Conference questions not quite up to par! (contd)

And finally …...

53.

1. In this ever changing world we live are the recommendations contained within the Structure Handbook 2013 (pages 82‐ 85) robust enough in dealing with inappropriate and threatening behaviour including aggressiveness and sexual harassment, currently being experienced by a cross section of the Fellowship?

2. Does the Fellowship agree that there is sufficient clarity within The Structure Handbook for Groups regarding the steps that may be taken when complaints are made regarding inappropriate behaviour by individuals?

3. Can the Fellowship confirm whether a Group, following a Conscience Meeting, has the authority to deny entry to an individual following an incident involving unacceptable behaviour?

Background

A. Tradition 1. Our common welfare should come first; personal recovery depends upon A.A. unity

B. Tradition 4. Each Group should be autonomous except in matters affecting other groups or A.A. as a whole

C. Pages 82‐85 of 'The AA Structure Handbook for Great Britain 2013'

Terms of Reference No. 7 There have been several submissions covering this topic and a question has been selected that encompasses all areas of the subject matter with appropriate background material.

Comment: The problem is not guidance. After all should adults need to be told that bullying is wrong! The problem is implementation. We repeat – if you want to know where the ultimate responsibility resides for ensuring this conduct does not go unadmonished look in the mirror! This is no one else's responsibility!

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS For AA Minority Report 2013 click here

PPS Plymouth Intergroup corruption

Conference questions not quite up to par! (contd)

52. 
Would the A.A. Groups of our fellowship consider a reorganization of the Conference committee tasks in such a way as to allow a more thorough review of the activities of the General Service Office, the General Service Board and the Fellowship as a whole over the preceding year?

Four committees to review the activities of the General Service Office, the General Service Board and the Fellowship as a whole and two committees to discuss topics or questions submitted by the Fellowship:

a. One committee to review the activities and work of the GSB with special attention to how effectively the GSB has aided groups in carrying the message to the still suffering alcoholic over the past year. 
b. One committee to review the activities and work of the GSO with special attention to how effectively the GSB has aided groups in carrying the message to the still suffering alcoholic over the past year. 
c. One committee would review activities and work within the Fellowship as whole, with attention to Regional, Intergroup and Group levels with special attention to carrying the message to the still suffering alcoholic. 
d. One committee would review the full financial report by the GSB for the previous fiscal year with focus on any large expenditures or commitments and in addition review administrative procedures and decision making processes. 
e. Two committees would work on Topics or Questions submitted by the fellowship as all six committees now do, this would allow for four to six Topics or Questions per Conference.

Background and Intention of the topic:

Intention:

The question of the content and relevance of Conference Topics and Questions is raised regularly, both in topics submitted to Conference itself as well as at Group, Intergroup and Region meetings.

It is possible that one issue which contributes to this recurrence is that there are so many Topics and Questions. In the need for between 12 and 18 ‘questions’ we often resort to issues that barely touch the lives of our members in their everyday lives. Participation in the Conference process, essential for a proper functioning of the process is low. 

Groups, Intergroups and Regions often express experiencing a distance or disconnection between themselves and Conference, the GSB and even GSO.

Changing the content and focus of (some of) the committee work, putting more emphasis on review and discussion of the current affairs and activities of GSB and GSO may lead members at all levels of our Fellowship to better feel their Ownership, and Responsibility for these levels of service. It is meant to be a true expression of the opening phrase of Concept One “Final responsibility and Ultimate authority for A.A. world services should reside in the collective conscience of our whole Fellowship” at the level of The General Service Conference of Great Britain.

It is not the intent that this become a vehicle to unfairly criticize or nitpick at either the GSB or GSO. Nor is this intended to preclude or override the responsibilities and duties of GSO, the GSB, their staffs and consultants. The process should be one of Respect and Consideration with awareness of Tradition two foremost in our minds. Furthermore all involved need to be focused on that which is the Very Best for Alcoholics Anonymous rather than on matters of personal prestige or personalities rather than principles.

Recent discussion of this issue or of similar issues.

Conference 2104, no. Conference 2013, no. Conference 2012, No . Conference 2011, No.

Similar or older discussions:

2010, Committee Four, Topic 2 – regarding the intention behind the Topics or Questions
2010, Committee Three, Topic 2 – regarding how Conference may be made more attractive to the membership as a whole.
2010, Committee Three, Topic 2 – regarding how we may better participate in the process of generating and formulating Topics or Questions for Conference.
2010, Committee One, Topic 2 – regarding the frequency of Conference, annual or Biannual (every other year).
2009, Committee Five, Topic 2 – regarding recording and uploading plenary sessions of Conference.
2009, Committee Two, Topic 1 – regarding Conference taking a regular Inventory of itself

Background: 

1. Concept One
2. Alcoholics Anonymous comes of Age , page 217‐218: 
“On their first day, the delegates inspected our Headquarters, got acquainted with the service staff, and shook hands with the Trustees. In the evening there was a briefing session under the name of "What's on your mind?" We answered questions of every description. The delegates began to feel at home. Seeing their quick understanding and confidence, our spirits rose. We all sensed that something momentous was happening; this was a historic moment.  One strenuous session followed another. The delegates inspected A.A.'s finances and listened to reports from the Board of Trustees and from all services. There was warm but cordial debate on many questions of A.A. policy. The Trustees submitted several of their own serious problems for the opinion of the Conference. With real dispatch the delegates handled several tough puzzlers about which we at Headquarters were in doubt. Though their advice was sometimes contrary to our own views, we saw they were frequently right. They were proving as never before that A.A.'s Tradition Two was correct. Our group conscience could safely act as the sole authority and sure guide for Alcoholics Anonymous. As the delegates returned home, they carried this deep conviction with them."

 3. The Fellowship as a whole has "Final responsibility and ultimate authority" for AA services. How can we then determine to what extent we are living up to that responsibility at the various levels of service in terms of the past year?
4. A recurring theme in Conference inventories at Regional and Conference level, as well as in questions themselves, concerns the perception of Conference, the GSB and GSO by the general membership. There is often dissatisfaction with the content of conference questions and reports as being of little relevance to the individual group or member. Having the majority of the committees review the work of the past year and make recommendations would result in a clearer perception that The Groups themselves are the ‘owners’ of AA and that they truly do bear ‘Final responsibility and ultimate authority’ in more than lip‐service level. These reviews should not be overly politically correct or polite, but they do need to be done in the spirit of Love and Service. There should be a realization that if there are problems at any level of A.A. then it is WE, the Groups, who bear the responsibility. There is no Us and Them, only WE. There need be no fear of overly critical or personal attacks as the committees will approach their remit with attention to mutual respect.
5. Possible Working Guidelines:
Love and Tolerance of others is our code
Trust God, Clean House, Help Others
Love and Service 
Big Book, page 164: ‐ “Ask Him in your morning meditation what you can do each day for the man who is still sick. The answers will come, if your own house is in order. “ 
B.B. page 124 ‐ “This painful past may be of infinite value to other families still struggling with their problem. We think each family which has been relieved owes something to those who have not,”
Bib book, page 86 : “Were we resentful, selfish, dishonest or afraid? Do we owe an apology? Have we kept something to ourselves which should be discussed with another person at once? Were we kind and loving toward all? What could we have done better? Were we thinking of ourselves most of the time? Or were we thinking of what we could do for others, of what we could pack into the stream of life?”

Terms of Reference No. 7 Process is already in place.

Comment: There's NOTHING quite like a committee to ensure NOTHING gets done! And if you're wondering where the buck finally stops …. look in the mirror!

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS For AA Minority Report 2013 click here

PPS Plymouth Intergroup corruption

Conference questions not quite up to par! (contd)

50. 
Big Book Pricing

Would Conference discuss whether the current pricing strategy for Alcoholics Anonymous (the Big Book) best supports our Primary Purpose? 

Background 

Our basic text, the book Alcoholics Anonymous, affectionately known as the “Big Book”, provides clear‐cut, precise directions on how to recover from alcoholism.

“To show other alcoholics precisely how we have recovered is the main purpose of this book.” Foreword to the First Edition

Broad distribution of the Big Book thus becomes a fundamental part of our Fellowship’s 5th Tradition, or Primary Purpose, and an essential element of individual members’ 12th Step activities. It is generally accepted that every AA member ought to possess a copy of the Big Book, and we are encouraged to make it available not only to still‐suffering alcoholics, but also third parties such as the family, wives, doctors and employers.

With permission from Alcoholics Anonymous World Services Incorporated, the General Service Board of Alcoholics Anonymous (Great Britain) prints several editions of the Big Book and distributes them for sale. Our current pricing strategy is cost‐plus; a profit margin over and above the costs of production. The General Service Board’s 2013 Annual Report provides the following figures:

Literature income: £ 518,608

Literature expenses: £ 181,839

From these figures we can estimate an average profit margin of 64%, which provides substantial flexibility to adjust our selling price to best meet the needs of the fellowship. Of course we understand some margin over the cost price is to be expected (in order to fund literature activities such as translations and the creation of new literature) but when evaluated against the importance of our fellowships’ primary purpose, the impact of our current pricing strategy with such a large profit margin on our basic text is worthy of our attention and continual review.

At least one independent publishing house has been set up in the USA to supply our basic text at cost price. The Anonymous Press, for example, sells their “Mini Edition” for US$0.89 (1000 pieces), which is approximately 53 pence per copy. In contrast, our own Pocket Edition Big Book costs £5, for which one could buy almost ten “Mini Editions”. For more information see http://anonpress.org/store/mini.htm. Copyright restrictions mean independent printing is not currently possible outside the USA. We also feel that buying literature from outside agencies would seem to contravene Traditions 6 and 7, as well as General Service Conference Literature Committee Advisory Actions, which recommended in 1977 that “A.A. groups be discouraged from selling literature not distributed by the General Service Office and the Grapevine” and again in 1986, that “A.A. groups be encouraged to display or sell only literature published and distributed by the General Service Office, the A.A. Grapevine and other A.A. entities”. However, we present this example to demonstrate that more affordable literature could be obtained, and that there is an existing demand for it. Therefore, we feel that Conference ought to discuss this issue, and as a Fellowship consider whether or not a new pricing strategy is required (i.e. competitive or demand‐based) to best meet any underserved needs and supply our basic text at the optimum price, so as to encourage maximum purchasing and distribution of our message as contained in the Big Book into the hands of the still suffering alcoholic, and ultimately bringing more recovered alcoholics into the fellowship.

Note: If the current costs of production per unit were to exceed the optimum selling price as determined by the pricing strategy review, then we also suggest a review of the current printing processes.

General Service Board Annual Report 2013

Terms of Reference No. 7 Background information was misleading and CSC have asked Honorary Treasurer to include this subject in the Finance Report given at Conference.

Comment: Firstly we're not aware that it is “generally accepted that every AA member ought to possess a copy of the Big Book”. They may or they may not. The programme after all is “suggested” and not mandatory, something which might come as a bit of a shock to sundry Step Nazis etc who seem to think otherwise. Secondly, in our view, any 'profits' gained by selling literature (used to subsidise service activity – usually based at York (or New York)) runs contrary to Tradition Seven. We believe that ALL AA conference approved literature should be downloadable free (with a facility for making a donation ie. a voluntary contribution) with hard copies made available strictly at cost price.

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)
 

PS For AA Minority Report 2013 click here 

PPS Plymouth Intergroup corruption

Conference questions not quite up to par! (contd)

48.

Usually, there are 12 to 18 Conference Questions per year. Would the Fellowship ask itself whether this number could be lowered?

Background

 In my experience, there is quite some criticism concerning Conference and its perceived lack of relevance, expressed in statements like: "Waste of money", "AA management", "Feeding the machine", "It's a show", "It's a thing of the past, when AA was still in its infancy", "Have you ever been at Conference, and couldn't wait to phone your buddies back home with the answer to a specific question?", "Can you name just one Question that has had any impact at your home group?" and "Have you been a Delegate, and could you remember a single Questions your Committee had to

answer, even a month after Conference?"

 These concerns are also frequently expressed in Conference Questions themselves. E.g., 2013, Committee 4, Question 1; 2012, Committee 5 Question 1 and 2010, Committee 1, Question 2 (having Conference every other year). However, it appears to me that these Questions have not mitigated these issues

 Although I fully support the Third Legacy, I have to concede that most Conference Questions seem of little relevance and often contrived

 I've understood that the usual number of 12 to 18 Questions per year, is a traditional figure, that is not evaluated periodically

 Reducing the number of Questions, would lower the costs of Conference, increase the quality of the Questions, while maintaining the continuity of Conference

 E.g.: With 1 Delegate per Region, Conference could process 2 or 3 Questions. With 2 Delegates per Region, Conference could process 4 to 6 Questions, and with 3 Delegates per Region, Conference could process 6 to 9 Questions.

Terms of Reference No. 7 Number of questions submitted by the Fellowship varies and their validity is determined by the CSC.

Comment: For our part we rather enjoy the questions. Especially the ones that don't make it (like this one)! Keep 'em coming we say! The more the merrier!

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS For AA Minority Report 2013 click here

PPS Plymouth Intergroup corruption

Conference questions not quite up to par! (contd)

45. 
Would Conference please discuss and make recommendations on the current wording in the A.A. literature and on the website regarding Open Meetings with a view to making it plainer that those attending A.A. meetings have some connection with alcoholism, either their own or somebody else’s.

1) Background material:

Open Meetings statement (see the national website);

Front covers of the London Where to Find and the
Where to Find A.A. Great Britain and English Speaking Europe.
The A.A. Preamble
Traditions 3, 5, 6 and 10.

2) Recommendation

The first paragraph of the website statement under the headings ‘About AA Meetings’ ‘Open Meetings’ states the case clearly that ‘Open’ meetings are for anyone wanting to solve a personal drinking problem, and for friends and families of those wanting to solve a drinking problem.

The statement on the front covers of the two meeting directories, “Non‐alcoholics may attend meetings listed as ‘open’ should I think for clarity and in keeping with A.A.s primary purpose, be changed and carry the same sentence or something similar.

Why?

The term and wording “Non‐alcoholics may attend meetings listed as ‘open’ on the covers of the two directories would seem not to serve our primary purpose as stated in the last two lines of the Preamble.

It is the case that many who have addictions other than alcohol go along to open meetings of Alcoholics Anonymous for their therapeutic benefit. Such individuals are not attending an A.A. meeting because they are supporting a family member or friend with a drinking problem, or because they have a desire to stop drinking (they may be moderate drinkers) they are attending because they have an addiction, and want to draw strength and comfort from our mature and strong Fellowship. Such individuals frequently share regardless of the fact that alcohol may not be their problem. In this case I feel that Traditions 3, 5, 6 and 10 are being contravened.

In this era where the words “recovery” and “in recovery” have become umbrella terms for those sober from alcohol, clean from drugs or abstinent from sex/food/or rock and roll, Alcoholics Anonymous has a real obligation to hold firmly and clearly to our primary purpose.

Terms of Reference No. 7 Background material did not match question and is already covered in AA literature.

Comment: Too true! It is known that some therapists and treatments centres are advising clients who don't meet our membership requirement to attend AA meetings simply for their therapeutic value (and the fact that they're free!) with a total disregard (thereby demonstrating their disrespect) for our primary purpose Of course the following statements may be read out (where appropriate, and in addition to the Preamble) to clarify what this purpose is.

Source: http://www.aa.org/assets/en_US/f-17_primarypurposestatementcard.pdf 

Furthermore it is perfectly legitimate for members to point out to the interlopers where necessary that whereas they have our sympathy (and perhaps even empathy) they are quite definitely in the WRONG place!

At this point it might be worth considering the potential impact of the 'chit' system (court mandated attendance) on the fellowship where individuals may be referred - or compelled - to attend AA meetings who don't fall into the category of drinker which AA caters for ie. the chronic alcoholic. These individuals may be sent to us purely on the basis of having some kind of drinking problem associated with their offending behaviour. This does not mean they are necessarily alcoholics, and certainly does not imply that AA is the best place for them. But a government looking to make swingeing cuts in public expenditure ie. ours, might be tempted not only to 'dump' these individuals on us but also anyone with any kind of addiction problem in order to save money. The consequences for AA in Great Britain could be as devastating as they have been in some parts of the US already.

See also: Problems Other Than Alcohol: What Can Be Done About Them, February, 1958, Bill W

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS For AA Minority Report 2013 click here

PPS Plymouth Intergroup corruption

Conference questions not quite up to par! (contd)

44. 
Would Conference like to give their approval (or otherwise) of individual members keeping their GPs informed of AA meeting in their areas. This is a very inexpensive way of spreading the message. 

Background

It came about when my GP asked me some years ago whether there was a list of AA meetings. I gave her the green one (i.e. without any members’ telephone numbers on it) and have since kept her up to date when a new one is issued. She seems pleased to have it. As you know it also gives our various helplines. It seems to be an effective and inexpensive way of keeping our GPs in the picture and since they presumably are aware of our states of health they will also hopefully observe how effective AA is.

Terms of Reference No. 7 A local PI issue – does not need Conference approval.

Comment: Bloody excellent idea! Who'd've thought common sense might break out in AA. This is how we're supposed to operate. Low key, informal, personal ie the direct antithesis of the AA 'promoters' with their advertising campaigns, banners, meetings at the House of Commons etc. Keep it Simple. Keep it Personal.

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS For AA Minority Report 2013 click here

PPS Plymouth Intergroup corruption

Conference questions not quite up to par! (contd)

43. 
Would Conference consider updating the guideline on bullying and conduct in AA, as how AA members should best deal with being bullied or abused anonymously on the internet by AA members?

Background

There are public internet websites in the UK run by UK AA members which regularly name people in the UK fellowship who are identifiable to all members in their regional area. The current guidelines do not cover this eventuality. Members attacked in this way are in an unfortunate position as the internet is not only regional, but national. Also the attacks are by anonymous people so there is no recourse for response. This seems to be an area not covered by the guidelines but one which is causing great upset to a number of members, and disunity on a local and regional level. This is not a local issue as the websites are usually not written by AA members in a different area to that of the people they are bullying. There is national input into these websites, and national distribution.

Terms of Reference No. 7 There have been several submissions covering this topic and a question has been selected that encompasses all areas of the subject matter with appropriate background material.

Comment: As always there's a simple solution! If the bullies, abusers and thugs who regularly appear on our blog discontinue their activities then they will disappear from our site. If not we will continue to publicise their names (and conduct) as widely as possible.... even internationally! We are referring of course to Jon F, Alexis K, Wayne P [Road to Recovery cult group Plymouth], Wally P [Back to Basics franchise, con merchant], Wayne B [Step'n Ahead/Last Mile Foundation .. or whatever it's called these days .. another con man], Harry K [aka Batman – coke head and control freak hailing from CA], Harry A [aka 'the Handbag', 'pill-head' and control freak, East Kent], Richard E [coke head and thug also hailing from CA], Billy [the Kid, thug and control freak, Hampton Wick Friday, Esher Saturday], David B [deceased – but not forgotten – founder of Joys of Recovery and various offshoots – control freak, tried to manipulate his way on to the General Service Board - failed. See also The Fix, AA Cults I Have Known], David C [heir to David B, bigot, control freak, co-publisher of various cult websites, sponsor to Happy Dennis ['fruitcake in residence' Ealing]], Chris R, Myers R [US, both run the Primary Purpose franchise with a sideline in book-binding flogging upmarket Big Book covers to the undiscerning punter], Joe and Charlie [self-proclaimed recovery 'experts' whose extremely patchy (whatever did happen to Chapter 7?) 'Big Book study' has been misinforming AA members for years], Clancy [US, another control freak, Pacific Group 'guru', did a regular 'turn' at the Bristol Reunion, and 'anti beard' for some reason!], Mike Q(uinones) (US, Midtown deceased – good riddance! Sexual predator, control freak etc)... the list goes on.....We're sure we've missed a few other assorted predators, abusers, paedophiles, perverts etc along the way but be sure to mail us and we'll be happy to publicise your activities on the site. We think you get our drift!

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS For AA Minority Report 2013 click here

PPS Plymouth Intergroup corruption

Conference questions not quite up to par! (contd)

41. 
Would conference please give guidance as to the usage of public websites to lobby for national AA UK policies as an addition to the conference process itself?

Background

In the last few years there has been a growing incidence of UK‐based websites run by AA members who publicise their views on various topics of AA UK service policy and officers, GSO and the GSB. They also encourage AA members reading the websites to lobby GSO and GSB with these views. They go through the conference‐approved literature explaining where they believe it should be changed. They discuss various incidents they have heard of at GSO explaining where GSO or the board are at fault. Such blog posts are available to the general public. Password protected sites are easily available to set up. There is a UK service structure in existence that provide a process for lobbying and raising issues at the highest level. The use of public websites is maybe more likely to cause public controversy, and gets included in AA search results for the general public and professionals.

Terms of Reference No. 7 Fully covered by Tradition 10.

Comment: Yep! Answered this one before...... It's called: 'freedom of speech'. And AA's an ANONYMOUS organisation – not a secret one!

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS For AA Minority Report 2013 click here

PPS Plymouth Intergroup corruption

Conference questions not quite up to par! (contd)

40. 
Would the Fellowship discuss, share experience and make recommendations on whether the intent behind Tradition 9 is being upheld when questions submitted for consideration by Conference are being rejected by Conference Steering Committee as being the responsibility of some other service board or committee?

Background

• Tradition 9 
• Summary of questions not accepted for Conference 2014 
• The Conference Charter‐Great Britain, AA Structure Handbook for Great Britain 2013, pp104‐107 
• Concept IV and V

A number of questions submitted last year for Conference 2014 were rejected under submission category 7 as being the /responsibility' of some other service board or committee.

Tradition 9 states that ‘AA, as such, ought never be organized; but we may create service boards or committees directly responsible to those they serve.’
Pages 104 to 107 of The AA Structure Handbook for Great Britain 2013 state that ‘The Conference will ... be the vehicle by which AA in Great Britain can express its views on all matters of vital AA policy and all hazardous deviations from AA Tradition' and that ‘Since 1966 Conference has been for all practical purposes the voice and the effective conscience of the Fellowship in Great Britain'.

Concepts IV and V give a ‘right of participation' and a ‘right of appeal' to all members of the Fellowship.

My intention behind asking this question is to ask Conference to consider the intent behind the Traditions and the rights outlined by the Concepts, and for Conference to find a better way to uphold these when questions are being ignored by Conference Steering Committee and swept into an accountability vacuum between Conference and the Board of Trustees and, with Conference Steering Committee decisions only being revealed once per year, there being no right of appeal.

Terms of Reference No. 7 A new system is in place and the Terms of Reference of the CSC have been updated to reflect this.

Comment: Steady now! Risk of democracy breaking out!

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS For AA Minority Report 2013 click here

PPS Plymouth Intergroup corruption (see here)

Conference questions not quite up to par! (contd)

38. 
Would the Fellowship discuss, share experience and make recommendations on how GSO reserves should be brought back in line with Guidelines, for instance whether the selling price of AA literature ought to be reduced or whether other actions to reduce reserves should be considered?

Background

• Tradition 7

• Report of the Trustees and Financial Statements for the year ended 30 September 2013

• The AA Structure Handbook for Great Britain 2013 p120

• Concept XII

The AA Structure Handbook for Great Britain 2013 p120 suggests GSO hold 'a prudent reserve equivalent to the budget expenditure for the forthcoming year', this aim being underlined by the Reserves Policy in the Report of the Trustees. However, at 30 September 2013 reserves totalled £2,096,000 while annual expenditure was £1,228,000.

In the year to 30 September 2013 the General Service Board reported a surplus of £188,000, further increasing its reserves from a figure already over the Handbook's recommended position and the Trustees' aim

Tradition 71ong [sic] form states that ' ... we view with much concern those A.A. treasuries which continue, beyond prudent reserves, to accumulate funds for no stated A.A. purpose.'

Additionally, Concept XII warns against becoming ' ... the seat of perilous wealth ... '

In the year to 30 September 2013 literature sales were £519,000 while costs as disclosed in the accounts were £182,000. Literature is therefore being sold at almost three times cost.

Reducing the selling price of literature would bring many benefits, such as:

• decreasing the Board's annual surplus and reducing reserves to bring them into line with Handbook and Trustees' aims to hold one year's running costs as a prudent reserve.

• helping groups and members to carry the message more widely at a lower cost.

• allowing AA groups to sell literature at a lower price than online bookstores, making this part of the fundamental attraction of meetings.

My intention behind asking this question is to address two significant issues revealed by the latest Accounts – those being that literature is being sold at a large profit, significantly hindering its vital role in carrying the message more widely, and the unnecessary and ever growing level of reserves which are in danger of compromising our primary spiritual aim.

Terms of Reference No. 7 Treasurer’s report at Conference 2014 answers this.

Comment: We'd go further.... we believe that ALL AA literature should be available FREE as online downloads. Printed literature should only be sold at cost. A facility should be made available on the website where members may make a VOLUNTARY donation for downloads thus obtained (but only to a pre-set maximum limit per account to avoid bequests being made by an alternative route). Advice should also be given that non-AA members (outside organisations) may of course avail themselves of the facility but refrain from making any donation. Only then will we be operating according to our own stated principles. See Tradition 7. AA is not a publishing business nor should profits from literature sales be used to subsidise the running of the General Service Office. Apart from being in breach of the aforementioned Tradition this subsidy reduces the “power of the pot” ie. the ability of the fellowship to hold the service structure to account by the simple expedient of withholding funds. In the meantime we advise members to download the existing free literature (here (GB) and here (US)) instead of purchasing hard copy. Moreover where competitively priced alternatives are available they should purchase these (although people should be aware that some of these are major tax avoiders in the UK eg. Amazon). AA is quite capable of functioning without this form of subsidy.

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS For AA Minority Report 2013 click here

PPS Also see Plymouth (cult) Intergroup – fraud allegations (update)

Conference questions not quite up to par! (contd)

37. 
"Is there any appetite to make some minor editorial changes to the Big Book and 12and12, partly to remove gender specific references which could nowadays be seen as off‐putting and sexist, and partly to update terminology or references which have become outdated and/or are unlikely to be understood by a modern British audience? The aim is emphatically NOT to change the substance of either book, but merely to make some minor changes to wording which will make our core literature more accessible and help ensure that AA's message continues to be carried effectively. Not a lot is required, but examples would include: 

1. Examples of irrelevance or outdated items, or vernacular unsuitability:
(i) Reference to “Alaska or Salerno beachhead” 12and12 p.40
(ii) “When all our score cards read zero” (what pastime does this refer to? – I have often wondered) 12and12 p.29
(iii) “Hen or egg…” 12and12 p.26
(iv) Electricity (“modern house”, “strange energy so few understand “etc.) 12and12 p 37‐38
(v) “…Einstein’s theory, nuclear physics…” 12and12 p36
2. Examples of religious rigidity:

(i) “… vice‐President of American Atheist Society…” 12and12 p,26
(ii) “ .. priest minister or rabbi…” Big Book p.87
3. Examples of unintentional sexism:
(i) “…we ask our wives or friends to join us…” Big Book p.87
(ii) “Better men than we…” big book p.8
(iii) The entire “mother and children vs. father” paragraphs of Big Book pp 124‐131 and beyond   

Terms of Reference No. 7 Alcoholics Anonymous Great Britain does not have copyright to these books.

Comment: Quick answer: no. Most members possess the wit to interpret the text and translate it from its past context to the present. And who's to decide which changes to make? Maybe get rid of the 'God' word altogether! After all this might seem outdated and irrelevant to the atheist/agnostic brigade! See how far that one runs! You can't please all of the people all of the time!

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS For AA Minority Report 2013 click here 

PPS Plymouth (cult) Intergroup – fraud allegations – The clock's ticking …...

Conference questions not quite up to par! (contd)

35.

Can the Fellowship consider whether changes should be made to the system of phone response centres in AA service offices?

Background:

In some cities, such as London, the AA service office is used to take calls to AA helplines and is staffed by volunteers. For some of the Intergroups on the outskirts of London, this can be quite a long journey. From our Intergroup area, the journey by train takes 90 minutes and the shift ends at 10pm. For someone without a season ticket, the cost is over £10 return.

It is difficult for us to get members to commit to doing phone service for this reason, and we feel that more people might get involved in this service if there were an option to log in from home.

With the number of members coming to AA through the phone helpline decreasing, is it time to consider whether using volunteer teams in service offices is the best way to continue?

Terms of Reference No. 7 Local issue. Tradition 4.

Comment: A good idea. Do we really need to pay for expensive office space in London? Why waste members' money!

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS For AA Minority Report 2013 click here