To: Juliet Prager <Julietp@quaker.org.uk>
Cc: Paul Parker <RC@quaker.org.uk>
Subject: Two agenda points for Sufferings on Saturday
From: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk (Henry S. Thompson)
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1012 (Gnus v5.10.12) XEmacs/21.5-b34 (linux)
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 15:47:15 +0000
Message-ID: <f5b7eu7vke4.fsf@troutbeck.inf.ed.ac.uk>
--text follows this line--
[Juliet, could you please forward this to Margaret Bryan and Anne
Ullathorne, I can't immediately find email addresses for them. Thanks]

1) I haven't checked ever possible document, but looking at this year's
draft Annual Report for Sufferings, I was reminded of Jocelyn Bell
Burnell's challenge to us back in December of last year, to consider
whether our approach to reports from central committees was working
well.  MFS/16/12/20 refers:

 We have heard of the positive relationship which has been developed
 between QLCC and BYM Trustees and have been challenged to consider how
 we as Meeting for Sufferings can work more effectively with QLCC.

 We recognise that this is an area that needs more work and ask our
 Arrangements Group to do some initial thinking on this, liaising with
 QLCC as appropriate, and to report back to us.

I note that in the follow-up mailing to that meeting, the minutes of
MfSAG for 2016-12-12 acknowledges this

 We noted our minute 2016.12.40 about Quaker Life Central Committee
 (QLCC) in which MfSAG is asked to do some initial thinking on the ways
 in which MfS can work more effectively with QLCC and will return to
 this in due course.

But I can't find any sign that this has happened, or any mention in the
most recent MfSAG minutes that we plan to -- have I missed something?

2) In the Trustee's Minutes of 21 September (MfS 2017 12 13b, item
BYMT-2017-09-08) I see

 We feel that the time may be right to look at the purpose Yearly
 Meeting in the life of the Society of Friends, including whether
 different formats may be appropriate in future.

and a little further on

 We agree that Ingrid Greenhow should prepare a paper and that she
 should represent us at [YMAC of 28 October].

Was this with reference to that earlier point?

In any case, could we hear a bit more about this issue?  If feels like
something we should be involved with.

Thanks,

ht