CANDIDATES FOR THE CTC/CUK ELECTION

roger
Posts: 154
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 2:14pm

Re: CANDIDATES FOR THE CTC/CUK ELECTION

Postby roger » 5 Feb 2017, 8:38pm

I have to confess that I have just seen that Dr Huppert is an Honary Member, equally I no idea of the significance, but it might have stood him in even higher stead if it had been covered in his application pack.

Roger.

JohnW
Posts: 6450
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: CANDIDATES FOR THE CTC/CUK ELECTION

Postby JohnW » 7 Feb 2017, 10:21pm

gaz wrote:E-mail received today.
A letter from Dan Howard, Chair Cycling UK wrote:Dear .

There have been some recent changes within the Board of Cycling UK and as the new Chair I’d like to take this opportunity to update all member group secretaries and representatives.

I was delighted to be selected as Chair, taking over from David Cox, and I look forward to working alongside our new Vice-Chair Jaki Lowe and the rest of the Board. Following elections last autumn, we welcomed two new Trustees, Janet Atherton and Rachel Kirkwood as well as our Senior Independent Trustee Julian Hubbert..........................................

Best wishes,

Dan
Dan Howard
Chair of Trustees Cycling UK


I think that we all, or at least many of us, received that e-mail gaz.

I don't know whether members generally respond to such e-mails, but for the very first time, I did. I responded as follows :

Thanks for that Dan –
I don’t know how many replies you’re going to receive. This is the first time I’ve e-mailed anyone at such high level in the erstwhile club as yourself. However, I would like to submit a perception to you – that the biggest contribution that CUK can make is in campaigning for rights, facilities and respect for cyclists at all levels, including the law-making government.

It’s all very laudable to be striving to increase cycling numbers, to encourage young people and families to cycle and to wean people away from their steering wheels for the greater good on mankind – I think we all support that. However, please be aware that if successful, moves to increase cycling numbers will be bringing additional people into the death-traps that are now our roads and putting their lives at risk. Politicians, highway engineers, drivers, (many) journalists, decision makers et al all need educating to begin to consider cyclists are valid human beings, whose lives matter.

To me that’s the biggest challenge - but absent from the personal manifestos from the various candidates.

Kindest of regards,


I have, of course, received no reply.

I don't know how other members feel, but my belief is that the trustees are missing the point, and don't know that they are.

Steady rider
Posts: 2287
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: CANDIDATES FOR THE CTC/CUK ELECTION

Postby Steady rider » 8 Feb 2017, 10:37am

1.7.2 preserve and protect the health and safety of the public by encouraging and facilitating cycling
and the safety of cyclists;


The 'Objects' in the Articles of Association includes the above.
1.7 The objects for which the Club is established (the Objects) are to:
........1.7.1 promote community participation in healthy recreation by promoting the amateur sport of
cycling, cycle touring and associated amateur sports;
........1.7.2 preserve and protect the health and safety of the public by encouraging and facilitating cycling
and the safety of cyclists;
........1.7.3 advance education by whatever means the trustees think fit, including the provision of cycling,
training and educational activities related to cycling;
........1.7.4 promote the conservation and protection of the environment.


I suppose part 1.7.2 could include something about reducing the risk of accident to cyclists.

Psamathe
Posts: 12247
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: CANDIDATES FOR THE CTC/CUK ELECTION

Postby Psamathe » 8 Feb 2017, 10:48am

Steady rider wrote:
1.7.2 preserve and protect the health and safety of the public by encouraging and facilitating cycling
and the safety of cyclists;


The 'Objects' in the Articles of Association includes the above.
1.7 The objects for which the Club is established (the Objects) are to:
........1.7.1 promote community participation in healthy recreation by promoting the amateur sport of
cycling, cycle touring and associated amateur sports;
........1.7.2 preserve and protect the health and safety of the public by encouraging and facilitating cycling
and the safety of cyclists;
........1.7.3 advance education by whatever means the trustees think fit, including the provision of cycling,
training and educational activities related to cycling;
........1.7.4 promote the conservation and protection of the environment.


I suppose part 1.7.2 could include something about reducing the risk of accident to cyclists.

I wonder about direct and indirect promotion of cycling. When out cycling round here I often reflect that to an extent cycling is "self-promoting" to many. Trouble is that quality of roads mean you really need a 4x4 SUV to use them, risk from some car drivers (made worse (or not improved) by road design, etc.). So, create the environment and infrastructure without such impediments (or lessen those impediments) and I expect cycling would grow on its own (to an extent). So I agree that indirect campaigns (e.g. on road quality/maintenance, design, sensible infrastructure, (helmet arguments - presenting cycling as an everyday activity), even maybe things like removing VAT from cycle parts and maintenance or even from bikes themselves), etc.) could have a significant impact on both 1.7.1 and 1.7.2.

Ian

JohnW
Posts: 6450
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: CANDIDATES FOR THE CTC/CUK ELECTION

Postby JohnW » 8 Feb 2017, 12:24pm

I note those 'Articles of Association', but the thread refers to candidates for election, and I was only referring to the self citations from those who were candidates at the recent election of trustees.

Experience of our roads, both in design and detail, and the behaviour of drivers, and the attitude of local councils (corporately, not necessarily individual officers) are all such that it seems to me that cyclists are constantly in enemy country. I submit that the main aspiration, a major role of cycling organisations ought to be to address and change that.

Steady rider
Posts: 2287
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: CANDIDATES FOR THE CTC/CUK ELECTION

Postby Steady rider » 8 Feb 2017, 5:37pm

Yes perhaps candidates should have been asked specific questions along the lines you suggest. It is very easy to say we want to promote cycling but doing it and the means is not so easy to specify.

PH
Posts: 9964
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: CANDIDATES FOR THE CTC/CUK ELECTION

Postby PH » 8 Feb 2017, 5:57pm

JohnW wrote:I think that we all, or at least many of us, received that e-mail gaz.

I don't know whether members generally respond to such e-mails, but for the very first time, I did.


How did you reply John?
Did you notice the return email address was
unmonitored-inbox@cyclinguk.org
I only noticed as I was about to reply myself, but thought I'd be waiting a long time for a response...

JohnW
Posts: 6450
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: CANDIDATES FOR THE CTC/CUK ELECTION

Postby JohnW » 8 Feb 2017, 10:17pm

PH wrote:
JohnW wrote:I think that we all, or at least many of us, received that e-mail gaz.

I don't know whether members generally respond to such e-mails, but for the very first time, I did.


How did you reply John?
Did you notice the return email address was
unmonitored-inbox@cyclinguk.org
I only noticed as I was about to reply myself, but thought I'd be waiting a long time for a response...


I clicked on "reply", and sent it off. If "unmonitored" means that an e-mail isn't going to be opened, let alone read, then I've wasted my effort - but I admit to my ignorance in these matters.

Thanks for the 'heads-up' PH.

PH
Posts: 9964
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: CANDIDATES FOR THE CTC/CUK ELECTION

Postby PH » 8 Feb 2017, 10:52pm

JohnW wrote:
PH wrote:
JohnW wrote:I think that we all, or at least many of us, received that e-mail gaz.

I don't know whether members generally respond to such e-mails, but for the very first time, I did.


How did you reply John?
Did you notice the return email address was
unmonitored-inbox@cyclinguk.org
I only noticed as I was about to reply myself, but thought I'd be waiting a long time for a response...


I clicked on "reply", and sent it off. If "unmonitored" means that an e-mail isn't going to be opened, let alone read, then I've wasted my effort - but I admit to my ignorance in these matters.

Thanks for the 'heads-up' PH.


You could try again
dan.howard@cyclinguk.org

JohnW
Posts: 6450
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: CANDIDATES FOR THE CTC/CUK ELECTION

Postby JohnW » 8 Feb 2017, 11:04pm

PH wrote:.........................You could try again
dan.howard@cyclinguk.org


Thanks PH, I've just done that.

JohnW
Posts: 6450
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: CANDIDATES FOR THE CTC/CUK ELECTION

Postby JohnW » 9 Feb 2017, 12:22pm

JohnW wrote:
PH wrote:.........................You could try again
dan.howard@cyclinguk.org


Thanks PH, I've just done that.


Thanks again PH. The chairman has replied - commendably quickly assuming that he only actually received my response yesterday. It was a well written reply, and I've asked if I can post it on the Forum. However, it didn't answer my query/point about campaigning being conspicuous by its absence from the trusteeship candidates' self citations.

JohnW
Posts: 6450
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: CANDIDATES FOR THE CTC/CUK ELECTION

Postby JohnW » 9 Feb 2017, 3:11pm

JohnW wrote:
JohnW wrote:
PH wrote:.........................You could try again
dan.howard@cyclinguk.org


Thanks PH, I've just done that.


Thanks again PH. The chairman has replied - commendably quickly assuming that he only actually received my response yesterday. It was a well written reply, and I've asked if I can post it on the Forum. However, it didn't answer my query/point about campaigning being conspicuous by its absence from the trusteeship candidates' self citations.


And finally, thanks again, again PH - the chairman's response is here :

Hi John,

Many thanks for taking the time to write back. I received a large number of replies and I was pleased to see so much support from members. I support the view that campaigning is hugely important to us - as it's always been and you may know that 'protecting the rights of cyclists' was one of the reasons we were formed back in 1878.

Your education point is well made and for me education is a key part of creating harmony on our roads - and in fact anywhere where people wish to cycle. We have many examples of the way in which we work to do this - either directly through our work or supporting others and one example is the 'close pass' initiatives being undertaken by many police forces recently where conversation and dialogue can lead to fewer accidents. Lobbying is hugely important and so too is wider public engagement to help make our roads as safe as they can be.

Best wishes,

Dan

Steady rider
Posts: 2287
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: CANDIDATES FOR THE CTC/CUK ELECTION

Postby Steady rider » 12 Feb 2017, 12:44pm

Education is nice but cyclists need a 'passing law', in addition to conversations.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 16717
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: CANDIDATES FOR THE CTC/CUK ELECTION

Postby mjr » 12 Feb 2017, 6:09pm

Steady rider wrote:Education is nice but cyclists need a 'passing law', in addition to conversations.

If education was going to work, it would have by now. How bad do things have to get before CUK will support stronger action?

Like https://trafficwmp.wordpress.com/2017/0 ... ion-event/ says "some drivers may be dismayed and distraught at the idea of us getting all “sneaky” to catch dangerous drivers, but they had their chance, “the gloves are off” as they say when it comes to the fight against the dangerous motorist in our region. But remember those who can drive to the required standard, “the law abiding motorist” have nothing to worry about, quite the opposite their journeys should become more pleasant as a result." Does CUK leadership reject AGM motions in support of passing laws because it's actually full of dangerous motorists?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

JohnW
Posts: 6450
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: CANDIDATES FOR THE CTC/CUK ELECTION

Postby JohnW » 12 Feb 2017, 6:24pm

mjr wrote:................... going to work, it would have by now. How bad do things have to get before CUK will support stronger action?.............................

I don't think it's a matter of how bad it'll get - there's enough death to cyclists - I think it's a case of convincing the trustees of their esponsibilities.
Last edited by JohnW on 12 Feb 2017, 8:24pm, edited 2 times in total.