Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?
Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?
In the blog he says
"With regard to charitable status, as far as I can ascertain, there is nothing that we do (or have done) that we can't do as a charity. In which case why not accept the advantages of this status?"
If this was so, then I would agree but I do not believe that this is the case.
The blog then goes on to discuss the "isolated" nature of the membership of local CTC groups which while probably being quite true has no relevance to the issue.
The vote will be decided by the membership NOT the minority on the Forum or on local club rides.
"With regard to charitable status, as far as I can ascertain, there is nothing that we do (or have done) that we can't do as a charity. In which case why not accept the advantages of this status?"
If this was so, then I would agree but I do not believe that this is the case.
The blog then goes on to discuss the "isolated" nature of the membership of local CTC groups which while probably being quite true has no relevance to the issue.
The vote will be decided by the membership NOT the minority on the Forum or on local club rides.
Yma o Hyd
Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?
bikepacker wrote:In my opinion - no I better not give my opinion otherwise the mods will only pull the plug and the big chief will axe the forum.
bikepacker wrote:We can air our views so long as they do not criticise him.
Alan, we've explained time and again why _some_ of your posts have been modded, yet still you don't seem to be able to understand.
I'll try again. Criticisms about CTC policy and actions are fine as long as they are done in a respectful and polite way. When you've done this you've not had your posts altered in any way. On the other hand, when you've made personal attacks, been insulting, accused CTC staff of having mental problems, etc, then your comments have been deemed unacceptable. Can you not see the difference between these two approaches?
You give the impression of being a reasonably intelligent chap, thus I would have expected you to have the ability to make a valid point without it getting personal. If you can't bring your self to do this then perhaps it's better that you don't post.
However, this thread isn't about you, it's about something that is extremely important to the whole of the CTC. So, should you feel aggrieved by what I've said in this post and you need to point out that I've ruined the forum again, please do not post it here, start another thread - we've more important things to discuss.
A similar message goes out to everyone. This is an important issue so please don't take the thread off at a tangent by making things personal, but getting into spats or trying to flame. This is directed to all sides of the argument - CTC staff going on about "conspiracy theorists" will be viewed in the same poor light as attacks on those same staff. As a moderator I will attempt to stay neutral when making decisions about such posts and think firstly about the good of the forum.
-
- Posts: 608
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 11:18pm
- Location: Greater Manchester
Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?
The main advantage I can see for the merger is to bring the whole of the CTC back under the control of the full council, rather than most of the assets being under the control of just 4 board members, as at present. This is one of the main reasons I will possibly vote for the merger.
Last edited by Karen Sutton on 20 Dec 2009, 7:41pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?
If the membership issues are an indicator of how well CTC is run at other levels I'm not sure I'd trust the club with charitable status yet. It seems like a once only offer with no possibility of returning to a members organisation.
It will be a chance to throw more money at campaigning and cycle tourists have to pick up the crumbs. If it's the final straw that pushes tourists towards their own independent organisation I'm all for it however.
It will be a chance to throw more money at campaigning and cycle tourists have to pick up the crumbs. If it's the final straw that pushes tourists towards their own independent organisation I'm all for it however.
Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?
Even though I read most of the Cycle magazines and I know that we're moving towards charity status, I must admit that I have pretty much zero idea of why or what that will mean. So a thread like this is ideal.
I assume that the question will have been looked into in detail by people more knowledgeable and skilled as myself - lawyers, accountants and so on. However, we need to make sure that this will work beyond pure economic reasons. We need to ensure that the members still get the same benefits and support - whether that be the legal cover or maintaining the local groups - and not get lost in a morass of campaigning, lobbying and government red tape.
I assume that the question will have been looked into in detail by people more knowledgeable and skilled as myself - lawyers, accountants and so on. However, we need to make sure that this will work beyond pure economic reasons. We need to ensure that the members still get the same benefits and support - whether that be the legal cover or maintaining the local groups - and not get lost in a morass of campaigning, lobbying and government red tape.
Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?
Alan - the mods will not erase your posts unless they're libellous (and, even then, with a heavy heart). Particularly since this particular mod is the most fervent opponent of the takeover of the Club by the Trust.
As for the original question - you've been blindsided. 'Membership Charity' is a bit of National Office bull****. This takeover is about concentrating power in the hands of a small executive committee and allowing the members' subs to be pillaged unmercifully - and undetectably. The membership can expect nothing from this other than an even fatter bill than the one that's been slipped under their noses for the last few years.
Anyway - watch this space. There's a fair amount of digging going on to unearth the full financial facts of the matter. What I can tell you is that when the 'nay' website is up and running there's going to be a fair amount of explaining to do.
As for the original question - you've been blindsided. 'Membership Charity' is a bit of National Office bull****. This takeover is about concentrating power in the hands of a small executive committee and allowing the members' subs to be pillaged unmercifully - and undetectably. The membership can expect nothing from this other than an even fatter bill than the one that's been slipped under their noses for the last few years.
Anyway - watch this space. There's a fair amount of digging going on to unearth the full financial facts of the matter. What I can tell you is that when the 'nay' website is up and running there's going to be a fair amount of explaining to do.
Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?
Simon says
This takeover is about concentrating power in the hands of a small executive committee and allowing the members' subs to be pillaged unmercifully - and undetectably
Karen says
the whole of the CTC back under the control of the full council, rather than most of the assets being under the control of just 4 board members, as at present.
Which may be the same thing but with different spins.
This takeover is about concentrating power in the hands of a small executive committee and allowing the members' subs to be pillaged unmercifully - and undetectably
Karen says
the whole of the CTC back under the control of the full council, rather than most of the assets being under the control of just 4 board members, as at present.
Which may be the same thing but with different spins.
Yma o Hyd
Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?
meic wrote:Simon says
This takeover is about concentrating power in the hands of a small executive committee and allowing the members' subs to be pillaged unmercifully - and undetectably
Karen says
the whole of the CTC back under the control of the full council, rather than most of the assets being under the control of just 4 board members, as at present.
Which may be the same thing but with different spins.
it's not a question of style - it's a question of looking at the track record. The simple fact is that the member's subs have been bankrolling the Trust. You may remember seeing the appearance of a £370,000 loan in last year's annual report, but you won't have seen the management accounts showing an absolutely stonking donation from the Club to the Trust in this current year. That's aside from the Club's main asset being signed over to the Trust without a smidge of democratic discussion - and that, my dears, is going to take an awful lot of sorting out.
Putting all the income and the expenditure on the same balance sheet is going to make matters less transparent still - as those of us who remember Kevin telling last year's AGM that the accounting of projects undertaken for the DfT would never be shown to members will have realised.
And forget the 'charidee' nonsense. The Trust is a Contractor, working for government, and doing so at a loss. Long term commitments have been made on fixed term projects, and, as central government pursestrings tighten the ability of the Trust to lose money, and the inability of Council to keep tabs on it, will manifest itself in cuts in services to members - not that local groups and the RtR movement are getting much in the way of a service now! Those of you of a deconstructionist bent might take a look at the last Annual Report and ask yourself what's missing. (clue - begins with Member, ends with Group...)
If people want to set up a Sustrans Mk. 2 - good luck to them. They should do it with their own money.
The other issue is managerial. While National Office has raced around the corridors of power like a grant-bunny, the administration of the club has deteriorated - look at the membership service fiasco and read the thread on these very boards about National Office helping out member groups with their websites (not). The recent RtR conference only happened after a year's prevarication by National Office, and on the insistence of John Meudell - and even then it suffered the fate of too many Council meetings which have turned in to puffs for projects that, however worthy they might be, have no relation to the aspirations of the membership.
The Club should get back to what it's supposed to be good at. This month's Cycle lists ten member benefits. None are charitable, other than campaigning, and, as Action Aid discovered, if you're a 'charity' there's a limit to the campaigning you can do before the Charities Commission declares it to be politics.
Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?
the point I was alluding too above....Simon L6 wrote:as Action Aid discovered, if you're a 'charity' there's a limit to the campaigning you can do before the Charities Commission declares it to be politics.
"42"
Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?
squeaker wrote:the point I was alluding too above....
apologies - but, then again, there's no great harm in making the same point twice!
-
- Posts: 2275
- Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:08pm
- Location: Worcestershire
- Contact:
Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?
I am mulling over the proposal as I have been told to do. Taking a ‘back to basics’ approach, let me figure out how the CTC will function as a charity.
The CTC will be run by a four person Executive that will owe it’s allegiance to the Charity Commissioners.
Should the Charity Commissioners not like what the CTC are doing they have the power to remove, or replace, any or all, of the Executive.
The membership have no real say in running the CTC and the CTC staff are only answerable to the executive and therefore the Charity Commissioners.
Any campaigning that the CTC does, that the Charity Commissioners take exception to, can be halted by stopping funding, or tax breaks, or both.
In order to run as a charity, the CTC the membership money has to be used to support the Trust over which the membership has no control.
Membership money that otherwise could have been used to support activities, i.e. Magazine, Birthday Rides, York Rally, supporting local groups, and other recognised CTC events, now goes to the Trust.
Money, reputed to be around £1.75 million, already given to the Trust as a loan by the members will now be written off and not used for member’s events.
So far after a few minutes of thoughts I am struggling to see any advantage.
The CTC will be run by a four person Executive that will owe it’s allegiance to the Charity Commissioners.
Should the Charity Commissioners not like what the CTC are doing they have the power to remove, or replace, any or all, of the Executive.
The membership have no real say in running the CTC and the CTC staff are only answerable to the executive and therefore the Charity Commissioners.
Any campaigning that the CTC does, that the Charity Commissioners take exception to, can be halted by stopping funding, or tax breaks, or both.
In order to run as a charity, the CTC the membership money has to be used to support the Trust over which the membership has no control.
Membership money that otherwise could have been used to support activities, i.e. Magazine, Birthday Rides, York Rally, supporting local groups, and other recognised CTC events, now goes to the Trust.
Money, reputed to be around £1.75 million, already given to the Trust as a loan by the members will now be written off and not used for member’s events.
So far after a few minutes of thoughts I am struggling to see any advantage.
There is your way. There is my way. But there is no "the way".
Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?
a decent summary, but it neglects a vital component. Management time has been taken up chasing Contracts. The administration of the Club has suffered as a result. You could argue that the administration of the Contracts hasn't been that special either.........
-
- Posts: 2275
- Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:08pm
- Location: Worcestershire
- Contact:
Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?
I take your point and agree entirely. I was just mulling over what the future would be as a charity.
There is your way. There is my way. But there is no "the way".
-
- Posts: 36781
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?
I think whenever there is a move to do something like this, the promoters make a big mistake if they only emphasise one side and don't fully explain the other. A lot of people, of whom I tend to be one, resent it.
At the moment, the Yorkshire Building Society is in the middle of taking over the Chelsea BS. As far as I can see, the Chelsea has been badly hit by fraud and they need rescuing. Instead of explaining all the issues, members get the rah, rah from the board of the Yorkshire, with all the bad news buried in the small print. (e.g after all the hype about the benefits of mutuality and no shareholders, if things go wrong, some of the creditors of the Chelsea will effectively become shareholders in the YBS.) So all the thirdcrank + family votes have been cast against and as they need a 75% majority, each "nay" = 3. No doubt it will still go through on the front of the bulldozer.
At the moment, the Yorkshire Building Society is in the middle of taking over the Chelsea BS. As far as I can see, the Chelsea has been badly hit by fraud and they need rescuing. Instead of explaining all the issues, members get the rah, rah from the board of the Yorkshire, with all the bad news buried in the small print. (e.g after all the hype about the benefits of mutuality and no shareholders, if things go wrong, some of the creditors of the Chelsea will effectively become shareholders in the YBS.) So all the thirdcrank + family votes have been cast against and as they need a 75% majority, each "nay" = 3. No doubt it will still go through on the front of the bulldozer.
Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?
IMHO...
I think that they should keep the CTC membership and charity as two distinct and seperate entities. The Charitable Trust working as it does, almost like Sustrans does (albeit with slightly different aims) but with the aims of the CTC membership at heart. Sadly it also seems as though certain senior people within the CTC have alterior motives within this, which is sad. (edited - see my reply further below for wider reasons for the short comment)
But also, as a personal view, I think the CTC needs to work hard to try and recruit younger members to keep it's head above water. I believe there is a CTC group in York, and I'd love to ride with a group, but I've never ridden with them because (after looking at their website to see who to contact) and it suggesting I take a spin with the Wednesday Wheelers, I think I'm in the wrong age bracket at 35. Especially as I work during the day on a Wednesday
I think that they should keep the CTC membership and charity as two distinct and seperate entities. The Charitable Trust working as it does, almost like Sustrans does (albeit with slightly different aims) but with the aims of the CTC membership at heart. Sadly it also seems as though certain senior people within the CTC have alterior motives within this, which is sad. (edited - see my reply further below for wider reasons for the short comment)
But also, as a personal view, I think the CTC needs to work hard to try and recruit younger members to keep it's head above water. I believe there is a CTC group in York, and I'd love to ride with a group, but I've never ridden with them because (after looking at their website to see who to contact) and it suggesting I take a spin with the Wednesday Wheelers, I think I'm in the wrong age bracket at 35. Especially as I work during the day on a Wednesday
Last edited by mark_w on 21 Dec 2009, 9:57pm, edited 1 time in total.
--------
Blog : My Bike Rides
Blog : My Bike Rides