2011.07 Report

2011.07 GLCPO Annual Communication Report

On Wednesday morning, Peter Renzland offered Corrections to the Minutes, which contained false assertions.

Grand Master Daniels refused to allow the Grand Lodge to consider these corrections.

On Thursday morning, Renzland attempted to give notice of motions, in accordance with Sections 23 (h) and 70 of the Constitution.

Grand Master Daniels refused to allow the Notice of Motions to be given to the Grand Lodge.

Renzland then urged the Grand Master to consult with his Constitutional advisors on the matter.

Grand Master Daniels threatened to have Renzland removed from the hall, by the Grand Director of Ceremonies.

Renzland, invoking Section 28 of the Constitution, appealed to the Grand Lodge from the Ruling of the Grand Master.

Grand Master Daniels read out Section 28 and then refused to allow the appeal to be considered by the Grand Lodge.

GLCPO Constitution

23. The Grand Master having taken his seat and opened Grand Lodge, the following shall be the order of business:

a) confirming the minutes of previous meetings;

. . .

g) reading, receiving and considering the reports of special committees;

h) presenting and considering notices of motion;

i) general business.

28. Any Brother present in Grand Lodge shall have the right of appeal to Grand Lodge from any decision or ruling of the Grand Master given in Grand Lodge.

29. When a Brother appeals from the decision of the Grand Master given while Grand Lodge is in session he shall state briefly the grounds for his appeal. The Grand Master may then state his reasons for his decision and, without further debate, shall put the question, "Shall the decision of the chair be sustained?" When the vote has been taken the decision of Grand Lodge shall be announced.

70. The Constitution of Grand Lodge may be amended at the annual meeting thereof by an affirmative vote of two-thirds of the members present and voting. A Notice of Motion in writing, stating distinctly the proposed amendment shall have been given at the preceding annual meeting or shall have been received by the Grand Secretary on or before the 1st day of January preceding the meeting at which the motion is to be considered, or at such shorter period as may appear to the Grand Master on consultation with the Committee on Constitution and Jurisprudence to be just and appropriate considering the special circumstances of the case. The Committee on Constitution and Jurisprudence shall have reported favourably on the constitutional validity of the proposed amendment and Grand Lodge shall have adopted its report. (1991)

Background Information

On Thursday, July 14, Peter Renzland sent two messages to the Grand Secretary:

1. This message is a courtesy to advise you of my intention to move, in accordance with Section 23(a), that the Minutes of the 2010 Annual Communications be corrected, as they contain substantial inaccuracies on pages 71, 76, and 77.

2. This message is a courtesy to advise you of my intention to present, in accordance with Sections 23(h) and 70, Notices of Motions to amend the Constitution, at the 2011 Annual Communication.

These messages were cc'd to the DDGM and the WM. The G.S. promptly acknowledged receipt.

On Monday, July 18th, the BGP meeting decided to publish the Proposer's Name with each Constitutional Amendment Proposal, as had been the practice until recently.

On Tuesday, July 19th, Peter Renzland gave the G.S. printed, plastic-covered, 3-hole prepared copies of the Corrections to the Minutes and the Notices of Motions. The G.S. put these in his 3-Ring Binder.

On Wednesday, July 20th, in the morning, Peter Renzland informed the Grand Lodge of his intention to give Notices of Motion.

On Wednesday afternoon, Peter Renzland informally repeated his intention to give Notices of Motion according to Section 70 to the G.S. The G.S. insisted that Section 70 does not allow this. Peter Renzland told the G.S. that he wanted to give notice at the AC session, so that the text would be entered into the record and published in the Proceedings unaltered, because that text had been altered when it was sent to the G.S. The G.S. insisted that he had not altered the text.

On Wednesday afternoon, Peter Renzland informally repeated his intention to give notices of Motion at the A.C. session to the G.M. The G.M also insisted that this could not be done. The G.M. further stated that if the Proposals were the same as the 2010 proposals, they could not be re-submitted for three years.