Occupy LSX General Assembly Minutes
1pm Monday 5th December 2011
--
SUMMARY OF DECISIONS
1. Shelter group will remove mattresses that currently underneath tents [Consensus reached]
2. Shelter will lend 4-5 tents to Occupy Leicester, who will return them. Now-empty tents that were bought with donations will be prioritised, followed by tents that have been abandoned for weeks. [Consensus reached]
3. We will ask people with dogs to camp at Finsbury Square [Consensus achieved]
--
Please raise your hand when you have something to say. Will run this GA informally, there is no need to have a formal structure.
There is a photographer working for the Portuguese newspaper Publico, he would like to know if it’s OK to take pictures for a repertoire on Occupy? Does anyone feel uncomfortable with this?
> I don’t like any pictures being taken of me at all!
> Only if they photoshop out this big spot on my face!
--
Welfare:
We are threadbare with our supply and materials. We hope to get everything sorted by the end of this week.
--
Economics:
There is a charitable appeal regarding the Goldman Sachs tax incident being made. UK Uncut is planning to sue for £10million, after our government representative agreed for them to be let off. They are asking for 20,000 people to donate £1 to make this happen - you can pay online on their website with PayPal, and it will cost £1.24. This is a practical thing that everyone can do, to show that nice deals done over nice meals can’t be got away with.
At tonights General Assembly we will be bringing back a revised version of the 6 point statement that was discussed at a GA a couple of weeks ago. A lot of work has been done on this, but it’s not that radical a revision. Without this in place, it is difficult for us to respond to developing news situations, such as the the Autumn Statement.
The Multi Faith group have organised a meeting with the Financial Services Authority, hopefully to talk about inviting people with particular economic knowledge into our group. Hopefully we can address the general problem of people not realising what everyone else is doing, working in harmony, not treading on each others toes.
A similar meeting with St Pauls Institute will take place on Wednesday at 7.30pm at the Oasis Centre on Westminster Bridge Road.
We’ll be discussing Economics WG proposals at this evening’s GA.
--
Legal:
Legal are taking witness statements all day. We need representatives from every working group for this, we need to organise them coming down.
> Some people think witness statements are only for people who seen they’ve seen a dodgy arrest or something - is this the case?
|
< Witness statements are firstly for people to say how they interact with the rest of the camp - an integrity statement. The second reason is to say positive or negative things that counteract the allegations being made against us - for example, acknowledging that there is a women’s tent.
Each of the 42 working groups have an integral part in bring here, and should give a statement about why they are here. This would not require a live performance in court.
--
DISCUSSION
Women’s tent and working group
--
There have been a few problems in the Women’s Safer Space, and we need a Working Group to be responsible for that space. I’m trying my best to look after it, and if any other female would like to help sort it, we can get a group together to be responsible for taking care of it and make sure it is a safe space.
We need women’s spokespeople to liaise and avoid potential difficulties.
> Is there currently a Women’s Working Group to look at sexism issues on the camp in general?
< No, there is not.
< There was a group of women meeting to discuss such issues at Finsbury Square.
> Women from the Global Women’s Strike have visited and supported this movement, such as Selma James.
The General Assembly at 7pm on Thursday will be about gender - another platform for us to raise and discuss this.
3 of us have agreed to work together on this, and will meet at 4.30pm in the Info Tent to move forward with this.
> It’s important that women run the women’s group, but it’s also important that men in the camp address sexist issues within their own male groups.
> That’s possibly even more important. The problem comes from the male side of this camp.
> Sober men are usually OK, people getting drunk is the problem.
< Some people get drunk and are not sexist.
> Drunk females are also a problem - everyone has a responsibility whether they’re male, female, drunk or sober.
> I agree that drunken behaviour is difficult to deal with. As a man, I would like to encourage other men to take personal responsibility that we don’t do sexism. I want to appeal to men that we take personal responsibility for our language, the way we behave towards out sisters, and that we challenge it when we see it in discussing and interacting with each other.
--
PROPOSAL
Shelter: Removing under-tent mattresses for health and safety reasons
--
At the moment we’re taking down empty tents and storing them. We’ve started at the top end of the site and worked our way down, so we have more room and can make the site tidier and more effective.
The tents being taken down and anything found in them are being stored in black bags in the Shelter tent. No personal articles will be lost, they have been taken care of responsibly.
We have cleared a lot of empty tents that have been blown by the wind, but I need need you support. We are having difficulty with some people who are stacking pallets on mattresses on boxes underneath their tents - this is not going to run. They think they’re going to be warmer, but they will not be. I need your support to say that this is not going to help the camp.
Someone staying at Finsbury Square is the owner of the mattresses, and has said that he will not move these tents until we have GA consensus.. I would like ask the GA for consensus that we can not have mattresses under tents. The legal team are also concerned about this.
> Maybe we can get consensus from this group on that approach. Practically speaking, we should speak to the person who’s mattresses they are and ask them to come to GA.
> He said that if the GA makes a decision, he would abide by it. My concern is with the health and safety - with a mattress under the tent, and water in the mattress will freeze and it will be so cold for the person sleeping in the tent that it is dangerous.
> The mattress under the tents belong to someone in the Press and Design working group. He was saying ‘I don’t care - I want my mattresses out’. I said I can’t do either of these things as Shelter - I have to take it to the GA.
> This may never happen, but if it gets very cold a rat or mouse could nest in the mattress - it’s a possibility. I don’t fancy that.
OK, let’s test for consensus that Shelter negotiate the removal of these mattresses with respect, fairness, communicating with appropriate body language and way of speaking.
Do we have consensus? Any objections?
> I would like to amend to clarify that this only applies to mattresses underneath tents - it’s OK to have mattresses inside tents.
OK. Do we have consensus?
[Consensus reached]
--
PROPOSAL
Lending 4-5 surplus tents to Occupy Leicester
--
Occupy Leicester are asking us if they can borrow 4-5 tents, and as a member of the Shelter working group I would like to ask the GA if this is OK?
> The grey and orange tents were bought from Tesco on the day of occupation, using funds donated from Occupy - they belong to the movement, they are not private property.
Occupy Leicester have said that they will return the tents. Some may be owned by individuals who have left them here. Currently they are being stored in the Shelter tent.
Are there any clarifying questions?
> You can’t give away other people’s tents.
> One or two tents have been empty for weeks - they belong to somebody, but have been abandoned for weeks.
> The orange and brown tents are not anybody’s private property.
> I agree that they are part of Occupy, and if they have been abandoned then they can be taken. We should amend this proposal to ensure we pick out the grey and orange tents first.
OK, we will prioritise grey and orange tents to be the ones sent up to Leicester, and any others will be tents that have been empty for several weeks.
Does everyone agree? Are there any objections?
> I think in a way it’s alright, but it would be good if there could be an announcement on the website so people who have gone away have got time to get there tent back before losing it. Let’s create this action beforehand.
D> The guy from Occupy Leicester is going back there at 9.30pm this evening - we can’t do it in time.
> If anyone says ‘that tent is my tent’, we will bring it straight back down again.
The objector is happy with that - do we have consensus?
[Consensus achieved]
> If we take a photograph of all the tents we send, there will be a record.
--
Legal:
Police are using new surveillance methods, including CCTV on hats and helmets as they walk through the camp.
Perhaps there are 2 reasons for this:
1. For public order incidents - if an alleged assault takes place, they have recorded video evidence of what’s happened.
2. To do with the letter being passed around that talks about hostile reconnaissance reports concerning individuals that would fit the anti-capitalist profile.
So, to sum up - if you feel that you’re an anti-capitalist, then the cops have your number. If an incident does occur on site, and you respond to it and the police respond to it, bear in mind that they may well be filming the incident. You must approach with caution and consider they will be filming it. Body language is an important thing to consider when this sort of thing occurs.
> The only way the police can move us away without a court order is if public order has broken down. If we have a sane sober balanced person present, then this will provide an independent witness.
> Sometimes when the police come onto the camp they do there job. There is the odd incident where they do need to come on to camp, and have had a genuine reason to speak up, remove, or arrest somebody, every now and then. If everybody comes out in force and shouts “shame on you” and practically kettles the police, then that will be recorded. So it’s important that if the police are up to something, whether we think it’s right or wrong, seeing as it’s being recorded, perhaps it’s best to stay away.
> I disagree. I think that in terms of the police, it depends on the situation. If the law is on our side, we stand united with the police. Sometimes the law is against us, so it’s better to police ourselves. Sometimes people make the situation worse. Collectively we should have some kind or response. If the police are being heavy-handed, we need some kind of passive response at least. In terms of shouting “shame on you” - if there is consensus that the police are doing something shameful, we should.
< But people don’t check first.
> I’ve been doing tranquility support at night. The City of London police are trying there best to live up to their office. They have a good rapport with the tranquility team. The police know their boundaries, and leave internal affairs to tranquility. Tranquility have made it clear, and invited the police in on occasions. We need to develop a relationship with the police - they’re not our enemy.
> According to this letter, we are officially officially classed as a domestic extremist terrorist group! [Ironic cheer]
--
Water:
We have had our water supply cut off by the City of London. Allegedly this happens every year because of the threat of frozen piping, which may or may not be true. Some working groups are looking into finding another source of water.
> The same thing happened at democracy village and parliament square.
> With the church on side, they could provide a drinking tap for us.
> I’m on church liaison, and spoke with one of the Canons yesterday. I’ll be meeting with this chap at 3pm, and will be talking about this. The church aren’t supplying us with water at present.
--
PROPOSAL
Dogs on Site:
The matter of dogs - there have been 4 occasions of cleaning dog mess up. We would really like dog owners not to oppose us in making an area for them to be located. The dogs shit, and we have to clean it up.
Another suggestion is for them to go to Finsbury Square, which is closer to parks and has green grass. We could have an area here, ask them to go to Finsbury Square, or nowhere.
It’s an ongoing problem that’s been getting worse. Issues such as urinating and defecating on tents, in and around the eating area. There have been several dog-on-dog fights and an alleged close dog-on-person fight. It’s an issue that the camp is now hard pressed to deal with.
OK, let’s have a chat about this for 5 minutes to get people’s feelings about what kind of actions we can take to deal with this. We’ll extend to 10 minutes if everyone feels happy.
So the options are:
1. Set up a dog zone on this site
2. Ban dogs here altogether - Finsbury Square are happy to have dogs on their site - they have more green grass, so better for dogs to be kept there.
Let’s gauge how people are feeling?
> I think it might be a good idea to talk to dog owners - have a dog owners working group. That way they can have say in how their own area is put together.
> We have confronted people with dogs, and they have been verbal and violent towards us. Dogs are beginning to attack people - we can’t have this.
Let’s test for consensus. Should we ask anyone with a dog to reside in Finsbury Square? Any objections?
> I am Occupy Leicester, but I feel I have a say. You should have an area in St Pauls for dogs, and you should talk to dog owners about having their own working group, so they feel they are being involved in how the dog location is organised.
Any more objections?
> I agree with the idea of moving dogs, but I think maybe a special meeting should be organised with dog owners.
< I’m from legal. Environmental health have mentioned dogs as a feature in the statements they gave. There is no facility in law to have a dog space in an urban environment. The owner is liable to a £80 fine - it’s an important part of our case to clean up get dogs off site.
> Are there any representatives from Finsbury Square here, and how do they feel about it?
< Finsbury Square have already offered a space for dogs on site. Some dog owners have been difficult to work with, partly because they come with alcohol and drugs and mental health issues, and are not prepared to sit in a working group. They are hostile when we raise any issues with them.
Would you be prepared to stand aside, having noted your objections in minutes and seen the consensus of the rest of the group.
> I am prepared to do that, but I think people should consider to at least organise a meeting for dog owner. If you don’t organise one, how can you say they’re not responding. I’m leaving tonight, but I do agree to acknowledge the decision.
Do we have consensus to ask people who own dogs to camp in Finsbury Square, where space has been provided for them? Any objections?
a> We can’t ban dogs or people - this is a public space. The issue here is people with dogs - if they’re not working with the Occupy movement we can distance them from the camp - surely that covers us.
> One way is to give a notice, with witnesses present to say that this person has been spoken to about this issue - so it’s recorded, and they’ve been formally warned.
Do we have consensus on this? Are there any more objections?
> What about if dogs are not residing on site, but people are coming back and visiting with them all day instead?
< The proposal will apply to dogs on site at any given time day or night.
We have reached a consensus!
[Consensus reached]
--
SHOUT OUTS
--
> We need to source some hot water bottles to help people keep warm. They will be stored in the 1st aid / welfare / surplus tent. If anyone offers to make donations to Occupy, please let them know that hot water bottles will be welcome.
> Outreach meeting will take place now at Salvation Army Cafe.
> Welfare meeting at 6pm this evening outside Info Tent.
> I propose we form a new working group for education. Early years, primary, secondary, adult education. New guideline legislation is incoming. We want to look at new ways of teaching and curriculum. Let’s meet at the Info Tent after this GA.
> Making witness statements is important - tell your story, why your here, why it’s important for you.
> We need volunteers to make a simple survey. We need to firstly ask people one word to describe the occupation (some have used ‘hope’), and secondly what people have normally done in their lives beforehand. We’re being described as terrorist, sex-mad, hippy drug takers, but there’s a whole mix - we have a whole range of society.
> The finance freeze is still extending for another couple of days. We’re still not able to sort out a new system for accessing and distributing proceeds around the camps. Please discuss at occupylondon.info - there are a lot of good ideas on there, all being taken on board, being looked at, and being developed. Popular ones will be brought to the GA at some point in the future. The freeze will continue.
> Stick dustbin bags and newspapers up you jumper, they will help keep your heart and lungs warm.
CLOSE
1pm Monday 5th December 2011
--
SUMMARY OF DECISIONS
1. Shelter group will remove mattresses that currently underneath tents [Consensus reached]
2. Shelter will lend 4-5 tents to Occupy Leicester, who will return them. Now-empty tents that were bought with donations will be prioritised, followed by tents that have been abandoned for weeks. [Consensus reached]
3. We will ask people with dogs to camp at Finsbury Square [Consensus achieved]
--
Please raise your hand when you have something to say. Will run this GA informally, there is no need to have a formal structure.
There is a photographer working for the Portuguese newspaper Publico, he would like to know if it’s OK to take pictures for a repertoire on Occupy? Does anyone feel uncomfortable with this?
> I don’t like any pictures being taken of me at all!
> Only if they photoshop out this big spot on my face!
--
Welfare:
We are threadbare with our supply and materials. We hope to get everything sorted by the end of this week.
--
Economics:
There is a charitable appeal regarding the Goldman Sachs tax incident being made. UK Uncut is planning to sue for £10million, after our government representative agreed for them to be let off. They are asking for 20,000 people to donate £1 to make this happen - you can pay online on their website with PayPal, and it will cost £1.24. This is a practical thing that everyone can do, to show that nice deals done over nice meals can’t be got away with.
At tonights General Assembly we will be bringing back a revised version of the 6 point statement that was discussed at a GA a couple of weeks ago. A lot of work has been done on this, but it’s not that radical a revision. Without this in place, it is difficult for us to respond to developing news situations, such as the the Autumn Statement.
The Multi Faith group have organised a meeting with the Financial Services Authority, hopefully to talk about inviting people with particular economic knowledge into our group. Hopefully we can address the general problem of people not realising what everyone else is doing, working in harmony, not treading on each others toes.
A similar meeting with St Pauls Institute will take place on Wednesday at 7.30pm at the Oasis Centre on Westminster Bridge Road.
We’ll be discussing Economics WG proposals at this evening’s GA.
--
Legal:
Legal are taking witness statements all day. We need representatives from every working group for this, we need to organise them coming down.
> Some people think witness statements are only for people who seen they’ve seen a dodgy arrest or something - is this the case?
|
< Witness statements are firstly for people to say how they interact with the rest of the camp - an integrity statement. The second reason is to say positive or negative things that counteract the allegations being made against us - for example, acknowledging that there is a women’s tent.
Each of the 42 working groups have an integral part in bring here, and should give a statement about why they are here. This would not require a live performance in court.
--
DISCUSSION
Women’s tent and working group
--
There have been a few problems in the Women’s Safer Space, and we need a Working Group to be responsible for that space. I’m trying my best to look after it, and if any other female would like to help sort it, we can get a group together to be responsible for taking care of it and make sure it is a safe space.
We need women’s spokespeople to liaise and avoid potential difficulties.
> Is there currently a Women’s Working Group to look at sexism issues on the camp in general?
< No, there is not.
< There was a group of women meeting to discuss such issues at Finsbury Square.
> Women from the Global Women’s Strike have visited and supported this movement, such as Selma James.
The General Assembly at 7pm on Thursday will be about gender - another platform for us to raise and discuss this.
3 of us have agreed to work together on this, and will meet at 4.30pm in the Info Tent to move forward with this.
> It’s important that women run the women’s group, but it’s also important that men in the camp address sexist issues within their own male groups.
> That’s possibly even more important. The problem comes from the male side of this camp.
> Sober men are usually OK, people getting drunk is the problem.
< Some people get drunk and are not sexist.
> Drunk females are also a problem - everyone has a responsibility whether they’re male, female, drunk or sober.
> I agree that drunken behaviour is difficult to deal with. As a man, I would like to encourage other men to take personal responsibility that we don’t do sexism. I want to appeal to men that we take personal responsibility for our language, the way we behave towards out sisters, and that we challenge it when we see it in discussing and interacting with each other.
--
PROPOSAL
Shelter: Removing under-tent mattresses for health and safety reasons
--
At the moment we’re taking down empty tents and storing them. We’ve started at the top end of the site and worked our way down, so we have more room and can make the site tidier and more effective.
The tents being taken down and anything found in them are being stored in black bags in the Shelter tent. No personal articles will be lost, they have been taken care of responsibly.
We have cleared a lot of empty tents that have been blown by the wind, but I need need you support. We are having difficulty with some people who are stacking pallets on mattresses on boxes underneath their tents - this is not going to run. They think they’re going to be warmer, but they will not be. I need your support to say that this is not going to help the camp.
Someone staying at Finsbury Square is the owner of the mattresses, and has said that he will not move these tents until we have GA consensus.. I would like ask the GA for consensus that we can not have mattresses under tents. The legal team are also concerned about this.
> Maybe we can get consensus from this group on that approach. Practically speaking, we should speak to the person who’s mattresses they are and ask them to come to GA.
> He said that if the GA makes a decision, he would abide by it. My concern is with the health and safety - with a mattress under the tent, and water in the mattress will freeze and it will be so cold for the person sleeping in the tent that it is dangerous.
> The mattress under the tents belong to someone in the Press and Design working group. He was saying ‘I don’t care - I want my mattresses out’. I said I can’t do either of these things as Shelter - I have to take it to the GA.
> This may never happen, but if it gets very cold a rat or mouse could nest in the mattress - it’s a possibility. I don’t fancy that.
OK, let’s test for consensus that Shelter negotiate the removal of these mattresses with respect, fairness, communicating with appropriate body language and way of speaking.
Do we have consensus? Any objections?
> I would like to amend to clarify that this only applies to mattresses underneath tents - it’s OK to have mattresses inside tents.
OK. Do we have consensus?
[Consensus reached]
--
PROPOSAL
Lending 4-5 surplus tents to Occupy Leicester
--
Occupy Leicester are asking us if they can borrow 4-5 tents, and as a member of the Shelter working group I would like to ask the GA if this is OK?
> The grey and orange tents were bought from Tesco on the day of occupation, using funds donated from Occupy - they belong to the movement, they are not private property.
Occupy Leicester have said that they will return the tents. Some may be owned by individuals who have left them here. Currently they are being stored in the Shelter tent.
Are there any clarifying questions?
> You can’t give away other people’s tents.
> One or two tents have been empty for weeks - they belong to somebody, but have been abandoned for weeks.
> The orange and brown tents are not anybody’s private property.
> I agree that they are part of Occupy, and if they have been abandoned then they can be taken. We should amend this proposal to ensure we pick out the grey and orange tents first.
OK, we will prioritise grey and orange tents to be the ones sent up to Leicester, and any others will be tents that have been empty for several weeks.
Does everyone agree? Are there any objections?
> I think in a way it’s alright, but it would be good if there could be an announcement on the website so people who have gone away have got time to get there tent back before losing it. Let’s create this action beforehand.
D> The guy from Occupy Leicester is going back there at 9.30pm this evening - we can’t do it in time.
> If anyone says ‘that tent is my tent’, we will bring it straight back down again.
The objector is happy with that - do we have consensus?
[Consensus achieved]
> If we take a photograph of all the tents we send, there will be a record.
--
Legal:
Police are using new surveillance methods, including CCTV on hats and helmets as they walk through the camp.
Perhaps there are 2 reasons for this:
1. For public order incidents - if an alleged assault takes place, they have recorded video evidence of what’s happened.
2. To do with the letter being passed around that talks about hostile reconnaissance reports concerning individuals that would fit the anti-capitalist profile.
So, to sum up - if you feel that you’re an anti-capitalist, then the cops have your number. If an incident does occur on site, and you respond to it and the police respond to it, bear in mind that they may well be filming the incident. You must approach with caution and consider they will be filming it. Body language is an important thing to consider when this sort of thing occurs.
> The only way the police can move us away without a court order is if public order has broken down. If we have a sane sober balanced person present, then this will provide an independent witness.
> Sometimes when the police come onto the camp they do there job. There is the odd incident where they do need to come on to camp, and have had a genuine reason to speak up, remove, or arrest somebody, every now and then. If everybody comes out in force and shouts “shame on you” and practically kettles the police, then that will be recorded. So it’s important that if the police are up to something, whether we think it’s right or wrong, seeing as it’s being recorded, perhaps it’s best to stay away.
> I disagree. I think that in terms of the police, it depends on the situation. If the law is on our side, we stand united with the police. Sometimes the law is against us, so it’s better to police ourselves. Sometimes people make the situation worse. Collectively we should have some kind or response. If the police are being heavy-handed, we need some kind of passive response at least. In terms of shouting “shame on you” - if there is consensus that the police are doing something shameful, we should.
< But people don’t check first.
> I’ve been doing tranquility support at night. The City of London police are trying there best to live up to their office. They have a good rapport with the tranquility team. The police know their boundaries, and leave internal affairs to tranquility. Tranquility have made it clear, and invited the police in on occasions. We need to develop a relationship with the police - they’re not our enemy.
> According to this letter, we are officially officially classed as a domestic extremist terrorist group! [Ironic cheer]
--
Water:
We have had our water supply cut off by the City of London. Allegedly this happens every year because of the threat of frozen piping, which may or may not be true. Some working groups are looking into finding another source of water.
> The same thing happened at democracy village and parliament square.
> With the church on side, they could provide a drinking tap for us.
> I’m on church liaison, and spoke with one of the Canons yesterday. I’ll be meeting with this chap at 3pm, and will be talking about this. The church aren’t supplying us with water at present.
--
PROPOSAL
Dogs on Site:
The matter of dogs - there have been 4 occasions of cleaning dog mess up. We would really like dog owners not to oppose us in making an area for them to be located. The dogs shit, and we have to clean it up.
Another suggestion is for them to go to Finsbury Square, which is closer to parks and has green grass. We could have an area here, ask them to go to Finsbury Square, or nowhere.
It’s an ongoing problem that’s been getting worse. Issues such as urinating and defecating on tents, in and around the eating area. There have been several dog-on-dog fights and an alleged close dog-on-person fight. It’s an issue that the camp is now hard pressed to deal with.
OK, let’s have a chat about this for 5 minutes to get people’s feelings about what kind of actions we can take to deal with this. We’ll extend to 10 minutes if everyone feels happy.
So the options are:
1. Set up a dog zone on this site
2. Ban dogs here altogether - Finsbury Square are happy to have dogs on their site - they have more green grass, so better for dogs to be kept there.
Let’s gauge how people are feeling?
> I think it might be a good idea to talk to dog owners - have a dog owners working group. That way they can have say in how their own area is put together.
> We have confronted people with dogs, and they have been verbal and violent towards us. Dogs are beginning to attack people - we can’t have this.
Let’s test for consensus. Should we ask anyone with a dog to reside in Finsbury Square? Any objections?
> I am Occupy Leicester, but I feel I have a say. You should have an area in St Pauls for dogs, and you should talk to dog owners about having their own working group, so they feel they are being involved in how the dog location is organised.
Any more objections?
> I agree with the idea of moving dogs, but I think maybe a special meeting should be organised with dog owners.
< I’m from legal. Environmental health have mentioned dogs as a feature in the statements they gave. There is no facility in law to have a dog space in an urban environment. The owner is liable to a £80 fine - it’s an important part of our case to clean up get dogs off site.
> Are there any representatives from Finsbury Square here, and how do they feel about it?
< Finsbury Square have already offered a space for dogs on site. Some dog owners have been difficult to work with, partly because they come with alcohol and drugs and mental health issues, and are not prepared to sit in a working group. They are hostile when we raise any issues with them.
Would you be prepared to stand aside, having noted your objections in minutes and seen the consensus of the rest of the group.
> I am prepared to do that, but I think people should consider to at least organise a meeting for dog owner. If you don’t organise one, how can you say they’re not responding. I’m leaving tonight, but I do agree to acknowledge the decision.
Do we have consensus to ask people who own dogs to camp in Finsbury Square, where space has been provided for them? Any objections?
a> We can’t ban dogs or people - this is a public space. The issue here is people with dogs - if they’re not working with the Occupy movement we can distance them from the camp - surely that covers us.
> One way is to give a notice, with witnesses present to say that this person has been spoken to about this issue - so it’s recorded, and they’ve been formally warned.
Do we have consensus on this? Are there any more objections?
> What about if dogs are not residing on site, but people are coming back and visiting with them all day instead?
< The proposal will apply to dogs on site at any given time day or night.
We have reached a consensus!
[Consensus reached]
--
SHOUT OUTS
--
> We need to source some hot water bottles to help people keep warm. They will be stored in the 1st aid / welfare / surplus tent. If anyone offers to make donations to Occupy, please let them know that hot water bottles will be welcome.
> Outreach meeting will take place now at Salvation Army Cafe.
> Welfare meeting at 6pm this evening outside Info Tent.
> I propose we form a new working group for education. Early years, primary, secondary, adult education. New guideline legislation is incoming. We want to look at new ways of teaching and curriculum. Let’s meet at the Info Tent after this GA.
> Making witness statements is important - tell your story, why your here, why it’s important for you.
> We need volunteers to make a simple survey. We need to firstly ask people one word to describe the occupation (some have used ‘hope’), and secondly what people have normally done in their lives beforehand. We’re being described as terrorist, sex-mad, hippy drug takers, but there’s a whole mix - we have a whole range of society.
> The finance freeze is still extending for another couple of days. We’re still not able to sort out a new system for accessing and distributing proceeds around the camps. Please discuss at occupylondon.info - there are a lot of good ideas on there, all being taken on board, being looked at, and being developed. Popular ones will be brought to the GA at some point in the future. The freeze will continue.
> Stick dustbin bags and newspapers up you jumper, they will help keep your heart and lungs warm.
CLOSE
Contact your Fat Councillor with interesting facts and tip offs here
