Another
'also ran' in the conference question season:
“19.
Would conference consider selling
literature at cost to bring it into line with tradition seven, nine
and concept seven.
Background
Tradition seven states
that every AA group ought to be fully self supporting and this
principle applies to all levels of the service structure. People and
agencies outside the fellowship are buying our literature and
resources meaning that GSO is partially funded by outside agencies.
To remove this outside funding issue literature and resources could
be sold at cost. Recent years financial reports suggest that with
minimal restructuring this is
achievable.
Why does this matter?
Accountability. In concept seven Bill refers to the ‘power of the
purse’. This works two ways. Firstly we confer that power to the
conference structure through concept seven but it also gives the
membership ultimate power to bring the conference structure to
account should we/they get off track and act against the conscience
of the fellowship or violate the traditions or concepts.
‘And finally, in any
great extremity, it would rest upon the undoubted ability of the
Delegates to deny the General Service Board the monies with which to
operate—viz., the voluntary contributions of the A.A. groups
themselves.’
A.A. Service
Manual/Twelve Concepts P29.
Having a GSO that is at
least partially self‐‐‐funding reduces the accountability to
those they serve (tradition nine). If we as a fellowship found a
conference decision unacceptable we could stop sending money (the
power of the purse (Concept 7)) which would force GSO into line.
Having an even partially self funded GSO would mean that GSO could
continue to operate in some form without the contributions of the
membership.
Terms
of Reference No. 6/7 Insufficient background regarding actual costs
and revenues, also is the responsibility of the GSB”
Comment:
See here.
As you may have guessed we'd go one step further and say that ALL AA
literature should be provided online FREE and hard copies should only
be provided at cost (as proposed above). The questioner also makes
some very valid points as to accountability. The final sanction AA
groups may apply if they disapprove of conference decisions, the
conduct of the General Service Board or the running of GSO is simply
to withdraw their financial support by cutting off the flow of funds
(an act sanctioned by our own Concepts). But a financially autonomous
GSO (funded by illegitimately derived profits from literature sales –
contrary to our own traditions) insulates itself from such action. In the meantime if your group doesn't like how it's money's being spent stop
sending it up the line! Of course in order to do that you'll need to
find out what's going on. This is where your treasurer comes in. The
next time he or she starts off with the old 'begging bowl' routine
ask him or her (politely) if there's enough money to keep the meeting
going? If there is then you've gone a long way towards fulfilling
your primary purpose. Next ask the treasurer where the extra money's
going and what it's going to be spent on (this applies especially in
'gratitude week' where the level of 'emotional blackmail' reaches its
absolute zenith!). If they don't know ask them (again politely) to
find out and report back. The group can then decide if they want to
send their excess funds to intergroup etc. It should be emphasised
here that no group is under any obligation to send money up the line (or should we say 'down' the line!)
Remember – these are all VOLUNTARY contributions. There are no
dues or fees for AA membership a principle which can be extended to a
group's participation in the service structure (we've even heard in
the past proposals to the effect that if a group does not make a
financial contribution to the service structure they should be
excluded from it. That's tantamount to making such participation
contingent on payment of a fee! We don't think so!). So if the group
doesn't want to send surplus funds to intergroup it can perhaps
consider paying a more realistic rent to its landlords where the
current rent falls below market rates. Accepting a subsidy from the
latter constitutes accepting funds from an outside source (again
contrary to our traditions). We're supposed to be 'self-supporting'
and not reliant on the charity of others! Or if this is not the case
then maybe a more generous allowance of Jaffa cakes should be
considered!
See
here
for a full list of other questions that didn't quite get through the
'filter'
Cheers
The
Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)
No comments:
Post a Comment