Message from discussion CCBN & Mick Ayers' unpaid debts - yet another twist in the tale!

From: "Duncan Heenan" <duncanhee...@tiscali.co.uk>
Newsgroups: uk.rec.naturist
Subject: CCBN & Mick Ayers' unpaid debts - yet another twist in the tale!
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 08:21:28 +0100
Lines: 44
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6001.18000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6001.18049
Message-ID: <4a4db43c$3_4@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com>
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 88.109.0.170
NNTP-Posting-Host: mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com
X-Trace: 3 Jul 2009 08:33:19 +0100, mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com
Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!npeer02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!tiscali!newsfeed2.ip.tiscali.net!212.74.112.120.MISMATCH!mk-nntp-1.news.uk.tiscali.com!mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com

In his BN Forum posting of 24.3.09, CCBN's current Chairman Michael Farrar 
(inter alia) says;

"We are left, therefore, with the inescapable fact that, while nobody can be 
shown to be culpable, CCBN is worse off by £1068.85. This will, however, be 
set right, since the Executive Council was informed at its March meeting 
that an individual decision had been made to suspend making any claim for 
reimbursement of expenses until that sum has been made good. This may 
satisfy the proper concerns of some members, though they will surely insist 
that we should be much more careful in future."

This is 'information'  repeated in the recent BN magazine.
No one 'culpable' - pull the other one Mr. Farrar. The evidence of 
culpability was there plainly on the file! But let's move on to the next 
intriguing twist in the tale.
Despite enquiries, I have been unable to find out who this 'individual' is 
who is going to to pay back Ayers' debt for him, by not making any expense 
claims for a while. Neither have I been able to find out why she, or he, 
feels they have to do such a thing. I can only speculate that she, or he, 
considers themselves complicit in the whole affair, and that her, or his, 
conscience has caught up with them. Why it has taken so long for her, or 
him, to come to this conclusion I can't guess, nor do I know why the EC are 
so coy about naming this 'generous' individual, as failing to do so opens 
the flood gates of speculation once more.
A far better outcome would have been to have got Ayers himself to pay his 
debts, and we still haven't been given a proper explanation as to why the EC 
would not sue him.
I wonder if Mr. Farrar's words " This may satisfy the proper concerns of 
some members, though they will surely insist that we should be much more 
careful in future.", will be realised in action. If so, being 'careful' 
would seem to imply that we should not allow any one person to control 
CCBN's money (not forgetting that information is power). If there is , as I 
suppose above, a person who feels they were complicit in the Ayers affair 
(and by 'repaying' the money, as above, is admitting it) surely she, or he, 
should not be involved in CCBN's finances again?
CCBN's current Treasurer is stepping down in October and no one has stood 
for replacement so far. I wonder if the EC is concerned at the lack of 
financial control this could lead to? It would be hard for them to defend a 
situation in the future if the person who has not been named, turned out to 
be the sole person with control over CCBN's money and the information about 
it, wouldn't it?
-- 
Duncan Heenan