Audio available here.
P: There has been, yes. Quite a furor. (laughs)
D: I’ve spoken with people who claim to be the Executive Committee at the moment, without naming names. I’ve spoken to a couple of them and they all say the same thing: that they held a meeting on Friday, where they chose to eject you as leader. Is that—
P: Well, all you need to do to verify the position, is to look on the Electoral Commission website.
D: Sure but the Electoral Commission website was closed, the Electoral Commission was closed, by the time the position was finalised. And I do believe they’re going to be contacting the Electoral Commission Monday.
P: Well, I mean, it’s absolutely total nonsense. It’s absolutely nonsense.
D: Okay, well the questions I actually had about the Cannabis Law Reform might be a little bit moot, at the moment, for the simple reason that the site is down and since I put the request out, on the student forums—
P: Let me give you my email address, okay?
D: Okay.
P: It’s peter at peter dash reynolds, dot co dot u k.
D: Okay, I’ve got that. Just a couple of questions, as I need to speak to — I’ve got a list of about eight people that I have to call, that have requested that I speak to them, rather than get just one side of the story. I thought it would be better to speak, if possible.
P: Yeah, well, okay, then, what did you want to know? I mean, there’s basically been an attempted coup by a number of people who have gathered together, they’ve committed offenses under the Computer Misuse Act, seizing the CLEAR domain name, there’s been reports to the police in fact.
D: Would that be the Dorset constabulary?
P: Pardon?
D: Would that be your local constabulary?
P: It would be the forces of the Dorset police, yeah.
D: Okay. Well, this seems quite serious.
P: It is very serious. I mean, there’s been a whole raft of offenses under the Computer Misuse Act, as I say. I’ve got documentary evidence of eight people, conspiring together to seize control of the CLEAR domain name, I’ve got an email [unclear] writing, and documents, [unclear] basically copies of conversations that took place on Facebook. And they are in extremely serious trouble. I mean, just one offence carries a maximum of five years in jail. I don’t suppose that’s going to happen to them, but there was the one person in particular who’s in a great deal of trouble.
D: Wow. Okay. That kind of sheds a different light on it. Getting back to the politics side of it, the political angle as well, for the argument: I’m also a cannabis—keep it between ourselves—I’m a cannabis user myself—
P: Right.
D: So I’ve got a vested interest in this—
P: So am I.
D: —and it is to me. So, on Friday, the four people from the Executive Committee—
P: Well, they’re not from the Executive Committee.
D: Oh, they’re not?
P: No.
D: I’m looking at a Google cache and their names—-
P: The Executive Committee—
D: —appear—-
P: The Executive Committee is composed of me, I’m the party Leader; Janice Wells, who is the party Treasurer, Mark Palmer, and that is the Executive Committee, among the three of us.
D: Okay. I was sent an email which appears to come from, is it Mark? Let me have a look—Mark Palmer.
P: Yeah. That’s a confidential email which should never have been released. When Mark sent me that email, I had a conversa—I mean, it’s absolutely disgraceful that people have been publishing private correspondence. I’m sure you’d agree.
D: Actually—-
P: Any reasonable person would. When Mark sent that email, it was because he was being put under a great deal of pressure, and bullied by these people.
D: Well, it seems to have been—
P: I had a conversation with him afterwards—
D: Okay—
P: —a telephone conversation.
D: Okay, I’m going to—it seems to have been sent to the committee, though.
P: It was. It was, yeah.
D: Okay, so it was—
P: Private correspondence within the Clear, it was private correspondence within the Clear Executive Committee.
D: Okay, I mean, from my—
P: And one of the problems is, is it’s two people on the Executive Committee, have taken it upon themselves, to start discussing the Committee’s business, with other people.
D: Okay, I mean, as far as my understanding; I’m only a first-year student; but part of the modules for this year have been electoral law. And the people who are claiming to be on the Executive Committee, let’s call it the other camp, are stating that that is a resignation letter, and that he did—
P: It was a resignation letter, but I’m the leader of the party, I had a telephone conversation with Mark, and he decided he didn’t want to go ahead with it. Simple as that.
D: When was that conversation?
P: It was the day or the day of the letter. I mean the day or the day after of the email.
D: Okay.
P: I mean it’s complete nonsense. You know, Mark did issue or send that email, that’s quite right, but the fact that it’s being published, something you–no offence to you, it’s not your fault, but the fact that it’s being published to you, who is, you know, nothing to do with the committee, is indicative of the way these people are behaving.
D: Well, I mean, it’s part of the interesting side of journalism, in this day and age—
P: Pardon?
D: Part of what’s interesting in journalism these days, is that there are whistle-blowers. We’ve seen it with other political parties you know, that confidential things, in the interests of the members of the party, are being released.
P: Well, it’s not in anybody’s interest, that a man’s resignation, which he then decides to withdraw, in a very short period of time, should be published all over the internet.
D: It was withdrawn?
P: Yeah.
D: The email, and there’s records of that?
P: Pardon?
D: There’s records of that?
P: Records of what?
D: Of him being reinstated, or the—
P: No no, no no, listen. Listen, listen, listen.
D: Okay. Sorry, I’m—
P: Mark and I had a telephone conversation.
D: Okay.
P: Right? When these things are formalised, when we come to have the whole committee meeting, which we do about every two months, Mark and I had a telephone conversation, after he submitted that email, in which we agreed that he would remain on the committee.
D: Okay, okay.
P: It’s as simple as that. There’s no ifs or what buts about it. It’s black and white.
D: Okay, the other side of it was; again, I’m looking through the electoral law; it was a majority of Executive members on the Friday, when they had the meeting that made the decision. They made a decision to—
P: They’re not; they’re not members of the Executive Committee.
D: Okay, as far as—I mean, I’ve read through the constitution, and sort of matched it up with the electoral law, and they still retain their executive powers, until the next—
P: Wah hey? [or similar indistinct interrogative ejaculation]
D: They still retain their executive powers, until there is an Executive meeting. And to my knowledge there has not been an Executive meeting.
P: No, no, that’s not the case at all.
D: That’s not the case.
P: No, that’s not the case at all. No, the CLEAR Constitution is quite explicit: I’m the Leader, I set policy, and I handle the day-to-day running of the party. Two members of the Committee were suspended recently, specifically for taking the business of the Committee—I shouldn’t even be discussing this with you—taking the business of the Committee outside of the Committee. But I’m not going to discuss this with you any further.
D: Alright.
P: Because it’s wrong to do so.
D: Alright, that’s fair enough. Forget about that side of it. I’m just really trying to get a bigger picture.
P: I’m not discussing it with you any longer. The people you’re talking to are fraudsters, and liars.
D: Okay.
P: Alright? They are fraudsters, and liars. Let me be completely explicit with you. They are liars, and fraudsters. They’ve already been reported to the police, for criminal offences, involving the party’s website, and the information you’ve given to me now, I’m glad you’ve given it to me. It’s very useful because I shall now take some further steps.
D: Okay. One other side separate from the actual running of CLEAR.
P: I can’t have any further time to talk about this now. I’ve got, I’m in the middle of doing other things, and and you’ve given me information on which I need to act on. I’ve given you my email address, and you can contact me on that, or you can call me tomorrow. Alright?
D: Okay.
P: Thank you, bye.
D: Many thanks, bye bye,
Summary of the Peter Reynolds-CLEAR saga: Peter Reynolds vs. Everyone (Apparently).
Comments are closed.