Message no. 1578 THE ONE CLICK GROUP
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/THEONECLICKPROTEST/

Statement from the MEA Chairman, Chris Ellis
26 January 2004

CHRIS ELLIS (MEA CHAIRMAN) STATEMENT

I am pleased to announce that, under the heading of POLICY, the new
Board have agreed to include a sentence drawn up by myself which
unequivocally states that "THIS ASSOCIATION REGARDS THE PROMOTION OF
RESEARCHES INTO THE PHYSICAL CAUSES OF M.E. AS THE PARAMOUNT OBJECT
OF ITS EXISTENCE AND INTENDS TO TAKE AN ACTIVE PART IN LOBBYING
PARLIAMENT AND WHOMSOEVER IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE ITS OBJECTIVE."

I trust that the above is crystal clear and represents no more nor
less in its intentions than as promised to the people who elected me
as Trustee. I hereby call for the support (or otherwise ) of those
people and, indeed, any other interested parties. Pending any such
response, I would remark that I am well aware that fine words demand
fine deeds and must advise you that without your expressed support,
unrelenting support, the implementation of these fine words
is in jeopardy. On the basis of the last Board Meeting held 20th Jan
it appears to me that some Trustees may well be prepared to fight
against every paragraph, every line and every inch of the way against
the fulfilment of the above objective. My reasons for alleging this
possibility are as under.

The need for a website statement was quickly agreed by all at the
Meeting and there followed a discussion as to what should be
contained therein. As I listened to the proposed wordings concerning
a so -called strategy for the Association, I must report to you that
I was so moved as to declare that, if the remainder of the Board
insisted on issuing a statement on the lines being suggested, then I
would have no other option other than to resign both as
Chairman and Trustee. I made it clear that what was being mooted did
not represent what I had promised the voters at the AGM. Only in
consequence of this strong declaration was it then agreed (or so I
understood it ) that I write a statement to be approved by the Board.
In the event, another statement was put forward in addition to my own
and indeed the proclamation which will now appear only contains a
single sentence of my own- the one cited at the beginning of
this E-mail, the substance of which is my sole concern. The plain
fact is that, without a further stand-off on my part, this single
sentence would not have appeared. All those who read this I leave as
my judge and jury.

Let me take the matter further by putting to you that, by the above
sentence under discussion, MEA has now clearly established its battle
lines. In particular this single sentence proclaims an identity for
MEA which is now completely different from that of AfME for the very
first time. People with ME now have a clear choice.The courses of the
two organizations are distinctly separate or are set for collision .
Which is it to be? Let the members and all other interested parties
make their views known on the web.

The previous sentence leads me to report that representations have
been made by AfME for a joint meeting with MEA. At the Board meeting
the other day it was mooted that that such a meeting might be
attended by Dr. Charles Shepherd and myself for the MEA. All that I
am prepared to say at the moment is that I would seek to persuade Dr
Shepherd not to attend such talks as an MEA representative
in view of the possible interpretation of this by certain of his
detractors .

Again dear people I seek your support and comments.Should any such
dialogue be established?

I return now to reporting, to those interested, some of the other
points dealt with at our Board Meeting( Regrettably approximately 98%
of the total time spent was in discussing problems of administration
left by the previous Board). I hereby confirm that it is my firm
opinion that MEA is viable in the short term. It must be clearly
understood, however, that, in the main, it is my impression that in
almost all matters relating to management and organization I
would appear to be in a minority of one. I am prepared to concede
here only that a radical overhall might possibly be delayed. It is
not, however something which can be left for too long. The continued
health of MEA, it must be stressed, essentially lies in the hands of
its current members and all those who might be tempted to join to
support the new policy outlined above. Again, I am sure I
have Ieft you all in no doubt as to the difficulties and delays that
may lie in persuading my Trustee colleagues to carry matters
forward but, here again the solution lies with members .Trustee
volunteers are desperately needed and the current Board of 6 needs
urgently to be increased to 12. We are running without a Chief
Executive and, although not mathematically
provable, doubling our strength would certainly decimate the load.
Here I would give you the example of Angela Flack who, in spite of
having M.E. herself, manages to make a valiant contribution to the
Board. Given the existence of E-mail Board Meetings I see no reason
why others with M.E. should not contribute to decision making.The
board must make provisions accordingly.

I personally am unable to contemplate moving forward whilst having to
remove obstacles continually being placed in my path by Board
members. I demand that :-

-The Board take immediate steps ( as they are able and should have
done from the outset ) to remove Mr Peter Stewart from the Board. As
treasurer for the past two years it must be clear to all that he has
been one of the architects of the lamentable financial and
administrative mess into which the MEA has fallen. On
these grounds alone he must go but the fact that he is obviously
unable to accept our new policy is sufficient grounds for the Board
to act.Who says I am uncompromising?

-The Board take immediate steps to insist that Mr Rick Osman, the
other remainder from the previous Board, confirms his acceptance of
the new policy.It is my opinion that he would possibly have much to
offer the MEA should he be prepared to so do .At the moment, it is
also my opinion that he is a Val Hockey android in need of re-
programming. By his own admission,he does not take information from
the web. I fear that his refusal to keep himself up-to-date (
which,alas, can nowadays only be achieved via the internet )
represents a dereliction of duty these days. What sort of question is
it to ask "Who is the Countess of Mar?" for instance in the present
circumstances? -The Board must find without delay another Chairman
since the present incumbent is without doubt the worse possible
selection for the job.He is temperamentally against imposing the
petty disciplines attaching to a meeting and for which a
Chairman is responsible.He is often completely uncompromising and
aggressive (not to say violent ) in speech,manner and tone.As this is
is only a self -confession, I am sure the position is somewhat
worse.I move (I hope ).

There it is then,late in coming (for reasons beyond my control ), but
a little positive in sentiment don't you think.I hope that I have
delivered in full the promises made by me at the AGM- namely a new
policy and, as Dr Shepherd pens it " an end to the culture of secrecy
at the heart of the MEA".The question ,dear readers, will be whether
the poachers will turn gamekeepers. Keep your eyes open.

Unless I receive overwhelming support from the web community, then
you may treat this as my swansong for obvious reasons.I am not
prepared to move any further forward knowing that I might be shot in
the back. I leave you all the final judgement and verdict on my
actions, as it should be.

Whilst I am on, the following is to a friend and is private and
confidential, Any doubts now? Like I told you it's all in the Rugby
League Coaching manual. Pressure,pressure,pressure.Some of our
players seem to be resting on defence.This is inexcusable don't you
think? On attack maybe,but not on defence.Do you think that I am
right in not selecting players who may fancy going on the transfer
list?

CHRIS ELLIS (CURRENT CHAIRMAN ME ASSOCIATION )