Cycling UK AGM : 13th May 2017 : London

dodbinmule
Posts: 21
Joined: 4 Apr 2017, 12:38pm

Re: Cycling UK AGM : 13th May 2017 : London

Postby dodbinmule » 5 Apr 2017, 8:25am

I wonder how many members have or will vote for these motions who did not attend last years AGM or have read the minutes or the annual report?

CTC AGM 2017

ORDINARY BUSINESS
1) To adopt as a true, record the minutes of the Annual General Meeting held in Derby, 7th May 2016.
2) To adopt the Annual Report of Council and the audited accounts for the year ended 30th September 2016, as published on the Cycling UK website.

Steady rider
Posts: 2169
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: Cycling UK AGM : 13th May 2017 : London

Postby Steady rider » 5 Apr 2017, 9:18am

There was lunch break in proceedings that could have been mentioned.

Cost of Governance paperwork was quite high, £20-30k or something like that.

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13701
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: Cycling UK AGM : 13th May 2017 : London

Postby gaz » 5 Apr 2017, 6:49pm

dodbinmule wrote:I wonder how many members have or will vote for these motions who did not attend last years AGM or have [not] read the minutes or the annual report?

"Not" added (as I suspect that's what you meant).

That's something that can be wondered about every year.

Steady rider wrote:Cost of Governance paperwork was quite high, £20-30k or something like that.

Do you have any source for your figure that you can link?
Hand wash only. Do not iron.

Steady rider
Posts: 2169
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: Cycling UK AGM : 13th May 2017 : London

Postby Steady rider » 5 Apr 2017, 8:26pm

Annual report CTC 2015 page 34 refers to £270K for governance costs, so the figure £20-30k is incorrect, how this cost is spread I am not sure. I assume some or most to the solicitors providing all the paperwork to cover the governance topic. http://www.cyclinguk.org/sites/default/ ... 201415.pdf
perhaps someone with detailed information may be able to explain the costs, paid to?

looking further, page 40 explains governance costs, staff costs and other costs, so actual cost of producing governance reports seems unclear.

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13701
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: Cycling UK AGM : 13th May 2017 : London

Postby gaz » 5 Apr 2017, 8:36pm

Governance costs from previous Annual Accounts:

2012 £207,044
2013 £242,652
2014 £251,336
2015 £270,213

I would expect that the hire of suitable facilities for Council Meetings and the AGM, the costs of ERS and in-house voting systems and the preparation of the Annual Report and Accounts together with Auditors fees all fall under Governance Costs. It seems reasonable to assume that the governance report and other professional advice also forms part of such costs.

I am not aware of any detailed breakdown of Governance Costs to support my view on the matter, nor have I examined the accounts in detail to see if any of those items are covered individually.
Hand wash only. Do not iron.

Steady rider
Posts: 2169
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: Cycling UK AGM : 13th May 2017 : London

Postby Steady rider » 5 Apr 2017, 9:14pm

I do not have sufficient old copies of Cycle but I recall most of the figure were published in the mag, prior to being linked up to the web. The breakdown of information means some aspects cannot be fully assessed for costs.

With regards to motion no 10,
Company House provided the following information. I have deleted the persons name. It seems to me with brand names more risks could occur. Using the proper company name makes it clearer for checking purposes and security.

-----------------------

Thank you for your email. I can confirm the company name must be displayed on the membership cards and not the trading name. Please see below.


Sections 82 to 84 of the Companies Act 2006 (in conjunction with Statutory Instrument 2008/495) states that every company shall disclose its registered name in characters that can be read with a naked eye on:-


(a) its business letters, notices and other official publications;

(b) its bills of exchange, promissory notes, endorsements and order forms;

(c) cheques purporting to be signed by or on behalf of the company;

(d) orders for money, goods or services purporting to be signed by or on behalf of the company;

(e) its bills of parcels, invoices and other demands for payment, receipts and letters of credit;

(f) its applications for licences to carry on a trade or activity; and

(g) all other forms of its business correspondence and documentation.

(i) every company shall disclose its registered name on its e-mails and websites”.

In addition, all companies must disclose:-

(a) the part of the United Kingdom in which the company is registered;

(b) the company’s registered number;

(c) the address of the company’s registered office;

On all:-

(a) its business letters;

(b) its order forms; and

(c) its e-mails and websites.

Please provide any evidence the company has breached the above legislation and I will contact the above company, for them to make the amendments.

Yours sincerely

Case Manager, Breaches Team

User avatar
RickH
Posts: 4504
Joined: 5 Mar 2012, 6:39pm
Location: Horwich, Lancs.

Re: Cycling UK AGM : 13th May 2017 : London

Postby RickH » 5 Apr 2017, 9:39pm

Just noting that British Cycling membership cards just have "British Cycling" on them when the Memorandum of Association says "The name of the Company is The British Cycling Federation (“the BCF”)."

Are they both wrong? Does a membership card count in the legal categories? They are not specifically mentioned so, unless a preference has been set, could be a grey area whether they come under "(g) all other forms of its business correspondence and documentation".

Steady rider
Posts: 2169
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: Cycling UK AGM : 13th May 2017 : London

Postby Steady rider » 5 Apr 2017, 9:47pm

(g) all other forms of its business correspondence and documentation.

that is the law.
Company House said;
I can confirm the company name must be displayed on the membership cards and not the trading name.

From the security point of view a company may have several trade names and any group trying not to be detected may borrow a trade name say, would need more checking to find they were underhand.

thirdcrank
Posts: 28648
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Cycling UK AGM : 13th May 2017 : London

Postby thirdcrank » 6 Apr 2017, 7:44am

RickH wrote:Just noting that British Cycling membership cards just have "British Cycling" on them when the Memorandum of Association says "The name of the Company is The British Cycling Federation (“the BCF”)."

Are they both wrong? Does a membership card count in the legal categories? They are not specifically mentioned so, unless a preference has been set, could be a grey area whether they come under "(g) all other forms of its business correspondence and documentation".


Hold the front page! :shock:

This dwarfs all the tittle-tattle about banned substances and sexism.

dodbinmule
Posts: 21
Joined: 4 Apr 2017, 12:38pm

Re: Cycling UK AGM : 13th May 2017 : London

Postby dodbinmule » 6 Apr 2017, 8:14am

WHAT IS A CTC MEMBER?
What going on here?

ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION OF CYCLISTS TOURING CLUB

10.6 The Trustees may establish different classes of Members and recognise one or more classes of supporters who are not Members (but who may nevertheless be termed as “members”) and set out their respective rights and obligations (including payment of Membership Fees save that such fees may not be imposed until approved by the members).


Cycling UK - Report – Memorandum and Articles

Amendments following Member Consultation
the membership structure of Cycling UK should remain unaltered
(92.72% of responding members agreed with this proposition);

3 Should there be provision for ‘supporters’ or ‘informal members’ who are not members of the charity for the purposes of company law?

This is a commonly used means to make clear that a charity may decide for engaging people who do not wish to become company members of the charity, and have no interest in participating in its governance, but may be willing to support the charity by making a small donation or in other ways. For that reason, we propose to leave this provision in place.

However, it is clear from the survey responses that the reasons for this proposal need to be explained more clearly to members. Some appear to believe the proposal was designed to ‘water down’ the role of existing members while others simply did not understand the reason for the proposal.

0

thirdcrank
Posts: 28648
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Cycling UK AGM : 13th May 2017 : London

Postby thirdcrank » 6 Apr 2017, 9:21am

dodbinmule wrote: .... Some appear to believe the proposal was designed to ‘water down’ the role of existing members ...


Why on earth would anybody think that?
:lol:
The only surprise to me is that it's taking so long.

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13701
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: Cycling UK AGM : 13th May 2017 : London

Postby gaz » 6 Apr 2017, 10:02am

dodbinmule wrote:WHAT IS A CTC MEMBER?
What going on here?
...
3 Should there be provision for ‘supporters’ or ‘informal members’ who are not members of the charity for the purposes of company law?

This is a commonly used means to make clear that a charity may decide for engaging people who do not wish to become company members of the charity, and have no interest in participating in its governance, but may be willing to support the charity by making a small donation or in other ways. For that reason, we propose to leave this provision in place.

...

There are posts elsewhere on the Cycling UK forum that offer a view that only "Real Members" should be involved in Cycling UK's governance. There are posts elsewhere on the Cycling UK forum suggesting that the Membership fee is a barrier to participation.

The introduction of a "supporter" category of "member" might have benefits in both regards. I've no knowledge of what benefits and obligations the Trustees intend to place on the "Cycling UK Membership Benefits Table" for the "supporter" category.
Hand wash only. Do not iron.

Steady rider
Posts: 2169
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: Cycling UK AGM : 13th May 2017 : London

Postby Steady rider » 6 Apr 2017, 10:50am

I've no knowledge of what benefits and obligations the Trustees intend to place on the "Cycling UK Membership Benefits Table" for the "supporter" category
.

Why over complicate the system, when existing members have 'no knowledge' etc. Insufficient details provided to warrant supporting such a change.

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13701
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: Cycling UK AGM : 13th May 2017 : London

Postby gaz » 6 Apr 2017, 11:51am

AIUI you support Motion 11,
Scrutiny Committe: that Cycling UK provide a scrutiny committee, independent of the trustees, to investigate any aspect of concern.


Why over complicate the system, when existing members have 'no knowledge' of the criteria to become a committee member, how the scrutiny committee would be appointed, the size or diversity of the commitee or who will determine what is an "aspect of concern" worthy of investigation, etc.

Applying your own criteria there are insufficient details provided to warrant supporting such a change.
Hand wash only. Do not iron.

Steady rider
Posts: 2169
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: Cycling UK AGM : 13th May 2017 : London

Postby Steady rider » 6 Apr 2017, 1:14pm

Proposer’s note: The 2016 AGM passed a
motion requiring all candidates for Trustees
to have at least 12 months’ membership, but
election saw several candidates who did not
comply with the motion. A scrutiny committee
could provide a balanced view. It would
promote a culture of transparency and
openness.


The motion did provide an example.
Jim Brown raised this issue requiring all candidates for Trustees
to have at least 12 months’ membership in a motion to Council but lost the vote 9 to 5. http://www.cyclinguk.org/sites/default/ ... utesv2.pdf Barry Flood said the elections were invalid.
On some occasions Council use an AGM motion to support their actions and on other occasions they override a motion. They are not really answerable in some ways for their actions. They can just say it is in the best interests of the charity - full stop. A scrutiny committee could provide a balanced view perhaps in that they will I assume have played no part in the decision making process. Council should look into the details of terms and conditions if members required a scrutiny committee.