Cycling UK Forum

PH wrote:

al_yrpal wrote:Nothing to stop someone from the 'Council' coming on here and telling us what they intend the reclaimed VAT money for?
Al

I haven't heard anything about this bid to reclaim VAT, have you any details?

I got an email from Cox. They are getting several years of gift aid (not VAT, sorry for the misinformation) back and as I have been a member for 9 years and just resigned. They were asking for my help to reclaim the gift aid I paid on my subscription over a few years. Apparently it adds up to half a million overall. That means they can employ lots more drones presumably?

Al

al_yrpal wrote:

PH wrote:

al_yrpal wrote:Nothing to stop someone from the 'Council' coming on here and telling us what they intend the reclaimed VAT money for?
Al

I haven't heard anything about this bid to reclaim VAT, have you any details?

I got an email from Cox. They are getting several years of gift aid (not VAT, sorry for the misinformation) back and as I have been a member for 9 years and just resigned. They were asking for my help to reclaim the gift aid I paid on my subscription over a few years. Apparently it adds up to half a million overall.

Al

So not VAT then.
I don't understand why anyone would object the idea of Gift Aid, it's entirely up to the individual member whether they wish to sign up, the Charitable Trust has been doing stuff that would have been eligible since it's foundation in 2004. It's certainly no surprise, it was a major selling point of the charity conversion.

That means they can employ lots more drones presumably?

Do you have any evidence for this presumption? Who are these drones? Has there been more spent on them recently?

Why are they reclaiming Gift Aid back to 2004? Why hasn't it been reclaimed annually as everyone else does? Does this demonstrate a lack of care/capability in actually managing (our) financial affairs?

they can employ lots more drones presumably?

The reason for starting this thread was precisely because every discussion here is dominated by this kind of knee jerk conspiracy theory.

There are pros and cons to the rebrand.

An intelligent exposition of these would help the debate; "drones" and the like doesn't. IMHO.

boblo wrote:Why are they reclaiming Gift Aid back to 2004? Why hasn't it been reclaimed annually as everyone else does? Does this demonstrate a lack of care/capability in actually managing (our) financial affairs?

The reason for this explained in the front of Bike this month, the chairman's piece. We have only just been given the green light by HRMC.

Personally I don't mind the rebrand, local groups can be what they want to be. It does seem a bit more encompassing as all cycling now.

boblo wrote:Why are they reclaiming Gift Aid back to 2004?

The trust didn't receive any income eligible to claim Gift Aid on.

The survey below was written on behave of governance committee by a consultant, when ask why she did not include background information to the subject she said she thought the membership would not understand.
CTC Members Survey


Dear Mr P Benstead

We are conducting a survey regarding CTC governance and as a member your input would be greatly appreciated.

Full details are found on the first page of the survey. Please click the button below to find out more and to start the survey.

We would appreciate it if you could complete the survey by Monday 23rd November 2015.

Thank you in advance for your participation.

CTC Governance Working Group

Begin Survey



Please do not forward this email as its survey link is unique to you.
Opt out of receiving surveys from this sender


Powered by



C Members Survey
Introduction
1 / 11 9%
Dear Member,

As the national cycling charity, CTC works to help people experience the joy of cycling – and to protect their freedom to do so. To achieve this we need an effective governance structure which harnesses the enthusiasm of our members, new and old.

CTC was formed as a company limited by guarantee in 1887 and is also registered as a charity. It is governed by the CTC Council, a group of up to 26 people made up of up to 22 people elected by our members and up to 4 people co-opted by the Council. The members of Council are non-executive company directors and charity trustees.

Council is ultimately responsible for the whole organisation and fulfils that duty by appointing the Chief Executive, giving clear strategic direction to the staff team, overseeing the finances, and monitoring the achievement of our objectives.

CTC Council recognised some time ago that the current structure is not ideal and has asked us to review it. We are therefore reviewing our governance structures and processes to identify ways to improve them. The review has led us to consult widely and consider the way other charities are governed.

In our review, we aim to apply recognised best practice for the governance of charities to improve CTC’s governance and to give members with appropriate skills, knowledge or experience a clear way to participate in the governance of CTC - whether as Council members (charity trustees) or in other ways.
This questionnaire has been developed as part of our review to help us better understand your views as a current member of CTC. The simple survey should only take a few minutes to complete. Any information you provide will remain anonymous. The results will help shape the thinking of the group and Council as we decide what to do next.

Thank you in advance for completing this survey.

The governance working group:

Martin Cockersole – Chair of working group
David Cox – Chair of Council
Dan Howard – Vice-Chair of Council
Jaki Lowe – Councillor
Paul Tuohy – CEO
Shivaji Shiva – Honorary Solicitor
Valerie Morton – Independent Governance Consultant
Next
Powered by
See how easy it is to create a survey.
CTC Members Survey
Privacy Statement
2 / 11 18%
The answers that you have provided in this survey will be anonymised and used for the purpose of reviewing and improving our brand and perception of our services and activities to members and the public. CTC will not disclose this information to any other person or organisation except in connection with the above purposes. If you have any query about the use we make of your data, please write to the Data Controller at CTC, Parklands, Railton Road, Guildford, GU2 9JX.
Prev Next
Powered by
See how easy it is to create a survey.

CTC Members Survey
3 / 11 27%
Please select the answer that most closely reflects your opinion.
1. Currently members can vote for Councillors (charity trustees) within their local regions. We are considering changing this to enable members to vote for all of the elected CTC Councillors. As a member of CTC, would you like the opportunity to vote for:
One or two Councillors (charity trustees) in your local region
All of the elected Councillors of CTC
No preference
Prev Next
Powered by
See how easy it is to create a survey.
CTC Members Survey
4 / 11 36%
Please select the most appropriate option to correspond with your response to the following statement.
2. I believe that all CTC Councillors should share equal responsibility for CTC's activities across the UK.
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly agree
Prev Next
Powered by
See how easy it is to create a survey.
CTC Members Survey
5 / 11 45%
Please select the most appropriate option to correspond with your response to the following statement.
3. The elected Councillors should be able to appoint an additional 1 or 2 trustees to join Council (the board of trustees) to fill gaps in the skills, knowledge or experience of the elected Council.
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly agree
Prev Next
Powered by
See how easy it is to create a survey.


TC Members Survey
6 / 11 55%
Please select the most appropriate option to correspond with your response to the following statement.
4. The contribution of experienced CTC volunteers should be recognised with a formal role that enables members with particular skills or experience to support the work of CTC and help energise volunteers locally and/or nationally.
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly agree
Prev Next
Powered by
See how easy it is to create a survey.


CTC Members Survey
7 / 11 64%
5. It is a principle of good governance that Trustee Boards should not be so large as to be unwieldy. Council currently comprises up to 26 members. The governance working group has concluded that the board should be substantially smaller to ensure efficient and effective decision making.

Do you...
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly agree
Prev Next
Powered by
See how easy it is to create a survey.


CTC Members Survey
8 / 11 73%
6. It is proposed that the Council should have a maximum of 12 members.

Do you...
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly agree
Prev Next
Powered by
See how easy it is to create a survey.




CTC Members Survey
9 / 11 82%
7. Which one of these statements best describes your opinion of the present system of governance and whether it enables us to deliver our mission?
It is very effective and could not be improved
It is effective but could be improved a little
I don't have a strong opinion either way
It is ineffective and could be improved quite a bit
It is very ineffective and needs a great deal of improvement
Prev Next
Powered by
See how easy it is to create a survey.



10 / 11 91%
8. If you have any ideas for improving the governance of CTC which you would like the governance working group to consider, please add them here.

Note: This survey is anonymous so we will not be able to respond directly to your ideas, although your input will be considered within this review.

Prev Next
Powered by
See how easy it is to cre


CTC Members Survey
Thank you
11 / 11 100%
Thank you for your valuable input.
P

Discussed at the time: viewtopic.php?f=45&t=101766&p=956275#p956275

I don't see that anything can be gained from discussing it again, especially since the membership passed the governance motion at the AGM.

No longer a member of CTC /CUK but I do have a view on things....I was once a member of a camping club with all the members chat meetings etc being done via Yahoo.....Then some brain at HQ thought that as the membership was mainly older folk it would be a great idea to close the Yahoo system and enforce membership updates etc via Facebook thus (they believed) encouraging more trendy young bloods into the camping fold......Guess what....The membership floundered, members told the powers that be that they didn't want to be on Facebook and that the Yahoo system worked just fine, but no, all appeals were ignored and the change was enforced.

I hear from others that despite the change there are NO trendy young things falling over themselves to join the group. The reason IMHO is this.........You can re-brand a cabbage all you like, it will still be a cabbage. You can change names to all sorts of trendy multi media hip hop wording BUT you will still only get the same people to view/join your club as that is their interest anyway. Trainspotters tend to stick together, as do cyclists (even if you are a Lycra clad road warrior, snif) as do VW owners etc.

Re-brand is money lost on admin costs....end of.

Penfold wrote:No longer a member of CTC /CUK but I do have a view on things....I was once a member of a camping club with all the members chat meetings etc being done via Yahoo.....Then some brain at HQ thought that as the membership was mainly older folk it would be a great idea to close the Yahoo system and enforce membership updates etc via Facebook thus (they believed) encouraging more trendy young bloods into the camping fold......Guess what....The membership floundered, members told the powers that be that they didn't want to be on Facebook and that the Yahoo system worked just fine, but no, all appeals were ignored and the change was enforced.

I hear from others that despite the change there are NO trendy young things falling over themselves to join the group. The reason IMHO is this.........You can re-brand a cabbage all you like, it will still be a cabbage. You can change names to all sorts of trendy multi media hip hop wording BUT you will still only get the same people to view/join your club as that is their interest anyway. Trainspotters tend to stick together, as do cyclists (even if you are a Lycra clad road warrior, snif) as do VW owners etc.

Re-brand is money lost on admin costs....end of.

Do Volvo owners still flash their headlights at each like they started to do in the 1970s ??

You paragraph on change sums it all up - change for the sake of it (and to appease certain egos)

Rob

It could be worse: I'm told the Civil Service Motoring Association is rebranding as "Boundless"

mjr wrote:It could be worse: I'm told the Civil Service Motoring Association is rebranding as "Boundless"

Only marginally better than "Bounders".

On the other hand a rebrand can be good for an organisation.

A Manchester based charity called Disability Living started life in the 1890s as the Cripples' Help Society (link).

When founded, it's name was probably a reasonable one, & one that was easily understood then. In the late 70s/ early 80s, when I first came across them, they just used the initials CHS. I can imagine a few cringeworthy moments when asked about what the initials stood for at a time when "cripple" had ceased to be an acceptable term for a disabled person.

Whilst it's aims are broadly the same as when founded - provision of equipment & advice to help enable the disabled - it's new name is much more obvious to a modern audience as to the type of work they are involved in.

Regards

Rick.

But 'CTC' etc is not offensive or non PC in the same way so your point is just a red herring. Sorry, no offence intended.

No offense taken.

But their name wasn't helping their cause.

Yes I would agree with those who say that CTC has a proud history but it isn't recognised by those in the wider world for whatever reason. I don't think I've ever met anyone who knew what CTC was who wasn't already a member or had a family member who was.

There are lots of people who ride bikes that wouldn't think of themselves as "cyclists" and quite a few of them may even have been on cycling holidays but wouldn't think of themselves as "touring cyclists" either.

My sister & her husband would fall into both categories - until they retired they commuted by bike fairly frequently & they go out for, mainly off road, rides for leisure. They've also been on several holidays where the mode of transport has been cycling - we would probably call them something like supported cycle tours but they may not have looked past the headline if it was described like that.

I've said it elsewhere, I have a friend who has cycled for transport for years. She commented that she understands Cycling UK as an organisation promoting cycling but never really "got" CTC. She has now joined.

Regards

Rick.

Regards