1
From: "Bernard Thompson"
To: "fraser addecott"; Greg Lloyd Smith; "John Fray"
Cc: "Paul Holleran"; "Jim McNally"; "Frank Shennan"; "James Doherty"; "Rory MacLeod"; "Susan Carden"; "Angela Austin"
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 12:46 AM
Subject: Hustings

Chris Youett has emailed me, suggesting that there should be an election hustings in Glasgow.

To help assess the viability of this, I would be grateful if candidates
could contact me with their reactions to this and with details of their
general availability.

I would then be in a position to contact the Glasgow branch and Scottish
Office with a view to proposing such an event.

Chris Youett's election statement is now available on the website.

http://www.nujglasgow.org.uk/electionspecial.html
Regards,

Bernard
---------------------------------------------------------------
2
Subject: Hustings

From: "Greg Lloyd Smith" Greg Lloyd Smith
To: "'Bernard Thompson'" Bernard Thompson; "'fraser addecott'" Fraser Addecott; "'John Fray'" John Fray
Cc: "'Paul Holleran'" Paul Holleran; "'Jim McNally'" Jim McNally; "'Frank Shennan'" Frank Shennan; "'James Doherty'" James Doherty; "'Rory MacLeod'" Rory MacLeod; "'Susan Carden'" Susan Carden; "'Angela Austin'" Angela Austin
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 6:15 AM
Subject: RE: Hustings

Dear Bernard,

Unlike many I do not see the value in making political campaign speeches.

I operate within the commercial world with a minimum of Meetings as I view them as a waste of time for the most part.

I stand for action, initiative and fortitude.

Identifying problems, seeing a way through to resolution and acting on that plan is what I do every day, seven days a week.

Hand-holding and campaign promises should be left for others.

I am always available for a Meeting worthy of the time required, by in this case, I see little reason for it.

Best wishes,

Greg Lloyd Smith
---------------------------------------
3
Subject: Hustings

From: Rory MacLeod
To: Greg Lloyd Smith; Bernard Thompson; Fraser Addecott; John Fray
Cc: Paul Holleran; Jim McNally; Frank Shennan; James Doherty; Susan Carden; Angela Austin
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 10:35 PM
Subject: Re: Hustings

Greg,

I see that as a shame. As someone else who has, for most of the last 20
years, worked in the commercial world and adopted a lack-time-wasting strategy like yourself I think it would still be seen as folly not to take the chance to show the potential electorate how you would deliver "action, initiative, and fortitude" to the NUJ membership.

When I started my build up to becoming president of our union I was given some sound advice - don't treat it like a corporate company, the members don't see it that way.

While you may be able to bring many qualities to the post if you were successful in your election, the membership - as any inquiring journalist should do - may wish to test the theory with questions of their own. After all, you are asking them to trust you with their membership, dues and union.

It is entirely up to you, but I think it would do a disservice to the membership if there were to be hustings and you denied them the membership to use them to test your views against their own judgement. The hustings are not for the service of those standing for election, they are designed to allow the membership to see the whites of the eyes of the candidates and to put their theories of how they would act in the name of members to the test.

Rory MacLeod
Chair, Glasgow Branch
Former President NUJ
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4
Subject: Hustings

From: "Greg Lloyd Smith" Greg Lloyd Smith
To: Rory MacLeod; Bernard Thompson; Fraser Addecott; John Fray
Cc: Paul Holleran; Jim McNally; Frank Shennan; James Doherty; Susan Carden; Angela Austin
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 7:45 AM
Subject: RE: Hustings

Dear Rory,

Thank you for your email.

I appreciate all comments, favourable and critical alike.

In fact, I appreciate the critical comments more, because what I don't need is someone telling me what a great job I'm doing.

That, I can see through the targets/goals I have set for myself and the regular check-ups I make along the way.

Frankly, the only time I need or want advice is if it is contrary to my own view.

In fact, around our office, we have a saying: "In the absence of a demure, all replies are positive."
Hey! It works for us.

However in my opinion, everything should be operated as though it were a corporation; but especially Unions.

My experience in Unions that avoid that practice is disastrous.

How can we understand the community our members serve if we try to hold ourselves out as something special or different?

The Union IS a business, endeavouring to service its members and provide quality labour to the community.

I suspect that the members would be a great deal more upset to learn that whilst management was fooling itself we failed in our objectives.

Anyone who says different doesn't understand the objective or is working towards a personal agenda.

As to members' questions, I have established a web site and written to more than 9,000 members by email, inviting their questions.

To date, I have received 1 question (quite intelligent), 2 general comments and several hundred emails of support; oh yeah and a silly comment from one of Mr Fray's supports.

I therefore welcome the questions of any member.

Indeed, I welcome the questions of anyone, member or not, on any subject.

Every email received, gets an immediate personal reply from me, so it's the best way for the journalists out there to test the theories, as you say.

I would point out that you yourself missed your first opportunity because when you wrote to me, you merely expressed your opinion (copying in a number of people) and did not put any question to me, on Union campaigns, business or any other issue.

In fact, after reading your message, I had to check, to see if you were on the list of Candidates.

HA HA

Best wishes,

Greg Lloyd Smith

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5
From: Rory MacLeod
To: Greg Lloyd Smith; Bernard Thompson; Fraser Addecott; John Fray
Cc: Paul Holleran; Jim McNally; Frank Shennan; James Doherty; Susan Carden; Angela Austin
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 9:00 AM
Subject: Re: Hustings

I take your points, although the reason I didn't ask any questions is because I rather hoped you would take the opportunity to travel to any hustings to face questions there.

There is a huge difference between the white heat of face to face debate than the impersonal sterility of answering questions by e mail or even on paper. That is not to say the latter two do not have their place, of course.

One thing I would take issue with, though, is the suggestion that the union is just like a business or any other corporation. If that were the case we would surely be derecognising our staff and laying many of them off with paltry remuneration and keeping a low-wage structure for the few that remain.

The allusion of the union being like a business is not a good one. It misses the point of the reason why they exist, were set up, and are still necessary.

However, I would take the greatest pleasure in being able to question you more closely on your beliefs and proposals for the future if you were only to attend a hustings!! The discussion nature of these meetings is better than one sided e mails going back and forth and can lead to better understanding as the various nuances and tones can be picked up which, hitherto, has proved very difficult my mail - either electronic or snail.

Rory
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6
Subject: Hustings

From: "Greg Lloyd Smith" Greg Lloyd Smith
To: Rory MacLeod; Bernard Thompson; Fraser Addecott; John Fray
Cc: Paul Holleran; Jim McNally; Frank Shennan; James Doherty; Susan Carden; Angela Austin
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 9:41 AM
Subject: RE: Hustings

WHOOSH!

Did you hear that?

That was your message missing its mark.

I have read this part of your message:
"If that were the case we would surely be derecognising our staff and laying many of them off with paltry remuneration and keeping a low-wage structure for the few that remain"
I read it a couple times.

Then I handed it to my assistant and he read it.

Rory, we don't know what you're on about.

This is one reason I find Meetings (of all kind) so tedious and unproductive.

Imagine, if a journalist cannot make their meaning clear in writing, what hope would we have in a Meeting, where presumably you'd be out of your element?

Gosh!

I am quite active in the local politics of our Island (Mykonos), working with the Mayor's Office.

Indeed in nearly 20 years, I have never (yet) attended one of their Meetings, but guess who they rely upon to achieve our specific goals?

Guess who is credited with the surplus budget?

Guess who manages the staff of 500 transient workers?

It doesn't take a Hustings to determine if one is suitable for the Post of DGS.

One can always find someone to smile, shake your hand and promise you the world (or near enough).

That same person is usually the first to blame others when the job doesn't achieve its desired result.

As for one-sided emails, Christ this one has 11 sides albeit 9 of them are displaying voyeuristic tendencies.

Regardless, I gleamed your intent from the first message, and indeed, the subsequent exchange has (really) only been for the hangers-on, who we include in this email.

Best wishes,

Greg Lloyd Smith
---------------------------------------
7
Subject: Hustings

From: Rory MacLeod
To: Greg Lloyd Smith; Bernard Thompson; Fraser Addecott; John Fray
Cc: Paul Holleran; Jim McNally; Frank Shennan; James Doherty; Susan Carden; Angela Austin
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 9:48 AM
Subject: RE: Hustings

Greg,

I genuinely hoped you would be a worthy candidate for the DGS job. From your first e mail I was encouraged that there was someone who was willing to make a good fist of this election and discuss the issues which affect the majority of our members ate the coalface.

I am glad we have had this exchange, if only because it has drawn you out a little and has now shown me that I probably should not be placing my union, my faith, my subs, and my colleagues in your hands as DGS.

Maybe if you had attended more meetings or gatherings of the NUJ you would understand the problems facing the wider membership, rather than just those in the limited area you have allowed yourself exposure to so far.

Thanks for the information and your thoughts that you have sent because they have informed and provided more information to one of the lectorate you are appealing to - unfortunately it has succeeded in making you lose a vote rather than gain one.

Rory
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8
Subject: Hustings

From: "Greg Lloyd Smith" Greg Lloyd Smith
To: Rory MacLeod; Bernard Thompson; Fraser Addecott; John Fray
Cc: Paul Holleran; Jim McNally; Frank Shennan; James Doherty; Susan Carden; Angela Austin
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 9:53 AM
Subject: RE: Hustings

...and here is my point at long last.

It is not your vote that matters (at all) but the nearly 24,000 members who didn't bother to vote in the last election.

If my candidacy encourages communication such as we have enjoyed, then I have (yet again) succeeded.

Best wishes,

Greg Lloyd Smith
-------------------------------------------------------------
9
Subject: Hustings

From: Rory MacLeod
To: Greg Lloyd Smith; Bernard Thompson; Fraser Addecott; John Fray
Cc: Paul Holleran; Jim McNally; Frank Shennan; James Doherty; Susan Carden; Angela Austin
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 10:04 AM
Subject: Re: Hustings

Believe, if you like, that you can change everything all by yourself.

However, if 24,000 didn't vote that leaves around 10,000 active members of the NUJ who could be most useful if you were able to bring them together and help reshape the map of the union's future if you so wished.

No organisation ever has full involvement of its members - trade union, business, clubs, trade organisations etc - but the secret is to get the best use out of those who do participate to gain the best possible future for everyone who is a member.

As to whether my vote, or that of any one else, matters - this point beggars belief. If you do not care about the votes why enter the election and waste both the union and the members' time? If you are serious about changing things you will need the vote to gain the position to be able to change things.

If you are not interested in the poistion then these exchanges are nothing more than idle banter and conversation and do nothing serious to try and change things.

Actions speak louder than words and it is those who actually get off their behinds and do something rather than indulge in mental masturbation or the kind of smiling glad-handing you mention that actualkly achieve something of substance and worth.

Get serious about the election and achieving something or have the dignity and respect for those that want to do something and withdraw and stop clogging up the system just because you want to make some kind of limited and futile point.

Rory
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

10
Subject: Hustings

From: "Greg Lloyd Smith" Greg Lloyd Smith
To: Rory MacLeod; Bernard Thompson; Fraser Addecott; John Fray
Cc: Paul Holleran; Jim McNally; Frank Shennan; James Doherty; Susan Carden; Angela Austin; "'Linda York'"; "'Tim Gopsill'" Tim Gopsill
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 10:39 AM
Subject: RE: Hustings

Dear Rory,

You will recall that you were recently expounding on how "the members" would not appreciate it if the NUJ was to be run more like a corporation with clear objectives, specific targets and results orientated check-points, but then you pass over the issue that more than 77.4% of the NUJ members do not vote.

In fact, my understanding is that there are not more than 31,000 members, despite information I have recently received from the head office:
"All members entitled to vote ie all full members, life members and honorary members.

I don't have up-to-date figures but I would estimate this to be around 25,000 members"
So, there is (perhaps) a problem with the math you propose.

However, once again, we differ on opinion.

I would suggest that the Role of the Union Official is to encourage participation of every member and or to determine the reason or reasons why between 77-80% (depending on which set of numbers you use) of the membership base cannot be bothered to tick a box.

This reminds me of a story, which I am sure you've heard, but it's nice to repeat all the same.

To paraphrase, often in political campaigns, proponents like to say, "if you don't vote, you only have yourself to blame."
However, I disagree.

You see, if one does not vote, one is "entitled" to blame the other people for the result.

In fact, of the current membership of anywhere from 25,000 (NUJ head office figure) to 34,000 (your figure) only around 6,000 or so were actually responsible for electing the current GS and DGS.

The many thousands who did not vote are blameless. Think about it.

In fact, their "vote" is one of apathy.

It's like the tale of the Talk Radio Programme on the subject of Apathy, which attracted no callers.

Who's to blame?

I say that real problem is in the numbers.

The NUJ isn't a private boys club and its suffering a great many problems that cannot be fixed by increasing its membership base.

The problem is that members have little faith in the existing management.

They want a change.

Their apathy screams out but in typical fashion, you suggest serving only those who vote rather than addressing the reason why others do not.

You were obviously 'elected' to represent existing management, and your
message becomes clearer with each email, and I am pleased.

Is this a serious point or are you trying to provoke me:

"Get serious about the election and achieving something or have the
dignity and respect for those that want to do something and withdraw and
stop clogging up the system just because you want to make some kind of
limited and futile point."

Shame on you.

Best wishes,

Greg Lloyd Smith
---------------------------------------
11
Subject: Hustings

From: Rory MacLeod
To: Greg Lloyd Smith; Bernard Thompson; Fraser Addecott; John Fray
Cc: Paul Holleran; Jim McNally; Frank Shennan; James Doherty; Susan Carden; Angela Austin; Linda York; Tim Gopsill
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 10:51 AM
Subject: RE: Hustings

Greg,

It is very simple. If the membership want change they will vote for you if you convince them you are the person to be able to deliver that change. If they don't vote for you then, by your own argument, they will still be able to blame the existing management and yourself for failing to deliver change. However, the important thing is that there are people who are willing to try to take the union forward.

In terms of how the union should be run. I, and many others, did not join it to see it run as a business. Good management is totally different. We want to see the union run well and efficiently but not like a business. The difference that lies in that statement is all important and may seem subtle to some, but it is so important.

I wish you well in the election but would suggest using hustings as a way of canvassing wider opinion across the whole union as well as a vehicle for giving your own opinion. I was surprised as I travelled around branches and chapels as President to find just how wide-ranging the issues were that had a) attracted members to the union in the first place; b) they now wanted addressed as a matter of urgency; and c) they wanted addressed in the long-term to encourage them to stay in the union.

Rory

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12
Subject: Hustings

From: "Tim Gopsill" Tim Gopsill
To: Greg Lloyd Smith; Rory MacLeod; Bernard Thompson; Fraser Addecott; John Fray
Cc: Paul Holleran; Jim McNally; Frank Shennan; James Doherty; Susan Carden; Angela Austin; "'Linda York'" Linda York; "'Tim Gopsill'" Tim Gopsill
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 10:47 AM
Subject: RE: Hustings

Greg

The question of numbers is easily sorted out There are different kinds of membership - not all are entitled to vote.

the NUJ is open about its membership, unlike some unions (probably because ours are going up while theirs are going down!) These are the figures from the 2003 annual report now at the printers (that's why I'm intervening, because the document is not out yet). They are from the computer.

Temps, unemployed, students and suspense don't get to vote. Hope this info is helpful.

Incidentally, the NUJ's roughly 25-28% return in elections is high by union standards. It 's more than Tony Woodley just got in the T&G. A union is
hardly as crucial in people's lives as a government so you can't really
expect a majority to vote.

Anyway, it's up to you to wow 'em into doing so.

Good luck!
TimG
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13
Subject: Hustings

From: "Greg Lloyd Smith" Greg Lloyd Smith
To: "'Tim Gopsill'" Tim Gopsill; Rory MacLeod; Bernard Thompson; Fraser Addecott; John Fray
Cc: Paul Holleran; Jim McNally; Frank Shennan; James Doherty; Susan Carden; Angela Austin; "'Linda York'" Linda York
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 11:08 AM
Subject: RE: Hustings

Thanks for that Tim.

That's why I included you in the latest email exchange.

I knew you would sort it out.

Cheers,

Greg
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14
Subject: Hustings

From: "Greg Lloyd Smith" Greg Lloyd Smith
To: Rory MacLeod; Bernard Thompson; Fraser Addecott; John Fray
Cc: Paul Holleran; Jim McNally; Frank Shennan; James Doherty; Susan Carden; Angela Austin; Jake Ecclestone
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 11:23 AM
Subject: RE: Hustings

Gee Rory,

What are you saying?

Are you saying that the other two candidates are shills for the current DGS?

Surely, if the membership desire a change, they could vote for either
Fraser Addecott or Chris Youett, in addition to the correct choice?

Having read this http://213.55.2.162/ecclestone/nuj.phtml, as a member,

I am left with doubts concerning the existing management's ability to
operate either a boys club or business, let alone a Union looking after
the interests of its members.

If you haven't read it, please do as it's a great read...especially the bit about the libel.

In any event, to be totally honest (as I always 'am) with you, I feel
your regular well-wishing somewhat disingenuous since you have already indicated your choice of candidate.

Best wishes,

Greg Lloyd Smith
---------------------------------------
15
Subject: Hustings

From: Rory MacLeod
To: Greg Lloyd Smith; Bernard Thompson; Fraser Addecott; John Fray
Cc: Paul Holleran; Jim McNally; Frank Shennan; James Doherty; Susan Carden; Angela Austin; Jake Ecclestone
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 11:31 AM
Subject: RE: Hustings

Greg,

Maybe you misunderstand the friendship and camaraderie that exists in trade unionsim. While I may not be convinced enough by your arguments to make me give you my vote, it does not mean I do not wish you well. After all we are all supposedly on the same side in that we have the best interests of the mebers at heart even if we disagree in approach.

It is a lesson from history that bad managements and media owners thrive at the times when trade unionists are distracted by internal squabbles and disagreements.

I do wish you well. Robust and incisive debate are healthy, but it would be sad if it were to be replaced by personal abuse. I have disagreed with you but that does not mean I wish you any ill or bad luck. There will be some areas we agree on and these are the ones that can be cultivated and used to best use for taking the union forward. I would have thought that is what all candidates would want, I hope.

Rory
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

16
Subject: Hustings

From: "Greg Lloyd Smith" Greg Lloyd Smith
To: Rory MacLeod; Bernard Thompson; Fraser Addecott; John Fray
Cc: Paul Holleran; Jim McNally; Frank Shennan; James Doherty; Susan Carden; Angela Austin; Jake Ecclestone
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 11:49 AM
Subject: RE: Hustings

Rory,

I understand perfectly friendship and camaraderie.

What you offer however is a conflicting message. You see, I sincerely hope the other three candidates lose their bid.

You wrote: "I wish you well in the election."

Wishing me well in the election is a non-sense if you desire your candidate to win. It suggests a two-faced attitude.

I represent honesty. I sincerely desire your guy to lose, because I believe I can do a better job and I believe the membership have already provided a vote of no confidence by ignoring the ballot.

Offering me best wishes or good health or kind friendship is another
thing altogether.

I often communicate with people who I detest, but with whom we must
either do business or associate with for one reason or another, and they
all receive my best wishes, but I would not wish their objectives success, since to a large degree their objects are opposed to my own or those I represent.

As to luck. I don't subscribe to that lark. We are, we achieve and we create because of what goes into our mind. It's not about luck.

Best wishes,

Greg Lloyd Smith
---------------------------------------
17

Subject: Hustings

From: Rory MacLeod
To: Greg Lloyd Smith; Bernard Thompson; Fraser Addecott; John Fray
Cc: Paul Holleran; Jim McNally; Frank Shennan; James Doherty; Susan Carden; Angela Austin; Jake Ecclestone
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 11:55 AM
Subject: RE: Hustings

Greg,

whatever. U seem determined to make this a conflict situation. Remember this correspondence started as, hopefully, a piece of constructive advice. I also hoped it would help me get you to change your mind to come and talk to the members I represent as chair of Glasgow branch and one of the Scottish representatives on NEC.

You chose not to accept that, and that is your choice. I do wish you luck in the election as I think, for the sake of the union as a whole, I would like to see a well run, well fought, and vigorous election and for that to happen it needs all the candidates to give of their best. If you do not believe in serendipitous luck then good fortune in manufacturing your own luck.

Rory
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

18
Subject: Hustings

From: "Greg Lloyd Smith" Greg Lloyd Smith
To: Rory MacLeod; Bernard Thompson; Fraser Addecott; John Fray
Cc: Paul Holleran; Jim McNally; Frank Shennan; James Doherty; Susan Carden; Angela Austin; Jake Ecclestone
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 12:11 PM
Subject: RE: Hustings

Rory,

My ole Dad used to say when you point the finger at someone, be careful b'cause there's three more fingers pointing back at you!

Remember, you were replying to my original message which was to say that I would not attend your hustings, irrespective of whether they were held in London, Glasgow or outside my door-step in Mykonos.

I fail to see any conflict in my emails to you. I am merely reflecting your message and questioning your intent.

You fail to comment on any of the points I make, and you have thus far, failed to ask me a single question regarding my ideas for plans for the operation of the Union.

Therefore, and I suspect rightly so, your diatribe has been for the
benefit of your masters.

I sincerely hope that you have served them well, at least according to their standards.

Best wishes,

Greg Lloyd Smith
----------------------------------------------------------
19
Subject: Hustings

From: Rory MacLeod
To: Greg Lloyd Smith; Bernard Thompson; Fraser Addecott; John Fray
Cc: Paul Holleran; Jim McNally; Frank Shennan; James Doherty; Susan Carden; Angela Austin; Jake Ecclestone
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 12:17 PM
Subject: RE: Hustings
Greg,

I have asked questions which you have ignored and you have displayed a singular lack of recognition of any need to coinsult with the members which I would have thought an important duty for any office bearer in this union. It was to that end I replied, to get you to meet with members and discuss your plans.

As to my masters - I do not know to whom you refer. I am a free person, in as much as anyone is free, and have never knowingly kow towed to any "master". I am a believer in the rights of the individual and the strength of the collective and look, in trade union terms, to achieving concensus to bring the greatest benefit to the greatest number and that is why I believe hustings and travelling to meet members is important as anyone holding office in this union does so to serve them as it is their union.

If your tone is now going to be personally abusive I suggest we end the correspondence now as I have tried to be polite and civil and your tone suggests you neither believe that nor that you now have to be towards me.

Rory
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

20

Subject: Hustings

From: "Greg Lloyd Smith" Greg Lloyd Smith
To: Rory MacLeod; Bernard Thompson; Fraser Addecott; John Fray
Cc: Paul Holleran; Jim McNally; Frank Shennan; James Doherty; Susan Carden; Angela Austin; Jake Ecclestone
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 12:30 PM
Subject: RE: Hustings

Rory,

Which part of my previous message didn't you understand?

I thought it was fairly clear that I did not believe the time required, to be time well-spent, in relation to your proposed hustings.

Since that email, you have made quite rude comments, including:
"Get serious about the election and achieving something or have the dignity and respect for those that want to do something and withdraw and stop clogging up the system just because you want to make some kind of limited and futile point."

You have made your point. You support John Fray. Good.

In fact, I admit a degree of admiration in your ability to make a choice, when so many NUJ members seem unable. Leave it that.

However, and you were placed on notice of this from the onset, I reply personally to every email I receive.

Best wishes,

Greg Lloyd Smith
---------------------------------------

21
Subject: Hustings

From: "Greg Lloyd Smith" Greg Lloyd Smith
To: Rory MacLeod; Bernard Thompson; Fraser Addecott; John Fray
Cc: Paul Holleran; Jim McNally; Frank Shennan; James Doherty; Susan Carden; Angela Austin; "'Tim Gopsill'" Tim Gopsill; Jake Ecclestone
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 1:29 PM
Subject: RE: Hustings

Rory,

I have added a link to my campaign web site "Meet the Press", with our
recent email exchange published there.

I think it's important for Members to read the full exchange.

Best wishes,

Greg Lloyd Smith

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
22
Subject: Hustings

From: Rory MacLeod
To: Greg Lloyd Smith; Bernard Thompson; Fraser Addecott; John Fray
Cc: Paul Holleran; Jim McNally; Frank Shennan; James Doherty; Susan Carden; Angela Austin; Tim Gopsill; Jake Ecclestone
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 1:31 PM
Subject: RE: Hustings

Thanx for that Greg.

The more info they have the better!
----------------------------------------------------------
23
Subject: Hustings

From: "Bernard Thompson" Bernard Thompson
To: Greg Lloyd Smith; Rory MacLeod; Fraser Addecott; John Fray
Cc: Paul Holleran; Jim McNally; Frank Shennan; James Doherty; Susan Carden; Angela Austin; "'Tim Gopsill'" Tim Gopsill; Jake Ecclestone
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 2:46 PM
Subject: RE: Hustings

Greg,

Although I hesitate to further prolong this exchange, I feel that your
responses have raised some pertinent issues and some obvious questions suggest themselves:

1 Have you ever attended an NUJ meeting? If so, how many have you attended?

2 Given your attitude to meetings, would you attend NEC meetings, meetings of the NEC Emergency Committee or ADM?

3 If elected, would you be prepared to move to London?

Regards,

Bernard Thompson
-------------------------------------------
24
Subject: Hustings

From: "Greg Lloyd Smith" Greg Lloyd Smith
To: "'Bernard Thompson'" Bernard Thompson; Rory MacLeod; Fraser Addecott; John Fray
Cc: Paul Holleran; Jim McNally; Frank Shennan; James Doherty; Susan Carden; Angela Austin; "'Tim Gopsill'" Tim Gopsill
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 3:12 PM
Subject: RE: Hustings
Dear Bernard,

Thanks for your email.

I wonder whether or not it wouldn't have been less painful for all parties concerned had you hesitated just a moment longer, because I believe these issues have already been dealt with in exchanges which you are already aware of; refer the NUJ Online Forum and or my most recent exchange with Mr MacLeod.

Regardless, in answer to your questions:
1. No;
2. Yes; as required and needed;
3. I am not aware of any requirement to live in London, but as I
have already indicated, my family own a house there and one in Scotland
and so as I have already indicated, if elected, I would work from the
UK;

Best wishes,

Greg Lloyd Smith