Cycling UK Forum

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........

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?

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.

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.

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.

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...

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...

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...

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.

gaz wrote:Thanks once again Regulator.

You've always been quick to correct such oversights.

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.