MN director appointed as director of the Good Law Project

See Justine's response upthread.

Is the GLP involved in MN moderation now?

Maugham still seems very much involved in the Good Law Project

Yes, he still runs the show:

find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/10556197/persons-with-significant-control

Thank you for responding Justine, what you’ve said is very reassuring.

Thanks very much @JustineMumsnet

Maugham still seems very much involved in the Good Law Project - whilst he has resigned as director of GLP he has set up GLP (Consumer) as sole director.

Twitter biog still describes him as Executive Director at GLP, as does the GLP website which also lists board members and other staff members.

The response is appreciated. Hope your hand feels better soon.

Thank you Justine for the response - I hope your hand is better soon

@theeyeballsinthesky
I thought he hadn't exactly stepped away - he still owns most of the company and has (sole, I think) power over appointments of the board? I trying to remember from a Twitter discussion, so it might be better to have a look on the Company's House website.

Thanks, Justine. Hope your hand’s better soon.

I missed the fact that the fox botherer had stepped away from the good law project. I’d not seem that anywhere

I have had mixed feelings about the Good Law Project over the years. They've done some good stuff. They've also done some bonkers stuff.

On the whole I think its good that Maugham has gone from their ranks because he was becoming a liability and his personality was bringing problems and controversy - and I suspect may have driven away support from people who support public accountability / a generally liberal (old fashioned meaning) agenda because of him personally.

I certainly started to get very pissed off with him - thats without some of his views on the trans subject.

When the story is more about the personality rather than the cause you end up painting yourself into a corner, if you have rather dubious personal incidents that are splashed all over twitter.

In terms of accountability and the law, its probably worth considering recent rulings and how scandals have flaired up around some of these issues. There may come a point where it becomes untenable for an organisation interested in accountability to support certain types of court case...

We shall see.

But on the whole, I reserve judgment on the potential conflict of interest (but its worth keeping an eye on all the same) and perhaps there is a hope that Maugham stepping down is in itself a good thing which might mean some of the more batshit stuff that the Good Law Project has got involved with goes with him.

I think its a wait and see what happens....

Thanks for updating, Justine. Hope your hand gets better soon

Still no comment from MNHQ? Strange….

Bump.

For every meeting, I have to make DOI/COI and consent to the information being held on a register for every NGO or similar body. A number of private companies/organisations follow the same principles although I can't comment on the ones named here.

If there is genuinely no issue here then it would be very easy for MNHQ to come on the thread, say so and explain why.

I've no idea what that explanation would look like. What would it take to dissuade people from some ideas and reassure them on others? Perhaps the people here might draft something that would look like a sufficient explanation without involving MNHQ in extensive follow-up questions?

If there is genuinely no issue here then it would be very easy for MNHQ to come on the thread, say so and explain why.

I'm surprised at this thread because I can't see the issue.

Although I'd be interested to hear anything mumsnet had to say on the subject, I doubt that this is anything to be very concerned about. NEDs tend to be just a variation on management consultants, providing advice and challenge to the executive directors on the running of the business. By their nature they are involved in a wide range of businesses, and they don't need to have any engagement or intense interest in the actual product.

As a Good Law Project NED, he is not more likely to have any role in its ideological opposition to anything related to gender critical stances, than he is likely to have had a role in MN's decision over the years to facilitate gender critical discussion.

And issues like data protection aren't really a concern because data protection law plus the regs surrounding NEDs (and the arms-length nature of their role in relation to the day-to-day running of an organisation) would make any dodgy access to our data completely off-limits.

Also, remember that aside from its bizarre hostility to gender critical politics the Good Law Project is doing masses and masses of good stuff. It isn't essentially a sinister organisation. It is just subject to one particular hobbyhorse that (IMO) taints its overall reputation.

Perhaps someone else could report the thread, in case the message didn’t get through to @JustineMumsnet?

If these boards do go, does anyone know of anywhere else where we can have these discussions?
The antipodean fruit farmers have some stuff, but the discussion isn’t as clear as it is on here

Surely we want environment experts to influence oil and gas at board level?

Looking at that in the reverse… I’d be highly sceptical of an oil and gas expert influencing the board of an environmental organisation. Which feels like a better analogy here.

except that if an NED of a discussion bulletin board around environmental issues turned out also to be an NED of a company running an oil and gas drilling business

Surely we want environment experts to influence oil and gas at board level?

I'm getting the impression that there's a preference for strictly segregated camps with no space for mutual understanding and cooperation.
NEDs may have a bad reputation but they do have a legal duty to enforce regulation and do play a part in regulatory improvement.