IUGG XXI Comptes Rendus	Top	Prev.	Next	End
Search:
Contents

THIRD MEETING OF COUNCIL
21st. G.A., Boulder, Colorado, USA, July 2-14, 1995
Thursday, July 13

PARTICIPANTS:

NATIONAL DELEGATES AT COUNCIL

Australia	B. Kennett		Japan	S. Uyeda
Austria	H. Sünkel		Korea (South)	C.G. Baag
Belgium	P. Paquet		Luxembourg	J. Flick
Brazil*	D. Blitzkow		Netherlands	F.C. Zuidema
Canada	R. Langley		New Zealand	R.I. Walcott
Chile	E. Gillmore		Nigeria*	R.O. Cooker
China	Liu Guangding		Poland	L.W. Baran
Croatia	K. Colic		Portugal	L. Mendes-Victor
Czech Rep.	P. Holota		Romania	C. Demetrescu
Denmark	C.C. Tscherning		Russia	G.A.
Egypt	A. Ashour		Slovakia	M. Hvozdara
Estonia	R. Room		Slovenija	B. Sket-Motnikar
Finland	J. Kakkuri		South-Africa	R.J. Kleywegt
France	F. Barlier		Spain	J.O. Cardus
Germany	R. Roth		Sweden	O. Kulhanek
Great-Britain	M.J. Hamlin		Switzerland	H. Lang
Hungary	J. Adam		Taipei*	C.Y. Tsay
Iceland	R. Stefansson		Turkey	O. Ergunay
India	V.K. Gaur		U.S.A.	C. Harrison
Ireland	P. Lynch		Zimbabwe*	F. Podmore
Italy	C. Morelli

* not voting

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

FINANCE COMMITTEE

BIRMINGHAM (M. Hamlin, M. Gadsden, D. Walling, G. Westbrook) during presentation.

H. Moritz opens the meeting at 9.00 a.m. 35 National Delegates are present. 31 are voting.

A. Presentation of the University of Birmingham

M.J. Hamlin and D. Walling from the U.K. National Committee, M. Gadsden from IAGA and G. Westbrook from the University of Birmingham (Head of Department of Geology and Geophysics) are invited to make the presentation of the bid. M.J. Hamlin outlines the organisational structure which is committed to meet IUGG requirements. The bid is based on the present pattern of General Assemblies. G. Westbrook comments a 2 minute video on the University of Birmingham. He then presents the budget, in which a surplus of £60K has been budgeted (~$100K). Questions addressed are answered by the four persons.

A Committee with 6 to 8 persons is to be formed. The budget looks well balanced. For 3 600 participants, the registration fees would be on the same level as in Boulder. The whole G.A. would be at Birmingham University with the opening and closing ceremonies at the International Convention Center of Birmingham if the numbers exceeded the capacity of the largest assembly hall of the University (brochures and maps are distributed). There are direct flight from Europe and U.S.A., and London is one hour and a half by train. There are about 9 000 rooms in two star hotels, 2 000 student rooms at the University (several hundreds with facilities). The cost of hotel rooms in Birmingham ranges from 30-40 pounds (in small hotels) to 70-100 pounds in more luxury places. The potential organizers have a lot of experience in social events and happenings.

A discussion takes place; main points are summarized below.

Geohost program

President stresses that there should be a Geohost Program helping the (young) scientists from countries with poor economic resources to attend. M.J. Hamlin thinks it is a decision to be set up by the Council (a resolution to that effect was passed); though he would be very much in favor. Austria comments that 100 people were financed by such a program in Vienna, supported by the Academy of Austria. Egypt underlines that the Geohost Program priority should be to provide support for accomodation to Developing Countries people. It is noted that nothing appears in the presented budget. Zimbabwe suggests that some percentage of the income from registration fees could go to the Geohost Program.

Budget

France wishes to have copies of the budget sheet. It is seconded by Austria, Belgium, Portugal and others. (No copying facilities being available in the building, it is agreed that copy of the budget paper be given later.) France also asks to have more details about the assumptions made. Westbrook answers that their analysis has taken into account the experience from Austria; they are also aware of the way it was organized in the USA case though it had different aspects. M.J. Hamlin comments that, in the USA budget, there are indirect costs for AGU, etc. whereas there is nothing of this kind in the UK proposal budget. A projected attendance of 4500 being comparable to the Vienna case, Austria comments that the cost for registering the participants was reduced since most was done in house: is it absolutely necessary to have a specific staff for conference booking ? Westbrook replies that it also implies accomodation booking. Booking arrangements would be best done by `specialists' taken from outside (including computers and software to handle everything).

Facilities

USA asks about the facilities which will be made available for rooming the IUGG officers, the conference sessions etc..

Gadsden tells that, for each Association, all sessions could be in one building. Clustering will be possible. 35 conference rooms (fitting a minimum of 100 persons, some of them many more) have been identified. In addition there are numerous class-rooms (some of them quite large) at the University (in the budget, the cost for the rooms at the University is accounted for).

The Birmingham delegation is thanked for its presentation.

B. Remaining Agenda Items

25. Adjustment of the unit of subscription

Introduction by Treasurer.

Egypt wishes to have this presented by the Finance Committee. This is done by its President (Father Cardus). The proposal is to use the inflation rate of OECD, to adjust yearly the unit instead of having abrupt changes. Canada makes the motion of discussing this; it is seconded by Egypt.

Canada quotes that this inflation rate has been ~ 3.8% in the past recent years. The mechanism considered by the Finance Committee seems reasonable.

President reminds that the matter is financial and therefore that we will proceed to a weighted vote.

USA and Egypt ask that the statement of the rule to be used be read.

President of Finance Committee reads it: "The unit of subscription for each year shall be adjusted by the same percentage that the OECD inflator for the USA changes over the 12 months ending in September of the previous year. The first adjustment shall begin in 1996, based on the 1995 Unit of 1200 dollars and on the September 94 to September 95 OECD inflator for the USA".

President is very much in favor; Austria agrees.

The Council is also informed that ICSU has a rate based on the same rule.

VOTE (weighted):
130 Y, O N, 1 abs.

24. Finances and Budget

President of Finance Committee states that the Union finances are in good health at present though reserves are low. There is some concern about countries in arrears of payment. Secretary General and Treasurer should try to find ways to incite them to pay their arrears.

A paper on the budget proposed by the Finance Committee for the period 1996-1999 is distributed.

President underlines the important work done by the Finance Committee.

Following the decision taken by the Council to reinstate the Committee for Developing Countries, the Finance Committee proposes to have the IUGG officers working on raising funds from governmental and non governmental agencies for supporting it. This is seconded by Egypt. The discussion is opened. Egypt says it is a logical step after the decision to create the Committee for Developing Countries. We must have all possible help of the Bureau to reach funds outside the Union. President says it is to be passed to the future Executive Committee and Bureau.

Nigeria fully supports the motion but wants to clarify the conditions to be attached to the scientists who will benefit from such fund. For example, it is sometimes stated that assistance can be given only to candidates from Member Countries which are not in arrears of subscriptions. Nigeria feels that this should not be the case with funds coming from outside the Union (though collected by the Union) and if the needs of young scientists from Developing Countries are to be met. Besides, the responsibility of soliciting funds should not be confined to members of the Bureau alone, but scientists from the developed countries should also be involved in the fund raising.

VOTE by hand on the motion including Nigeria recommendation:
a large majority in favor. The motion is accepted.

President of Finance Committee then makes the presentation of the budget. On the chapter of expenditures, it is noted that the cost of administration is kept at a very low level thanks to the Secretary General, also that the cost of publications preparation and printing is low due to the efforts of the Honorary Secretary General the mailing being covered thanks to Luxembourg support.

The allocation to symposia to be distributed by the Secretary General is smaller than over the preceeding period, one result of the readjustment of the allocations to Associations.

President recalls that Associations Presidents contributed to the elaboration of this readjustment, and they must be thanked.

Italy moves and Germany supports to discuss the matter.

Belgium asks clarification on the provision of $100K made in the budget for the next General Assembly: is it an acceptance of a new way of management? President of Finance Committee answers that it is a reserve for any purpose related to the next G.A.

France wants to know who is responsible for the use of this money? It is answered that the Secretary General and the Treasurer will be pending the approval of the President.

P. Wyllie says that it is to be discussed at the Executive Committee meetings when appropriate.

President asks to trust the new Executive Committee.

F. Spilhaus remarks that it is not expected to be spent, except in the event of a big trouble. It may be used to support scientists attending the G.A..

VOTE on the next period budget (weighted):
131 yes, 0 no, 0 abs.

27. Future organization of IUGG General Assemblies (cont')

Vice-President re-introduces the discussion, after reminding where it had been left and recalling the proposal of Denmark to reduce the length of G.A.s.

Past-President stresses the role of the future Program Committee where Secretaries General would have to play the double role (defending their Associations and the Union view).

Netherlands wonders about the necessary time to be devoted to administrative matters at the Union and also Associations level. Vice-President thinks that too many facts are unavailable to us at the present time to make a decision.

Treasurer recommends to do what is best for the scientists.

France thinks that it is not our role to settle the length of the G.A. here since it is a too complex issue. However, we can encourage the Program Committee to reduce the length of the G.A..

President reminds of the fact that at Boulder, the overlap with the Union lectures was very criticized and that the Program Committee will have to avoid this to happen again.

Spain thinks that, today, governments are inclined to reduce the money supporting science; however, science is growing. Before discussing, one must understand what it is intended by a General Assembly and how it can be achieved. For instance, is it necessary to put all topics at every meeting, why would not we make a selection of topics with a rotation through time, since each Association individually establishes a full program on all its topics at its own Scientific Assembly.

Secretary General supports this view.

Netherlands suggests to focus on global programs such as the Earth Obsevation system, the Megacities, etc ... and that this should be considered by the next Executive Commmittee and Advisory Board. (P. Wyllie says it will).

Switzerland states we should strongly recommend and find ways on how to avoid collisions between Associations and strengthen Union Symposia.

Vice-President supports the idea of protecting Union Lectures and in the same time not to compete with speakers in parallel sessions.

Russia is of the opinion that one must reduce the number of symposia and small business workshops of the Associations; one must preserve Inter-Associations symposia.

Australia thinks that restricting the range of topics as proposed by Spain may end up in narrowing too much the topical subjects since this is decided long in advance.

Austria notes the enormous increase of the number of symposia. Attendance at non Association symposia was hampered by the Associations' internal symposia. It is what we want to avoid at G.A.s which should show IUGG as a Union.

IAGA reminds that they are very interdisciplinary. The particular value of IUGG G.A.s is that they are very widely international. One must realize that the explosion of data may require IUGG to meet every 2 years! One should not try to force by a commitment the scientists to be interdisciplinary; rather, one should try to bring the matter within the Associations. Otherwise, the scientists may flee away from IUGG G.A.s. Following on this, President reminds of the case of Grenoble (1975) with Coulomb's dictatorial view of the scientific program (multidisciplinary at all cost!), resulting in many Associations having organized their separate program just after the G.A. itself.

Vice-President proposes a non-binding vote by hand about Union Lectures protection just in order to obtain a correct picture of preferences.

Egypt agrees, Japan wishes not to take a strict position.

VOTE: 5 are in favor of competition with other sessions; vast majority is in favor of no parallel sessions during Union Lectures.

29. Next General Assembly (cont'.)

President comes back on the related matter of the UK invitation. Implications for the future of IUGG might be far greater than those engendered by an acceptance of the Royal Society conditions. He feels that, due to the experience of UK, the `99 G.A. is likely to be a success, but that it may be very different in the future with another country if we change the way of functioning of IUGG for the G.A.s.

USA makes the motion to vote on the UK proposal, seconded by different countries.

Belgium says that we do not have to make a decision today; we should see within the next 6 months how it evolves.

The Treasurer finds the UK proposal sound and that we have a good chance to make some profit.

France thinks that, if we are obliged to share the risk, we must also oblige ourselves to be involved in the day-to-day preparation of G.A.s; consequently, France is strongly opposed to enter into this commitment. One should reopen the competition for invitation.

Egypt wishes to settle the case now for it could be worse in 6 months if no other invitation is made.

President feels we need much more time for coming to a decision on such an important move to which we are driven in a frantic way.

U. Shamir says that differing our decision may be very negative since Birmingham people said they could not maintain their offer longer than a few months. We must take a vote on this issue now and an Oversight Committee has to be settled.

Netherlands fully agrees with the document prepared by the Finance Committee and is not in favor of postponing the decision.

USA makes the remark that the UK proposal comes up with a very pessimistic estimate on the attendance; it is a very good proposal which is very conservative but minimizes the risk.

Portugal thinks we are indeed trying to modify the way of operating of IUGG. We have to consider the different issues separately: the document prepared by the Finance Committee, and then the UK proposal.

Vice-President considers that we may be pioneers in this evolution, but it may be generalized in the future given the world we are in. We should proceed, assuming a strong Oversight Committee.

Secretary General summarizes his viewpoint, emphasizing the following: (i) we have had a provisional offer made by U.K., and no competition; (ii) it would not harm to delay by a few months our decision since nothing in the Statutes and By-Laws (cf. By-Laws 5, 6) forces the Council to take such a decision now; (iii) the Bureau and the Executive Committee are entitled to take decisions later (Statute 7); (iv) being given the present situation, the idea of the Oversight Committee, to be established in all cases (of other invitations), is good, though we have to limit its power on the implications.

F. Spilhaus wishes to separate the two issues: first vote on accepting the invitation and if we do, then decide on how to proceed.

France refuses because the information were given only a few days before; National Committees for IUGG and geophysical societies are quite active in some countries and new options may come in the next months.

USA proposes to vote on the Finance Committee document, with two modifications. The Secretary General asks for an exact wording of the modifications. The USA Delegate reads them; the written version will be passed to the Secretary General afterwards (see attachment 3).

Egypt seconds the proposal.

At a question on the character of the vote (general or financial ?) President decides (Statute 20) that it is to be a general one.

VOTE: 20 in favor, 8 against, 7 abstentions. The amended text of the Finance Committee on the examination of the invitation by a country for a G.A. and the organisational implications, is accepted.

Several National Delegates then ask whether we accept now the UK proposal or we postpone the decision until December, 31st, 1995.

USA proposes that, since we accepted the Finance Committee document (with amendments), we should logically proceed to a vote on this second issue. M.J. Hamlin states the University of Birmingham offer is valid until the end of August of this year. The US motion is seconded by several countries (Belgium, Netherlands, ...). Some confusion follows.

President asks to vote precisely on the following question: do we accept the UK proposal subject to a positive evaluation by the Oversight Committee (to be formed right after this General Assembly) ?

VOTE:
25 in favor, 4 against, 6 abstentions.

28. Adoption of resolutions.

The text of the 7 resolutions prepared by the Resolution Committee is distributed.

The resolutions are commented one by one. A vote by hand takes place on each of them, separately: the majority is obtained for each resolution.

Before concluding, apologies are expressed to Nigeria for its forced Observer Status implied by the non reception of its annual dues, which payment had apparently been sent.

President warmly thanks Father Cardus for his very dedicated work in the Finances of the Union. He also thanks the Bureau and Presidents of Associations, and finally UK for its invitation and M. Hamlin for his work, cleverness and gentleman's way of making it acceptable.

P. Wyllie expresses his gratitude toward H. Moritz for his hard work at conducting the Union affairs over these four years, and at reducing the tensions between the Bureau and the Associations.

CLOSED at 1:30 p.m.

N.B. (1) A document, "How Science in China Makes Best Use of IUGG General Assembly", prepared by Ye Duzheng at the request of the President following a meeting of the Bureau the week before, is distributed, but not discussed.

(2) The minutes of the discussion on agenda items 27 and 29 have been kept in the narrative mode so as to better show how decisions were taken.

IUGG XXI Comptes Rendus	Top	Prev.	Next	End
Search:
Contents