RHS rule changes should be opposed
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.From Mrs E. A. Greaves Sir: The proposal to move the Lindley Library to Wisley is to be discussed at the annual general meeting of the Royal Horticultural Society on 21 February. Also at that meeting, members are asked to vote on a new set of by-laws stipulating inter alia that any resolution to an annual general meeting must be signed by 100 members. At present, any single member can put forward such a resolution. Which of us knows personally, or can contact, 99 other members? (The National Trust, withfive times the membership of the Royal Horticultural Society, requires only 10 signatures on a resolution.)
Had the council of the RHS announced its plans for the Lindley Library by September, any member could have put forward a resolution opposing the move. Next year, if the new by-laws are passed, such a resolution (always supposing the council has not already pre-empted the issue) will need 100 signatures. The new by-laws also increase the number of members' signatures required to call a special meeting from 50 to 500, thereby making it virtually impossible to force a vote on the Lindley Library issue by calling a special meeting.
I suggest that, to retain the democratic right to vote on the Lindley Library move, and on any other matters of future concern, members should vote against the proposed new by-laws. Postal votes have to be in by 17 February.
Yours faithfully, E. A. Greaves London, W5
5 February
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments