Response to Fans Parliament Proposal on 22:26 - May 25 by ribble |
Not a cat in hell's chance of being adopted but other than point 3 (which would raise major governance difficulties as it reads), I'm pretty much with you. |
You are right Ribble
I suspect however that would be fine-tuned by the 12
Personally I'd set qualification by reference to 2/3 years STs in last 5 |  |
| |
| BST Response to Fans Parliament Proposal on 22:53 - May 25 with 4469 views | ribble |
| BST Response to Fans Parliament Proposal on 22:31 - May 25 by TwelveAngryMen |
You are right Ribble
I suspect however that would be fine-tuned by the 12
Personally I'd set qualification by reference to 2/3 years STs in last 5 |
Something like that although, as an alternative qualifier, I'd also throw in membership of a recognised supporters group for a minimum period, say 12 months. [Post edited 25 May 2015 22:56]
| | | |
| BST Response to Fans Parliament Proposal on 22:56 - May 25 with 4460 views | BiggieSeasider |
Part of me says that the Trust should have had additional conditions, such as those suggested by Beds about dropping legal action etc.
But then the part of me that is pretty sure that the main purpose of the Parliament in the first place is not to actually engage, but to give the impression of engagement just knows that none of that will be acceptable to the club, because it defeats the purpose of the Parliament in the first place.
An interesting response, and it will be interesting to see how it is acknowledged. If at all. | |
| |
| BST Response to Fans Parliament Proposal on 11:24 - May 26 with 4380 views | BFC_Tim |
| BST Response to Fans Parliament Proposal on 22:56 - May 25 by BiggieSeasider |
Part of me says that the Trust should have had additional conditions, such as those suggested by Beds about dropping legal action etc.
But then the part of me that is pretty sure that the main purpose of the Parliament in the first place is not to actually engage, but to give the impression of engagement just knows that none of that will be acceptable to the club, because it defeats the purpose of the Parliament in the first place.
An interesting response, and it will be interesting to see how it is acknowledged. If at all. |
The question is though how do you choose an independent panel to choose the 12 candidates  | |
| |
| BST Response to Fans Parliament Proposal on 17:56 - May 26 with 4350 views | oneswallow |
Two things: Have I missed this 'tabled bid' that is being put in by BST and if the above are all adhered to where does that leave BST as a campaign group? | | | |
| BST Response to Fans Parliament Proposal on 19:06 - May 26 with 4338 views | ribble |
| BST Response to Fans Parliament Proposal on 17:56 - May 26 by oneswallow |
Two things: Have I missed this 'tabled bid' that is being put in by BST and if the above are all adhered to where does that leave BST as a campaign group? |
On the first point, the bid is due to go in by late June apparently and on the second, not sure that's something we need to worry about really as KO will never agree to it. [Post edited 26 May 2015 19:08]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
