Council Works: From the ‘governance geek’
By Karen Hamilton

I have been called a number of things in my day. But it is in recent days that I have come to be called and, more importantly, come to accept being called, a ‘governance geek.’ It is always interesting, but often disconcerting, to try to see yourself as others see you and it has definitely been disconcerting to then go a step further and accept myself as a ‘governance geek.’ It is in that persona that I write of the latest progress in revising the statutes and bylaws of our international World Federalist Movement, a process which I chair.

The statutes and bylaws of any organization express in practical terms its values and priorities; so does the process of revising them. It has been an interesting ride indeed: the facilitating group mandated into existence at the 2005 council meeting in Brussels has consulted with many, reflected on the responses, prepared documents for executive members and reflected on their responses. The process now moves forward to the international Council and Congress meetings in Geneva in August.

The values and priorities of our organization had indeed come to the fore and been expressed. As the first point of our current preamble to our current statutes document says, “As members of the World Federalist Movement, we affirm our determination to exercise our rights and responsibilities as citizens of the whole world in order to achieve the high purposes of the United Nations.”

And as the eighth point of the preamble says, “We recognize that the building of a world community – one based on fundamental justice and an appreciation of differences – is the greatest intellectual, moral and political challenge of our time. It calls on each of us to examine our beliefs and priorities and to express in our personal way our commitment to global change.”

Nary a ‘jot or tittle’ of these lofty and deep statements is in question. The questions arise as we try to discern the most practical ways to implement these lofty and deep goals and to implement them in ways which faithfully appreciate our differences. A number of resolutions to revise the statutes and bylaws will be going forward to the Geneva meetings.

There are also areas where, despite long and thoughtful discussion, no consensus has been possible, areas in which there will no doubt be resolutions to come in time but areas in which even more thought and discussion is required. They include such questions as how many levels of governance are appropriate for the movement and how can individual members be democratically engaged.

Among the resolutions going forward in Geneva this summer are:

•   a resolution to allow for two co-presidents of the international movement, a resolution that encourages us to truly manifest diversity in terms of gender and global regions.

•   a resolution aimed at implementing the concept of ‘associated program networks’ – groups of organizations and individuals who may not actually be world federalist themselves in their primary orientation but who would come together and work together on specific issues related to world federalism.

•   a resolution to change the criteria by which member organizations are accepted into the movement’s structure, requiring, for example, that new member organizations have 300 members rather than the current 30, that they have active programs and communication vehicles, an office that is staffed at least part-time by paid staff or volunteers and that they have incorporation and financial documents.

•   a recommendation that the incoming Council structure itself on a staggered two-year cycle in which in one year its agenda will focus on business and then in the next year its agenda will focus on federalist issues and outcomes of resolutions.

How will the resolutions be received? The Council and the Congress will decide after thoughtful, democratic deliberation and reflection on those forms of governance which, as the third part of the current preamble to our statutes says, enable us to “affirm that the ideals and principles of community life which are basic to civilized existence can and must be applied to international relations.”

So says the ‘governance geek’.