Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
Whether I agree with the decision or not I understand why the OSC would want to keep channels open between them and the club. Personally (and I've said this to Kevin) I see a difference between his role as OSC GenSec and as the OSC representative on City Matters. I wouldn't have an issue with him holding regular meetings with the club on OSC matters (which he needs to do) but not attending CM meetings.Do we need to start posting our membership cards on here now aswell? A lot of us are members, myself included, and that's the reason some of us are fuming, a decision by the group representing us that we pay to be members of, was made without any consultation or chance to vote on the matter.
The attitude of the OSC is well-established and has been for years. It will help its members but will not get involved in club politics, which led to the split between them and the Centenary Group during the Swales Out years. But a few people fuming on a forum is not a mass Tiananmen Square-type protest. Should the OSC be more vocal in representing its members? You'd get a variety of views on that I suspect but any representative group, like the OSC or CM, has to take balanced decisions where there are pros and cons. There are mechanisms for raising issues to the OSC Executive I believe and that's the only way you'll get anything meaningful done.
As I said earlier, I'm getting increasingly disturbed by unelected groups like 1894 whipping things up from the sidelines.