[Previous Months][Date Index][Thread Index][Join - Register][Login]
[Message Prev][Message Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: [IPk] letters to BDA

Could you tell me which bit you disagreed with - was it the
confidentiality issue?  When/if you get my letter, you will see that I
have basically asked for pumps to be an agenda item, and asked
individuals for support at the discussion (nothing like assuming that
you'll get what you want!)  

Is there not an Any Other Business - could you say you've received
letters and ask if anyone else has?  At that point could you propose it
be an agenda item for the next meeting?  

In message <001b01bf736c$91d54a80$email @ redacted>, Jeremy GRAINGER
<email @ redacted> writes
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Pat Reynolds <email @ redacted>
>To: <email @ redacted>
>Sent: Tuesday, 08 February, 2000 19:34
>Subject: Re: [IPk] letters to BDA
>> While I know that there is (I hope) someone or two like Jeremy, who are
>> pro-pump anyway, and that the anti-pumpers would probably be better with
>> individual letters which hit their mis-conceptions, the hassle of co-
>> ordinating such a monitoring of responses, getting the Data Protection
>> sorted out, etc. makes it too much hassle (I think - is anyone
>> volunteering?)
>> I think that the letters we send, and the replies we receive are
>> private, so we can't share the information - but if any of us receives,
>> or hears about anything in the public domain (such as a press clipping
>> where a trustee is saying how marvellous it is that little Jimmy has a
>> pump, or that a cure for diabetes is the only thing worth investing
>> research money into) the could they notify the list?
>> Pat Reynolds
>Hi Pat,
>I would wish to disagree with you.
>What any one (or more) trustees says is not important, as I have found out
>it is not possible to do anything unless the 'item' is on an agenda at a
>board meeting and there is a promise to discuss the issue. In practice this
>involves getting the OK from the  Chair or Chief-Exec. For us responses from
>individual trustees do not amount to much, it is when/if a response (likely
>a preprinted letter) from head office, comes that something may happen.
>It is for this reason that I earlier suggested we should have an individual,
>as a representative, with whom the central office could communicate.
>Whatever responses are received the 'mass' of letters puts me in a position
>to raise the issue, if only by stating that I have received many letters
>about pumps, ask if others have as well and then suggest we should look into
>them, as they are obviously of concern.
>If anybody has time to spare, another way to increase influence  would be to
>stand to become a trustee (look in March Balance).
>Best wishes,
>for HELP or to subscribe/unsubscribe, contact: HELP@insulin-pumpers.org
>help SUPPORT Insulin Pumpers http://www.insulin-pumpers.org/donate.shtml

Pat Reynolds
email @ redacted
   "It might look a bit messy now, but just you come back in 500 years time" 
   (T. Pratchett)
for HELP or to subscribe/unsubscribe, contact: HELP@insulin-pumpers.org
help SUPPORT Insulin Pumpers http://www.insulin-pumpers.org/donate.shtml