A Message to Members in London

A place to discuss the issues relating to the proposed change in the national CTC’s structure.
Regulator
Posts: 523
Joined: 27 Jan 2007, 10:13am

Re: A Message to Members in London

Postby Regulator » 12 Apr 2010, 9:12pm

Hi charming

If you want to vote against the charity proposal, you should clearly mark the 'Against' boxes next to motions 8, 9 and 10.

You can nominate one of the London Councillors if you wish (I'm one of them) rather than the Chair - at least that way you'll know they'll vote as you want. Further details here.

Jimmy The Hand
Posts: 116
Joined: 10 Mar 2008, 11:26am

Re: A Message to Members in London

Postby Jimmy The Hand » 13 Apr 2010, 9:27am

Regulator wrote:.....You can nominate one of the London Councillors if you wish (I'm one of them) rather than the Chair - at least that way you'll know they'll vote as you want........

The implication being that the Chair will disregard the proxy voters instructions and vote as he wishes?

Regulator
Posts: 523
Joined: 27 Jan 2007, 10:13am

Re: A Message to Members in London

Postby Regulator » 13 Apr 2010, 9:33am

Jimmy The Hand wrote:
Regulator wrote:.....You can nominate one of the London Councillors if you wish (I'm one of them) rather than the Chair - at least that way you'll know they'll vote as you want........

The implication being that the Chair will disregard the proxy voters instructions and vote as he wishes?


No. It is a statement of fact that if you give the Chair discretion on how to vote in relation to the charity proposal, then he will vote for it. It isn't a secret - everyone knows he is 'pro' the charity change.

Jimmy The Hand
Posts: 116
Joined: 10 Mar 2008, 11:26am

Re: A Message to Members in London

Postby Jimmy The Hand » 13 Apr 2010, 9:55am

Regulator wrote:
Jimmy The Hand wrote:
Regulator wrote:.....You can nominate one of the London Councillors if you wish (I'm one of them) rather than the Chair - at least that way you'll know they'll vote as you want........

The implication being that the Chair will disregard the proxy voters instructions and vote as he wishes?


No. It is a statement of fact that if you give the Chair discretion on how to vote in relation to the charity proposal, then he will vote for it. It isn't a secret - everyone knows he is 'pro' the charity change.

There is no mention of giving the chair, or anyone else, discretion in your original post so maybe you need to amend your original post to calrify that point

Regulator wrote:Hi charming

If you want to vote against the charity proposal, you should clearly mark the 'Against' boxes next to motions 8, 9 and 10.

You can nominate one of the London Councillors if you wish (I'm one of them) rather than the Chair - at least that way you'll know they'll vote as you want. Further details here.

Regulator
Posts: 523
Joined: 27 Jan 2007, 10:13am

Re: A Message to Members in London

Postby Regulator » 13 Apr 2010, 10:12am

Jimmy The Hand wrote:
Regulator wrote:No. It is a statement of fact that if you give the Chair discretion on how to vote in relation to the charity proposal, then he will vote for it. It isn't a secret - everyone knows he is 'pro' the charity change.


There is no mention of giving the chair, or anyone else, discretion in your original post so maybe you need to amend your original post to calrify that point

Regulator wrote:Hi charming

If you want to vote against the charity proposal, you should clearly mark the 'Against' boxes next to motions 8, 9 and 10.

You can nominate one of the London Councillors if you wish (I'm one of them) rather than the Chair - at least that way you'll know they'll vote as you want. Further details here.


I was responding to charming's post. My response is perfectly clear in relation to that post and I see no need to amend it.

You seem to be the only person who has a problem with it.

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13190
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: A Message to Members in London

Postby gaz » 23 Apr 2010, 10:08am

Regulator wrote:Funnily enough, after a little adverse publicity and a few complaints, the message from London Councillors has now been sent out, albeit it with the following 'introduction' from National Office:

The message below and attached is to all CTC members in the London area, sent by CTC National Office on behalf of Greg Price and Helen Vecht, Council members representing London. The letter represents the personal views of these two members of Council and members should be aware is contrary to the resolution approved by Council as a whole.


They can't quite break the spin habit, even in that statement. The resolution was not approved by Council as a whole... :roll:


Regulator posted the above on Tuesday 6 April. However on the savethectc website this morning the e-mail is still headed up:-

This is the message that National Office declined to send out, on behalf of the London Councillors Gregory Price and Helen Vecht, to CTC members in the Greater London area. This is despite National Office having sent out e-mails of behalf of other Councillors to their constituents.

No reason was given for the refusal to send out the e-mail. We must assume it is because Council doesn't want members to know that some Councillors aren't supporting the proposals for converting the Club to a charity - or why...


They can't quite break the spin habit. :wink:
Hand wash only. Do not iron.

Regulator
Posts: 523
Joined: 27 Jan 2007, 10:13am

Re: A Message to Members in London

Postby Regulator » 23 Apr 2010, 12:27pm

gaz wrote:
Regulator wrote:Funnily enough, after a little adverse publicity and a few complaints, the message from London Councillors has now been sent out, albeit it with the following 'introduction' from National Office:

The message below and attached is to all CTC members in the London area, sent by CTC National Office on behalf of Greg Price and Helen Vecht, Council members representing London. The letter represents the personal views of these two members of Council and members should be aware is contrary to the resolution approved by Council as a whole.


They can't quite break the spin habit, even in that statement. The resolution was not approved by Council as a whole... :roll:


Regulator posted the above on Tuesday 6 April. However on the savethectc website this morning the e-mail is still headed up:-

This is the message that National Office declined to send out, on behalf of the London Councillors Gregory Price and Helen Vecht, to CTC members in the Greater London area. This is despite National Office having sent out e-mails of behalf of other Councillors to their constituents.

No reason was given for the refusal to send out the e-mail. We must assume it is because Council doesn't want members to know that some Councillors aren't supporting the proposals for converting the Club to a charity - or why...


They can't quite break the spin habit. :wink:



Whoops! An oversight on the part of those editing the Save the CTC web-site. The 'News' item had been amended but the SpinWatch linked page hadn't. :oops:

The web fairies have now duly amended the page. After all, we do try to be as accurate and honest as possible.
Last edited by Regulator on 23 Apr 2010, 1:13pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13190
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: A Message to Members in London

Postby gaz » 23 Apr 2010, 12:40pm

Thanks once again Regulator.

You've always been quick to correct such oversights.
Hand wash only. Do not iron.

Regulator
Posts: 523
Joined: 27 Jan 2007, 10:13am

Re: A Message to Members in London

Postby Regulator » 23 Apr 2010, 1:07pm

gaz wrote:Thanks once again Regulator.

You've always been quick to correct such oversights.



We aim to please! :D

Jonty

Re: A Message to Members in London

Postby Jonty » 17 Apr 2011, 12:04am

Regulator wrote:Hi charming

If you want to vote against the charity proposal, you should clearly mark the 'Against' boxes next to motions 8, 9 and 10.

You can nominate one of the London Councillors if you wish (I'm one of them) rather than the Chair - at least that way you'll know they'll vote as you want. Further details here.


Charming
If you wish to vote against the proposal and elect the chair as your proxy, the chair is required by law to cast your vote against the proposal.
jonty