Friday, January 13, 2012 -

    CLEAR Constitution amendment: Equal Opportunities Statement

    This is the draft of the proposed Equal Opportunities Policy to be presented to conference later in the year.

    ___________________________

    CLEAR Equal Opportunities Statement

    We believe it is essential to CLEAR’s principles, productivity, and efficacy to enable activists of all backgrounds to reach their full potential by encouraging an environment that is inclusive to all.

    To this end, and within the framework and spirit of the law, we are committed to achieving and maintaining a support and activist base which broadly reflects the community at large.

    CLEAR whole-heartedly supports the principle of equal opportunities and opposes all forms of unlawful or unfair discrimination on the grounds of colour, race, nationality, ethnic or national origin, sex, disability, age, religious belief, sexual orientation or marital status.

    We welcome people who support cannabis law reform from whatever cultural, ethnic or political backgrounds, be they cannabis users or not.

    We believe that it is in CLEAR’s best interests and of all those who work as part of it, to attract, retain and develop a diverse pool of activists and supporters.

    Every possible step will be taken to ensure that individuals are treated equally and fairly, and a mechanism will be introduced for people to raise concerns and seek action if they feel an infringement has been made. Members found to be in violation of the CLEAR equal opportunities policy will be dealt with in accordance with a defined disciplinary procedure.

    Note

    The formal Disputes procedure is being drafted and will be presented shortly.

    ————

    As always we welcome comments, now is a good time to have your say.

    Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

    No related news found.

    • http://twitter.com/OnPhysics Jonathan

      Seriously? How much internal-hatred is there in the pro-cannabis movement? I’m pro cannabis, but from what I can gauge with the bickering between current and ex party leader and the need for these mechanisms I’m gravely concerned :(

      Please someone shed some light on a dark matter for me.

    • Anonymous

      I haven’t seen any hatred in CLEAR. Just there are some people (or probably just one guy) trying to accuse the leader of having beliefs out of some blog that its sense they couldn’t grasp. It was explained thousands of times…
      So yeah, just ignore it. Everyone is welcome here and we have to CLEAR some bad laws, that is the goal :)

    • Anonymous

      From what I can see, it’s more than one person.

    • Anonymous

      Put your tin hat on and let the insults bounce off.

      I don’t care who’s in charge, as long as someone who’s not me is.

      Its a thankless task with nothing but a poison chalice at the end of it for the brave soul to look forward to.  But Peter put himself in the line of fire so I think those of us who are not having stones thrown at us should be grateful someone was dopey enough to take it on.-)

      The only real shame of it is the fact we’re no longer benefitting from the charisma of Lesley Gibson and Chris Baldwin, nor the tenacity of Alun Buffry and Winston Matthews.

      Together it would have created an irresistable force.

    • Philip McNab

      I for one am sad that so much animosity has been demonstrated towards Peter. He is clearly trying his best to forward the cause that everyone who visits this site is interested in. For one, I think the tax proposals are very sensible and offers incentive to legalize for those who don’t smoke cannabis.  

      Have you seen the UK420 website recently? They have created a sham poll that claims there is no support for Peter and demanding that he step down. The main perpetrator claims that guests can vote…which they can’t. He is very high and mighty about that too, ironically. The comments read to me as if many were written by the same person, with the same vendetta inherent that could only be described as personal. I may not agree with everything Peter may have said in his blogs but quite frankly I would be rather shocked if I did. People tend to have differences in opinion. The comments in this thread blow things completely out of proportion and take things out of context. This is either the work of just a few individuals or through the process of group think, an anti -Peter Reynolds movement has sprung up. Either way, the people involved have lost sight  of what is important and some of them need to get themselves under control as they are going completely overboard. The Clear website is incomparably better than the old LCA site and the sob stories on Allan Buffry’s website that Peter didn’t continue with the LCA like he said he would just ring true of someone who fails to grasp that changes have been made for the better, (plus I hear the changes were upheld by a vote, so he really needs to get over it). 

      I have faith in the developments CLEAR and Peter will make in the future. In terms of things they can be expected to do, progress IS being made. We now have a reputable website and torch holder for reform of Cannabis laws. The old LCA was rubbish as the face of cannabis smokers in Britain and didn’t help our chances of success. It may seem trivial to some but having a decent platform that can be referred to when questioning the cannabis laws is important. So well done on the website and good luck guys.

    • http://www.peter-reynolds.co.uk Peter Reynolds

      Thank you Philip.  I greatly appreciate your support.