Morag, hello.
On 2010 May 20, at 03:56, Morag Hunter wrote:
> I'd assumed that reports would be minuted. This is, I think, a
> reasonable assumption. If the convenor of the sub-com does not
> present a written report, it is the duty of the minute taker to take
> minutes of the verbal report.
>
> Or am I misunderstanding what minutes of a meeting are?
I think you may be, yes. The point of minutes is to record the bare bones of who was there, any decisions taken or significant news that needs to be recorded as having been heard (for example the fact that there now exists a subcommittee report and that this was introduced and discussed), progress on actions, and who's been landed with further actions. That's about it -- minutes aren't intended as a transcript, but as a non-deniable record of promises and progress.
All the best,
Norman
--
Norman Gray :
http://nxg.me.uk