[Bell Historians] CCC Bells & Clocks Committee

Mark markregan at KFF43pGZUmqFSLrkmnuMI99NMmxTAeuMLAydlsLSvu_5_yiGYFv9gUasZKz9sNajsf16BLyILJypYCEn6uPP.yahoo.invalid
Wed Aug 30 19:32:57 BST 2006

Oh dear!

What's wrong with being open about how any appointment is made? It's only
bells we're talking about - not matters of national security. If people are
appointed on ability and competence what is there to hide?

Advertising or recommending candidates, interviews and a half decent
performance management structure, and all should work well. Surely all
appointments should be open and subject to scrutiny without referring to
freedom of information.

Or am I missing something?


31Park Street

0797 1573688

-----Original Message-----
From: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com [mailto:bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of David Bryant
Sent: 30 August 2006 19:26
To: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Bell Historians] CCC Bells & Clocks Committee

> I think most people on your list are grown-ups and quite capable of 
> deciding for themselves whether this is a fit subject for open 
> debate.  But, by all means, let us move it elsewhere, if you feel the 
> to leap in and censor on the extraordinary basis stated above.
> Credibility is not just an issue for members of the new CCC Bells & 
> committee ...

Don't patronise me Robert. As I have said, you are quite at liberty to 
discuss it here but I don't want a repeat of the circuar argument 
whereby demands are made to the members of the committee to explain how 
they were appointed. This achieves nothing and is not fair on them. 
Provided this request is observed, I think open discussion is a good 


Yahoo! Groups Links



More information about the Bell-historians mailing list