POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB PLEASE TAKE PART YOUR VOTE IS IMPORTANT

Discussion of the re-branding of CTC as Cycling UK.
PH
Posts: 7489
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB PLEASE TAKE PART YOUR VOTE IS IMPORTANT

Postby PH » 9 Jul 2016, 10:53pm

merseymouth wrote:As you have no interest or investment in what happens to the Club what is your agenda all about??? Show or Blow, now that is rude! MM

Well you seem to struggle with the simple concept that doing nothing can be an action in itself so I'm probably wasting my time here.
You've got the tense wrong in the above quote, I was very much interested in what happens to the club at the time it was happening, but by the time this poll came along it had already happened.
What did you think could be achieved? The trustees are obliged by law to act in what they consider the charities interests whatever the membership vote and the poll would only have obliged them to postpone the branding for 6 months. So in the extremely unlikely event that this poll was won, in what possible way do you think that would have moved us closer to the the club of old?
My agenda is very clear, to make the best of what we've got and I believe there's still plenty of good in it.
Your agenda is what? You can't change it back, that's not an option, the law says so. The assets were given to the charity and then the club merged with it, that's where we are.

merseymouth
Posts: 1029
Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 11:16am

Re: POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB PLEASE TAKE PART YOUR VOTE IS IMPORTANT

Postby merseymouth » 10 Jul 2016, 8:24am

Hello again, I will make one final point, which you may or may not find relevant!
Did I or did I not read on this Forum that the concept of a membership vote is against Charity Commission Rules, so should have ruled the CTC out from applying for Charitable status?
If that is correct then all subsequent actions by our ruling body brought into question!
The aims of the club were vastly different from the Charitable body that it now purports to be, so maybe the people who hi-jacked the CTC that we both prefer should have simply created their own vehicle for the purpose?
You rightly say it is not the club you joined, well that goes for me to, but for a simple analogy it is like a burglar who enters a house, then takes the house !
Enjoy your cycling, TTFN MM

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13699
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB PLEASE TAKE PART YOUR VOTE IS IMPORTANT

Postby gaz » 10 Jul 2016, 9:27am

merseymouth wrote:... Did I or did I not read on this Forum that the concept of a membership vote is against Charity Commission Rules, so should have ruled the CTC out from applying for Charitable status? ...


What I believe you have read is this thread describing comments from the Charity Commission on Article 11, which has been linked during the rebrand discussions.

...I notice that there is a provision in Article 11 whereby the whole Club may be polled on any question. Any decision arrived at by a poll of the whole Club shall bind the Club and the Council (i.e. the charity trustees) for six months.

Although this Article doesn’t affect charitable status, it isn’t really appropriate for a charity. ...

The Charity Commission were well aware of Article 11 when they granted CTC charitable status, it did not rule it out.
Hand wash only. Do not iron.

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13699
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB PLEASE TAKE PART YOUR VOTE IS IMPORTANT

Postby gaz » 10 Jul 2016, 9:39am

merseymouth wrote:...The aims of the club were vastly different from the Charitable body that it now purports to be, ...

The Pre-Charity edition of the CTC Memorandum and Articles of Association are still available if you know where to look.
3. The objects for which the Club is established are:
3.1 To promote, assist and protect the use of bicycles, tricycles and other similar vehicles on the public roads and public rights of way;
3.2 To promote and safeguard the interests of riders of bicycles, tricycles and other similar vehicles (hereinafter referred to as “cyclists”);
3.3 To encourage cycling and cycle touring as a means of adventure, recreation, character training and other forms of education, to stimulate by all possible means interest and participation, and in particular the interest and participation of young persons, in cycling, and to promote cycling competitions, rallies, rides and other events;
....

The current version lists:
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.

Could you please outline the vast differences between them.

merseymouth wrote:... You rightly say it is not the club you joined, well that goes for me to, ...

The current edition date to 2012, those were the aims of the club when you last renewed your membership. They have not changed.
Hand wash only. Do not iron.

Psamathe
Posts: 10391
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB PLEASE TAKE PART YOUR VOTE IS IMPORTANT

Postby Psamathe » 10 Jul 2016, 9:54am

gaz wrote:
merseymouth wrote:...The aims of the club were vastly different from the Charitable body that it now purports to be, ...

The Pre-Charity edition of the CTC Memorandum and Articles of Association are still available if you know where to look.
3. The objects for which the Club is established are:
3.1 To promote, assist and protect the use of bicycles, tricycles and other similar vehicles on the public roads and public rights of way;
3.2 To promote and safeguard the interests of riders of bicycles, tricycles and other similar vehicles (hereinafter referred to as “cyclists”);
3.3 To encourage cycling and cycle touring as a means of adventure, recreation, character training and other forms of education, to stimulate by all possible means interest and participation, and in particular the interest and participation of young persons, in cycling, and to promote cycling competitions, rallies, rides and other events;
....

The current version lists:
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.

Could you please outline the vast differences between them.

merseymouth wrote:... You rightly say it is not the club you joined, well that goes for me to, ...

The current edition date to 2012, those were the aims of the club when you last renewed your membership. They have not changed.

e.g. SPORT

(And I note that they should be promoting "the safety of cyclists" yet would have nothing to do with a Passing Clearance campaign (directed the membership to vote against their getting involved. Left of British cycling to do that.)

Ian

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13699
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB PLEASE TAKE PART YOUR VOTE IS IMPORTANT

Postby gaz » 10 Jul 2016, 10:55am

Psamathe wrote:e.g. SPORT

Hardly "vastly different" especially when you report the difference correctly as amateur sport, which in Charity terms has a very broad definition that readily encompasses cycling in its more relaxed forms.

Psamathe wrote:(And I note that they should be promoting "the safety of cyclists" yet would have nothing to do with a Passing Clearance campaign (directed the membership to vote against their getting involved. Left of British cycling to do that.)

Council considers how Cycling UK can best use its resources to help preserve and protect the safety of cyclists. In the case of the Passing Clearance motion the membership voted in agreement with Council's position.

You disagree with that view, adding it to the list of reasons why you don't want to become a member.
Hand wash only. Do not iron.

PH
Posts: 7489
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB PLEASE TAKE PART YOUR VOTE IS IMPORTANT

Postby PH » 10 Jul 2016, 1:49pm

merseymouth wrote:The aims of the club were vastly different from the Charitable body that it now purports to be, so maybe the people who hi-jacked the CTC that we both prefer should have simply created their own vehicle for the purpose?
You rightly say it is not the club you joined, well that goes for me to, but for a simple analogy it is like a burglar who enters a house, then takes the house !
Enjoy your cycling, TTFN MM

I agree with some of the sentiment in that, though not your name calling of those who disagree with you. You again fail to answer the simple question as to what difference you think this poll could have made. Do you have an answer to that? You've been incredibly insulting to those who didn't vote without offering a reason to have done so, except for some fantastical idea that it could change the clubs recent history. You may feel it worthwhile to have used your vote as a protest, but IMO that's no more legitimate than someone concluding it wouldn't make a meaningful difference and abstaining on that basis, or deciding it makes no difference to them what the organisation is called.

User avatar
honesty
Posts: 2514
Joined: 16 Mar 2012, 3:33pm
Location: Somerset
Contact:

Re: POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB PLEASE TAKE PART YOUR VOTE IS IMPORTANT

Postby honesty » 10 Jul 2016, 2:09pm

jb wrote:
Si wrote:
So over a third of the membership is not happy


Incorrect. About 1/20th of the membership voted against the rebrand. About 1/10th voted for. And one might assume that over 4/5ths were not sufficiently worried by the issue to cast a vote.

Whilst technically correct, It does somewhat hide the fact that the powers that be have for sometime been deliberately recruiting members from outside the broad touring fraternity which has resulted in 'the result'.

If you join a traction engine club and the committee start bringing in motorcyclists because they want to increase membership and the motorcyclists decide to call it 'The Motorbiking Club' you might feel a little aggrieved.

Still, its done now, time to move on.


I love the fantastical idea that the council has stuffed the membership with yes men that aren't "really cycle tourers" so they could swing this vote and the club how they wanted. It's utter nonsense, but I think the pure conspiracy theory element of it is brilliant.

Has there been a significant increase in member numbers to reflect this?
Define touring fraternity? The more I read in posts like this, the more it comes across as pure snobbishness. Were proper tourers they can't be right because they're not proper tourers, and so on.

PH
Posts: 7489
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB PLEASE TAKE PART YOUR VOTE IS IMPORTANT

Postby PH » 10 Jul 2016, 2:30pm

honesty wrote:I love the fantastical idea that the council has stuffed the membership with yes men that aren't "really cycle tourers" so they could swing this vote and the club how they wanted. It's utter nonsense, but I think the pure conspiracy theory element of it is brilliant.

One mans stuffing the membership is another mans broadening the appeal, but it was Kevin Mayne's intention to do whichever of those you call it;
http://www.cyclinguk.org/file/public/ct ... -mayne.pdf

That did change the clubs emphasis, which did put us on the path to where we are now, and some people have a legitimate grievance that this isn't the club they joined, just as others would never have joined the club that was.
Of course in a perfect world it could and should be both, I see occasional glimpses that it could go that way, but I also see how much ill feeling and distrust there is on both sides which makes me wonder if it's too late.

jb
Posts: 877
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 12:17pm
Location: Clitheroe

Re: POLL OF THE WHOLE CLUB PLEASE TAKE PART YOUR VOTE IS IMPORTANT

Postby jb » 10 Jul 2016, 9:40pm

honesty wrote:
jb wrote:
Si wrote:
Incorrect. About 1/20th of the membership voted against the rebrand. About 1/10th voted for. And one might assume that over 4/5ths were not sufficiently worried by the issue to cast a vote.

Whilst technically correct, It does somewhat hide the fact that the powers that be have for sometime been deliberately recruiting members from outside the broad touring fraternity which has resulted in 'the result'.

If you join a traction engine club and the committee start bringing in motorcyclists because they want to increase membership and the motorcyclists decide to call it 'The Motorbiking Club' you might feel a little aggrieved.

Still, its done now, time to move on.


I love the fantastical idea that the council has stuffed the membership with yes men that aren't "really cycle tourers" so they could swing this vote and the club how they wanted. It's utter nonsense, but I think the pure conspiracy theory element of it is brilliant.

Has there been a significant increase in member numbers to reflect this?
Define touring fraternity? The more I read in posts like this, the more it comes across as pure snobbishness. Were proper tourers they can't be right because they're not proper tourers, and so on.

Well that would be utter nonsense, good job I didn't say that.

I did not say that members were deliberately recruited to swing the vote, There has however IMO been a concerted effort to bring a broader spectrum of cyclists into the membership in accordance with the vision of the 'Cycling UK' management to becoming an entity which promotes cycling in general. Which is fine in itself but has been done at the expense of a club which was set up for a different reason and has been hijacked because it happened to be the biggest organisation in cycling.
As for snobbishness, I've spent half a lifetime cycling in a group considered the poor relation to proper cyclist who all aspire to be 'cat.1' riders who turn their noses up at a dynamo or panier rack and would faint at the idea of stopping off to peruse some happening of interest. You confuse snobbishness with identity me thinks.
Cheers
J Bro