Cycling UK Forum

I'm new to the CTC and was not aware of the dual structure when I joined. I have read around the debate on here and the two opposing points of view. From what I have read the argument revolves around money, which means clarity will go out of the window.

I haven't been able to find a concise breakdown of how the money that is donated to the trust by the club is used beyond generic headings.

If i am correct the trust seeks money in the form of "contracts" to promote third party interests, and the suggestion is these contracts have in fact cost the membership money, this is not how I imagined the club would be run.

I assumed the third party work was what Sustrans was about?

Is this change part of an intention to ultimately transfer all cycling matters to the one organisation and save the government money? Whatever the intention it is in no doubt whatsoever the government will seek as much of the clubs money as it can after the next election, cycling is not a government priority.

I had expected the CTC to be run in a similar manner to something like the Motorcycle Action Group, an independant company run for the members on matters directly related to the members interests. It is not a charity and it has audited accounts available for review.

I look forward to reading the proposals from both points of view and will vote for one that promotes actively using my subscription directly for the benifit of its members.