Did anybody attend the CTC/CUK AGM?

Steady rider
Posts: 2749
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: Did anybody attend the CTC/CUK AGM?

Post by Steady rider »

Which is why proxy voting is allowed and encouraged. Do you think Cycling UK should not meet its legal obligations to provide a proxy voting mechanism to its members?
Seems a loaded question.

No one is suggesting not meeting legal obligations.
A change in approach would probably revert back to a simpler approach to accepting motions and for Council to hear both sides of any issue before casting its vote (proxy votes allocated). More time for both sides of any issue to be presented. The block vote seems a disadvantage, in that issues may be divided and voting should reflect this. The precise details would need consideration.
PH
Posts: 13106
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: Did anybody attend the CTC/CUK AGM?

Post by PH »

Philip Benstead wrote: 14 Sep 2022, 6:03am Should we do away with the AGM then?
As a physical meeting? I'd say yes. I don't think it's any longer a requirement?
If the motions have already been decided by the proxy votes cast prior to the physical meeting, nothing that happens there is going to change the outcome. So you tell me, what purpose does it serve?
We keep hearing that in the old days fifty people meeting in a room was a better way to make decisions than a couple of thousand voting by proxy. It's a matter of opinion which made the better decisions, but I don't think anyone can argue that the first is more representative.
A couple of thousand voting is still a poor percentage, that may reflect the level of interest, or it could be argued it's a massive vote of confidence in the board. IMO it just shows the majority have joined for reasons that are not particularly affected by the decisions of the AGM.
User avatar
Philip Benstead
Posts: 1944
Joined: 13 Jan 2007, 7:06pm
Location: Victoria , London

Re: Did anybody attend the CTC/CUK AGM?

Post by Philip Benstead »

PH wrote: 14 Sep 2022, 9:45am
Philip Benstead wrote: 14 Sep 2022, 6:03am Should we do away with the AGM then?
As a physical meeting? I'd say yes. I don't think it's any longer a requirement?
If the motions have already been decided by the proxy votes cast prior to the physical meeting, nothing that happens there is going to change the outcome. So you tell me, what purpose does it serve?
We keep hearing that in the old days fifty people meeting in a room was a better way to make decisions than a couple of thousand voting by proxy. It's a matter of opinion which made the better decisions, but I don't think anyone can argue that the first is more representative.
A couple of thousand voting is still a poor percentage, that may reflect the level of interest, or it could be argued it's a massive vote of confidence in the board. IMO it just shows the majority have joined for reasons that are not particularly affected by the decisions of the AGM.
.
My is fear the voting will go down and numbers participating by proxity votes by giving their vote to the chair will go down.

In the case of the national trust, the voting is around 0.5%, in the case of the ctc that would be around 350
Philip Benstead | Life Member Former CTC Councillor/Trustee
Organizing events and representing cyclists' in southeast since 1988
Bikeability Instructor/Mechanic
User avatar
gaz
Posts: 14649
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent

Re: Did anybody attend the CTC/CUK AGM?

Post by gaz »

Once again, following a General Meeting, half a dozen or so of the usual suspects from the forum membership have got together to express our deeply held opinions on how the democratic processes of Cycling UK/CTC [delete according to preference] do/do not [delete according to preference] function appropriately.

Once again we're repeating the same arguments, and once again I see no evidence either that anybody else is interested in our debate or that any of our own views on these matters will shift significantly.

Time for me to bow out and try harder not to get bothered by it next time around.
High on a cocktail of flossy teacakes and marmalade
Steady rider
Posts: 2749
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: Did anybody attend the CTC/CUK AGM?

Post by Steady rider »

I am fairly sure that approach will not address or provide any improvements.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Did anybody attend the CTC/CUK AGM?

Post by thirdcrank »

gaz wrote: 14 Sep 2022, 8:38pm Once again, following a General Meeting, half a dozen or so of the usual suspects from the forum membership have got together to express our deeply held opinions on how the democratic processes of Cycling UK/CTC [delete according to preference] do/do not [delete according to preference] function appropriately.

Once again we're repeating the same arguments, and once again I see no evidence either that anybody else is interested in our debate or that any of our own views on these matters will shift significantly.

Time for me to bow out and try harder not to get bothered by it next time around.
gaz - Just a note from me to express my appreciation of your contribution over the years.
Steady rider wrote: 15 Sep 2022, 9:25am I am fairly sure that approach will not address or provide any improvements.
It's the old exit, voice or loyalty choice and so often, when the loyal people decide to exit, they do so silently.
Bazza55
Posts: 54
Joined: 22 May 2013, 4:56pm

Re: Did anybody attend the CTC/CUK AGM?

Post by Bazza55 »

Cycling UK don't really want members to show an interest in how the charity is run, which is why the AGM is held on a weekday when many people are at work. When it was the CTC, members were encouraged to attend the AGM and get involved, it was held over a weekend with organised rides, presentations and awards and moved around the country, as a result the attendance was far higher than now. The last thing the Trustees need is members trying to block, object, or interfere with anything they intend to do. Members are an inconvenient necessity they could do without, but they need the revenue from subscriptions.
AndyK
Posts: 1498
Joined: 17 Aug 2007, 2:08pm
Location: Mid Hampshire

Re: Did anybody attend the CTC/CUK AGM?

Post by AndyK »

Bazza55 wrote: 3 Oct 2022, 8:25pm Cycling UK don't really want members to show an interest in how the charity is run, which is why the AGM is held on a weekday when many people are at work. When it was the CTC, members were encouraged to attend the AGM and get involved, it was held over a weekend with organised rides, presentations and awards and moved around the country, as a result the attendance was far higher than now. The last thing the Trustees need is members trying to block, object, or interfere with anything they intend to do. Members are an inconvenient necessity they could do without, but they need the revenue from subscriptions.
You are muddling up cause and effect there. The vast majority of members drifted away long ago because most of them no longer had any interest in club formal dinners and awards and speeches (and blazers? I bet there used to be blazers) and people posturing in a conference room. They decided they had better things to do with their weekends.
millimole
Posts: 909
Joined: 18 Feb 2007, 5:41pm
Location: Leicester

Re: Did anybody attend the CTC/CUK AGM?

Post by millimole »

There seems to be a hard core of members (?) who cannot accept that CUK is not the CTC of old.
The current organisation certainly has no interest in its 'members' as Bazza555 says, and they are an embarrassement to the trustees. The membership is a legal requirement that they can't shake off.

Equally while CUK is no longer a 'membership club' and is legally a charity, a lot of people confuse modern 'big charities' with the good works done by their local dog's home.
Big charity organisations - like CUK - exist to do the work, at arms length, of government both local and national, through winning grants. CUK would fold if these grants weren't forthcoming - don't think for a moment that you as a member have any say in the organisation - follow the money!
Leicester; Riding my Hetchins since 1971; Day rides on my Dawes; Going to the shops on a Decathlon Hoprider
AndyK
Posts: 1498
Joined: 17 Aug 2007, 2:08pm
Location: Mid Hampshire

Re: Did anybody attend the CTC/CUK AGM?

Post by AndyK »

millimole wrote: 5 Oct 2022, 7:47am Big charity organisations - like CUK - exist to do the work, at arms length, of government both local and national, through winning grants. CUK would fold if these grants weren't forthcoming - don't think for a moment that you as a member have any say in the organisation - follow the money!
Yeah, not actually true in Cycling UK's case. It was certainly starting to head that way a few years back, but I like to think one of my achievements in my time as a trustee was to help steer it towards a new strategy, one that emphasised its role as a campaigning charity that wasn't dependent on government handouts. Sure it still takes on a lot of "partnership" work with local and national government (especially in Scotland) but the money for that is ring-fenced: if all those projects stopped it would mean the staff directly employed on them would not have their contracts renewed, but the organisation as a whole would still be in good financial health and all its other work could continue. Have a look at the annual accounts sometime.
Bazza55
Posts: 54
Joined: 22 May 2013, 4:56pm

Re: Did anybody attend the CTC/CUK AGM?

Post by Bazza55 »

AndyK wrote: 4 Oct 2022, 11:11pm
Bazza55 wrote: 3 Oct 2022, 8:25pm Cycling UK don't really want members to show an interest in how the charity is run, which is why the AGM is held on a weekday when many people are at work. When it was the CTC, members were encouraged to attend the AGM and get involved, it was held over a weekend with organised rides, presentations and awards and moved around the country, as a result the attendance was far higher than now. The last thing the Trustees need is members trying to block, object, or interfere with anything they intend to do. Members are an inconvenient necessity they could do without, but they need the revenue from subscriptions.
You are muddling up cause and effect there. The vast majority of members drifted away long ago because most of them no longer had any interest in club formal dinners and awards and speeches (and blazers? I bet there used to be blazers) and people posturing in a conference room. They decided they had better things to do with their weekends.
That's not how I see it. I have attended three AGMs and helped host the 2012 AGM with Sue Cherry. We visited four different potential venues looking for somewhere large enough to cope with the numbers. Every attempt was made by the CTC to attract members to the event and the result was that on the Sunday we had to arrange four rides to cater for the numbers staying over the weekend. The truth is that once it changed to a charity and the new CEO was in place, the members were viewed as an irritant, so why should they want them at an AGM? It has nothing at all to do with blazers and posturing, more to do with the change to a top down driven organisation where money matters more than the members.
Post Reply