Forum: changes to constitution not passed

Chairman Paul Plim ran through proposals which had included leaving constitutional matters to the committee rather than use up valuable time at Forum meetings discussing them.

The Forum meets up four times a year to discuss matters of public concern and meetings take approximately two hours.

The executive committee had drafted a leaflet outlining the aims of the Forum and how it works - this was called Bexhill Town Forum Constitution - Making the Most of Meetings.

The idea of this was to “improve clarity” according to the executive committee which sees its own role as improving communication between the Forum and Rother District Council.

Mr Plim commented: “Rother District Council needs to use Bexhill Town Forum as a consultative vehicle.

“That is how it needs to be.”

“We are in effect a town council ourselves. We are a forum. We need to show the district council what we want.”

The leaflet outlined powers of the executive committee such as filling its own vacancies, co-opting other members and deciding how long for, and approving any changes or amendments to the constitution after prior notice had been given to the Forum itself.

The proposals were not supported by a number of speakers who expressed their reaction and concern - including Margaret Jones of Bexhill Youth Council, who did not accept the new Code of Conduct, Frank Stratten who asked where it stated how long executive committee members serve before re-election, and Paul Cortell who felt the executive committee having final say on the document went against British democratic tradition.

The question was also raised as to which was the “supreme body” - the Forum or the executive committee.