Green Party of Saskatchewan

Thisgrandfather resolution is a bad policy. First, many "old" policies are current such as one of the oldest which has the GPS opposing nuclear power. Second ,will there be a period of one year when all policies over 5 years old will be null and void? The resolution committee does not exist for the 2009 AGM.So we have to wait until 2010. Third,there simply is not enough time to review all policies over 5 years old(there must be a few hundred) at a one day convention ,when many times there is not enough time to get through all the new policy resolutions and constitutional amendments.Where will the extra time come from? The best thing to do ,is to amend and change existing policy.Do not throw everything out. This would knock the foundation out from under the party in many areas of policy.

I'd like to suggest some clarification:

• The intent of this resolution, as I read it, is not to throw everything out after 5 years.  It's to have it reviewed for relevance after five years. 
• It does contain a presumption of obsolence, in the words "become obsolete and".  These words could perhaps be deleted, if so moved and carried at Convention, but by leaving this as originally proposed, a busy Convention would only have to deal with those policy items that some members think has current relevance.  Those no one wants to preserve could just fall off the agenda at Convention and be automatically dropped. (Unless we adopt mail-out Bonser ballots, in which case all old policy resolutions would be put to a vote.)
• The policy items in question would be communicated to members at least 6 weeks in advance of Convention, in accordance with Bylaw 10.7, and dealt with at Convention.
• There will be no period during which old policies are in limbo.  They will either be re-affirmed or dropped at the Convention where they turn 5 years old.
• Since we have not yet adopted this proposal, no review of old policies is scheduled for the 2009 Convention.
• If we adopt this motion, I believe it should be on the understanding that no policies will be dropped under the provisions of this motion until the 2010 Convention (or a special General Meeting) has a chance to review them.
• There is a Resolutions Committee for this year's Convention.  (I'm the chair.)  However, the Committee does not yet have the duties proposed in Tory's motion.
• If we adopt this proposal, the role of the Resolutions Committee would be expanded considerably, into the area of making recommendations as to current relevance.  If that happens, the Resolutions Committee will undoubtedly want to solicit input from various sources within the Party before finalizing a recommendation.
• We do have a large backlog of policy resolutions, many of which are at least partially obsolete.  I agree with Mike & Amber that we need to do something about this.