Draft Proposal for the Cycling UK / CTC Board Meeting on Saturday 22nd October 2016

User avatar
Philip Benstead
Posts: 1418
Joined: 13 Jan 2007, 7:06pm
Location: Victoria , London

Draft Proposal for the Cycling UK / CTC Board Meeting on Saturday 22nd October 2016

Postby Philip Benstead » 6 Oct 2016, 6:21pm

NB I have permission to post this.

Draft Proposal for the Cycling UK / CTC Board Meeting on Saturday 22nd October 2016

The Board is concerned that the Nomination Committee has exceeded its authority, disregarded the views of members, disregarded decisions made at Cycling UK Board / CTC Council meetings, and not reported to the Board before going ahead with some controversial actions.

1) Despite the large number of votes held by the Chair this year’s AGM voted by a clear majority (55.91% in favour) that all candidates should have been fully paid up members of CTC / Cycling UK for at least a year before nominations closed. This was a clear and unambiguous statement of members’ wishes at an AGM. However the nomination committee chose to ignore this and include six people on the ballot who did not meet this criterion. It is not acceptable for three people to overturn an AGM decision. Despite efforts to build bridges, move on and work together for the good of cycling and our organisation it should be noted that it was clear that members who had not supported the governance proposals would not be welcome on the nomination committee. Thus the current elections are invalid.
2) Consistently Council and Board meetings were reassured that members not endorsed by the nomination committee would be allowed to stand for election leaving members as a whole to make the choice by voting in the ballot. Indeed some members might choose to vote for unendorsed candidates as happens in some building societies and elsewhere. Excluding members from the ballot was not what was intended and is very dangerous. In the future it will make it very difficult, if not impossible, for those who disagree with the CTC / Cycling UK leadership of the day. Thus the current elections are invalid.
3) On many occasions, including recently, CTC Council and Cycling UK’s Board made it clear that elections should be by the transferable vote. The papers have gone out based on “first past the post.” It is certainly not acceptable for a small subcommittee to overturn a decision of Council. Transferable voting is not hard and, anyway, we have arranged for ERS to conduct this election but, critically, “first past the post” goes right against agreed policy. Thus the current elections are invalid.
This is so serious that a shrugging of the shoulders we’ll take steps to get it right next time is not acceptable. We cannot go through next year with a board set up by such an exclusive, undemocratic, unagreed process. The nomination committee have so over reached themselves that we must suspend the current elections and start again.
We should consult ERS on the best way to do this but perhaps:
• A small subcommittee including Barry Flood, Chair of Operations until its abolition, or his nominee to work with ERS.
• Disqualify those on the ballot with insufficient or zero membership.
• Circulate all those with at least twelve months membership who wanted to stand but were not approved to ask if they want to stand as unendorsed candidates.
• Change the voting system to transferable voting as previously agreed.
• If possible re-issue the correct ballot papers and instructions with the December magazine. Otherwise as soon as possible.

Proposed: Jim Brown
Seconded: Barry Flood
Philip Benstead | Life Member Former CTC Councillor/Trustee
Organizing events and representing cyclist in southeast since 1988
Bikeability Instructor/Mechanic