Disagreement with AGM resolutions

[pwa]

One interesting tack might be to inform prospective customers for CUK holidays how flying to a particular destination (e.g. Nice) compares with driving a Ford Focus 1.6 TDI car. "Your return flight would produce the greenhouse gas equivalent (CO2 and methane) of driving a Ford Focus TDI for X thousand miles....", just to spell it out so that people can make better informed choices. And that is what we all need, isn't it? For me, that would be a grown up way of dealing with this issue, giving recognition to the problem but allowing individuals to weigh things up for themselves. As someone who doesn't fly, I'd be interested in that done in reverse. If I drive our Auris Hybrid for, say, 6000 miles in a year, what sort of flight does that compare to? We all have our areas where we "could do better" and perhaps being a bit less defensive and more open to information is the way forward, for CUK and for all of us as individuals.

[Neil Wheadon]

It's extrapolation-itis gorn mad here ?

The AGM motion is that CUK not take advertising (money) where the product involves travel by flight.
. . . .
A bit different to - making CUK members walk-the-plank for using flights to travel.

No it's not Graham.
There are 35 volunteers donating hours and hours of their time organizing, managing and running trips for fellow cyclists. The motion effectively tells us we shouldn't be doing that. As Chris Juden has pointed out there is no effective infrastructure to take groups abroad. It will be a tremendous loss to a small but very active group of people many of whom have given years of voluntary work to CUK

Neil

[CJ]

Thanks, CJ, very interesting.

Can you see any positive ways to engage with rail operators, especially as there's now some resurgence of sleeper trains?

Campaigning is not my special subject. That's what I used to pay my membership subs for. So what exactly do touring cyclists get for that? Seems to me that Cycling UK is doing very little for cycle-touring and absolutely NOTHING for touring by groups. Eurostar, that used to carry ten bikes but now only two, is a prime example of utter failure dressed up as success. That campaigning failure stops dead in its tracks, any attempt to get a group with bikes into Europe by train.

So where are these sleeper trains then? Where can I catch one to? Madrid? Rome? Berlin? I recall that sleeper trains were originally planned for the tunnel, I believe they were even built, but those plans came to nothing with the carriages eventually sold to Canada. And the recent loss of City-Night-Line is hardly indicative of a resurgence!

[Jdsk]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/27/covid-19-reawakens-europe-sleeper-trains

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Mark_5_(CAF)
... I was amazed and very pleased to see the new sleeping cars.

Jonathan

[Will]

Screenshot 2020-08-13 at 18.14.52.png
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/27/covid-19-reawakens-europe-sleeper-trains

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Mark_5_(CAF)
... I was amazed and very pleased to see the new sleeping cars.

Jonathan

The Brussels Vienna sleeper train is run by the Austrian operator Österreichische Bundesbahnen (ÖBB) and does not carry bikes. Some other sleeper train routes out of Vienna and Innsbruck that are run by ÖBB do take bikes, but only have space for 5.

The Prague Rijeka sleeper train is new this year, but it does not look like it takes bikes.

The Stockholm Brussels sleeper train does not exist, but I would be very surprised if it was to carry bikes since you cannot take your bike on long distance trains in Sweden. There is an existing sleeper service connecting Sweden and Berlin, but it does not take bikes.

It is all very well that sleeper trains are making a comeback, but if they don't carry bikes then they are no use to cycling groups.

Will

[Neil Wheadon]

Amtrak in the USA have been lobbied by Adventure Cycling and can now carry 12 bicycles on each train. I have used the service on the East Coast and on the West Coast for two CTC Holidays in the past 5 years. I've also used a local service in South Africa, to carry a group for a day ride out of Cape Town

[irc]

One interesting tack might be to inform prospective customers for CUK holidays how flying to a particular destination (e.g. Nice) compares with driving a Ford Focus 1.6 TDI car. "Your return flight would produce the greenhouse gas equivalent (CO2 and methane) of driving a Ford Focus TDI for X thousand miles....", just to spell it out so that people can make better informed choices. And that is what we all need, isn't it? For me, that would be a grown up way of dealing with this issue, giving recognition to the problem but allowing individuals to weigh things up for themselves. As someone who doesn't fly, I'd be interested in that done in reverse. If I drive our Auris Hybrid for, say, 6000 miles in a year, what sort of flight does that compare to? We all have our areas where we "could do better" and perhaps being a bit less defensive and more open to information is the way forward, for CUK and for all of us as individuals.

The root of this is that Cycling Uk is a campaigning charity with one goal being environmental green issues. The CTC was a club for touring cyclists many of whom chose to fly.

If I wanted to be a member of a charity to promote green issues I would join Greenpeace.

Another example of the lack of emphasis on assisting tourers was when Chis Juden was made redundant and the CTC no longer had a technical officer. I found his articles invaluable. Yes, that was when it was still the CTC but it was a stepping stone on the way to Cycling UK. A campaigning charity not a cycle touring club.

[pwa]

The root of this is that Cycling Uk is a campaigning charity with one goal being environmental green issues. The CTC was a club for touring cyclists many of whom chose to fly.

If I wanted to be a member of a charity to promote green issues I would join Greenpeace.

An organisation with an identity problem and, on this issue, pulling in two directions. I think that is correct.

[PH]

Amtrak in the USA have been lobbied by Adventure Cycling and can now carry 12 bicycles on each train. I have used the service on the East Coast and on the West Coast for two CTC Holidays in the past 5 years. I've also used a local service in South Africa, to carry a group for a day ride out of Cape Town

I bet that involved a lot of flying.

[Neil Wheadon]

Amtrak in the USA have been lobbied by Adventure Cycling and can now carry 12 bicycles on each train. I have used the service on the East Coast and on the West Coast for two CTC Holidays in the past 5 years. I've also used a local service in South Africa, to carry a group for a day ride out of Cape Town

I bet that involved a lot of flying.

It's an example of how a cycling organization can make a difference even in a country where the car is king. It's easy to lobby to ban things, a little trickier to create something.
Adventure Cycling has about the same number of members as CUK, produces a great magazine (Cycle is a highlight of my membership in the UK, so a good parallel) and advocates for better cycling infrastructure and has made tremendous progress, I'm a life member

[Jdsk]

Amtrak in the USA have been lobbied by Adventure Cycling and can now carry 12 bicycles on each train. I have used the service on the East Coast and on the West Coast for two CTC Holidays in the past 5 years. I've also used a local service in South Africa, to carry a group for a day ride out of Cape Town

Well done.

Jonathan

[MattHodges]

I hope that if this motion goes through CTC Tour Leaders will abandon CTC holidays and set up a new organisation Real Cyclists' Touring Holidays perhaps affiliated to British Cycling. I am too old for moving on tours now but I would be happy to book for their first birthday rides holiday in a suitable centre in Britain.
After Cycling UK let York Rally collapse a group of volunteers have resurrected York Rally as an independent event. I have been every year since they restarted it and was booked for this year until Covid 19 forced it to be abandoned. There is real cycling outside of Cycling UK.
Matt H

[Will]

I think what would be a real game changer is if Deutsche Bahn were to re-consider their previous decision to cancel the introduction of a service from London to Cologne/Frankfurt. They may re-consider their previous decision as a response to the recent proposed merger between Eurostar and Thalys as a way to hinder their expansion into Germany and protect their market share. The original plan was to run ICE3 trains (which are the Velaro trains that are also used by Eurostar) on this service. Unfortunately the ICE3 trains don't carry bikes, but last month Deutsche Bahn announced that they had placed an order for 30 Velaro Novo trains - These are updated versions of the current ICE3 trains and include 8 bookable bike spaces per train.

If this service was to be introduced, then it would be possible to get to Cologne from London in about 4 hours, and Frankfurt in about 5 hours. It would be possible to split a group into two and re-group for an overnight stop in Cologne. The next morning for example, you could then take the EC9 service to Basel in under 5 hours, or Zürich in 6.5 hours - This train has 8 x 2nd class carriages, each with 2 bike spaces as well as 2 x 1st class with 2 bike spaces.

The new Velaro Novo trains are planned to be used between Dortmund and Munich. There is talk of them being used in Belgium and The Netherlands in due course. I assume that this would be on the current Brussels - Cologne/Frankfurt and the Amsterdam - Cologne/Frankfurt ICE services. This would make it easier to get a group into Germany, but it would still be necessary to get the group to Brussels or Amsterdam. A London - Cologne/Frankfurt service would be much better.

If Deutsche Bahn were to introduce this service, then it would be really helpful if there was a national cycling organisation that could campaign to have it serviced by Velaro Novo trains. Unfortunately, no such organization exists. Some people may think that Cycling UK is that organization, but they are not - They are more concerned with making empty gestures (such as this motion) than making a real difference. I think that many of these green campaigners make even the most hard-nosed Presbyterians look like Oliver Reed.

Will

[Jdsk]

Unfortunately the ICE3 trains don't carry bikes, but last month Deutsche Bahn announced that they had placed an order for 30 Velaro Novo trains - These are updated versions of the current ICE3 trains and include 8 bookable bike spaces per train.

Thanks. I'd missed that.

And the Novos can be reconfigured.., "empty tube" design.
https://www.mobility.siemens.com/global/en/portfolio/rail/rolling-stock/high-speed-and-intercity-trains/velaro-novo.html

Jonathan

[Suffolk audaxer]

As a former foreign tours leader, I endorse Neil Wheadon's comments. While, yes, tour leading is a labour of love, I have no doubt it is the most demanding voluntary role there is within CUK/CTC. I'm now one of CUK's official campaigners. I'm the rep for Waveney, one of the rep's for Suffolk and the regional rep for eastern England. All that is a walk in the park compared to being a tour leader, especially for foreign tours. Tour leading can be stressful (don't forget, you're dealing with people! Yes, even some cyclists can be difficult!) but tour leaders keep at it out of the sheer love for what they do and the great pleasure they are giving the majority who come on their tours. Many tour leaders have worked EXTREMELY hard for CTC/CUK for MANY years and provided MANY members with fantastic experiences and wonderful memories. Almost certainly, they are responsible for MANY members continuing their membership for MANY years. It includes me and ultimately they inspired me to be a foreign tours leader myself for 14 years.

My point is that even if one supports the principle of the motion (I don't), it is, nonetheless, important to consider how it impacts on the most hardworking volunteers in CUK/CTC. I expect many of them spent lockdown working hard on 2021 tours to give some members a fantastic uplift after a bad year. Out of the blue, there is a risk they will in effect be told all that was a waste of time. The commonly decent thing (okay, politically correct thing) to have done would have been to first discuss it with foreign tours leaders and take it from there. Rather than being a reason to support the motion, the fact there has been debate on the issue in CTC Tours anyway is all the more reason to discuss it with them first to explore if they can resolve it anyway. Surely it would not have been constitutionally wrong for those considering motions for inclusion to have got back to the proposers to ask if they could drop it, explaining why the ethical thing would be to see if CTC Tours can resolve it themselves. If the proposers still insisted, they could have indicated opposition to it for the moment, explaining why.

The fact that does not seem to have occurred to any of those responsible for deciding on motions to be included, feeds my fear that many (I fear a majority) in CUK management and amongst the Trustees are out of touch with the leisure side of CUK, don't have the first clue and don't regard it with great importance.

If management is so worried about CUK's green image, they need to do something about the sheer number of cars parked at HQs for events. Yes, flying is more environmentally damaging but the principle is still there. I suspect there are far more members driving to/from CUK events than flying on CUK tours. Also, the campaigning argument is around cycling instead of driving. The point is made by the fact we all know why that won't be done!