Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?

[dave holladay]

Noting the points raised about RSPCA and the curbs on campaigning I' be interested fi anyone has detail on the reasoning used by some of the Quaker Trusts for not taking on charitable status because of the way it will restrict their ability to support contentious causes. Rowntree is I think one where they have a non charitable part of the structure for that reason.

Another charity I was involved with some years ago, were very clear that in having a non charitable trading subsidiary, which donated its entire nett profit each year to the charity, and reclaimed the tax. The non charitable operation was able to take commercial risks and trade in a real-world commercial environment without the constraints applied to a charity.

It does seem logical to keep a mix of options but the way in which this is done is possibly the root of the debating points that need to be answered for most people. One detail that does help to inform thinking, is not to pick out the big figures just because they are big figures but to spot the big changes - massive decreases as well as increases, which can show both improved savings or expected costs of increased activity, but the results of little 'surprise' events during the year, which provide valuable pointers to the amount to allocate to contingency budgets. Contingency being a rather interesting focus for a few recent public transport episodes where the extent of demand for handling delayed and cancelled services overwhelmed the resources in place, and their commitment to the one basket-all eggs approach. Cycling the length of snow dusted streets filled with static motor traffic with little variation on my normal journey times I think I see where several of those debating the changes are concerned.

[bikepacker]

No-one looking after the subs then?

It depends what you mean by looking after. There would certainly be an administrative role cascading funds down to the members groups by the most direct means possible, to develop local cycling in the way they deem appropriate.
The DA/member groups could develop best practice from the front runners and head office facilitate that dissemination. I don't see a role for centralised prestige/willy waving exercises. Take up will be from grass roots initiatives, not Grand Ideas.

Sounds like my kind of club,when can we start!

The subject of a club going back to the roots of the CTC is often discussed on rides and tours. Many of us would like to return to a club of 40,000 genuine cycling members, most of whom would gladly volunteer to help out in some way at a riding/touring event. However I am always reminded of those who broke away from the Labour Party to form the SDP. It didn't really work because they did not have the solid foundation that had been gained by many years of activity. I think the same would be with the CTC. So before forming a new club would it not be better to attempt to reverse the current structure? Voting against becoming a charity could be the first step. Next step would be to give the club back to the members.

[glueman]

Taking a few steps back would be the ideal situation but the club has been on a mission to redefine itself for some years, and the process hasn't worked itself through yet.

When momentum reaches a certain level its best to stand back and watch which way the apple cart turns over, rather than trying to steer the horse and risk getting trampled (end of tortuous but apposite metaphor). Barring loud noises from head office and a few political voices the club is fully intact on the ground doing what it has always done, though despite rather than because of leadership from above.
If the Cyclists' Touring Club continues its present course of distancing itself from its grassroots it won't be reactionary old sabre rattlers - or however the modernisers portray the members - that kill the old girl off, it'll be death by self-inflicted wounds.

[Lawrie9]

I would like to see the CTC returning to its roots as a nice friendly organisation catering for solely cycle tourists and would like to see a separate pressure group set up that campaigns for everyday practical commuting type cyclists.

[Simon L6]

it all sounds a bit like the resolution my DA passed - advocating a club that concentrated on rides, tours, holidays, advice, 3rd party and campaigning..

that's not what I think the resolution will be about. We'll be asked in effect to roll the Club in to the Charity, which will have the effect of putting two sets of accounts in to one, and for a change in the 'Mems and Arts' which will, in effect, make the member benefits discretionary. There will be, unless someone is clever enough to work it out, a bodyblow to the Holidays and Tours subsidiary. The position of DA funds isn't clear....but, basically, the vote will be about putting the Club's money in to the Trust.

Given that the funds of the Club have been pillaged by the Trust in a seven figure kind of way already (putting to shame the £50,000 stamp duty referred to above) you might ask - so what? Well, the answer to that is if we put the two sets of accounts in to one we will never know...and if the Trust goes belly-up it will take the Club with it.

I'm still hoping that someone will set out the profit and loss of projects, and the cost of those projects to the Club over the last few years.............

[bikepacker]

Simon.
I apprecitate that you want to see a P&L of projects. But if they have come from the Directors office, do you believe they would be a true reflection?

[bikepacker]

The HQ transfer is a bit mysterious. My understanding, which is open to correction, is that four councillors signed a piece of paper on fifteen minutes notice. I've spoken to two of the councillors, and neither appeared to be comfortable about it, and one of those two confessed to not entirely understanding the situation at the time. My understanding of the current position, again, open to correction, is that the Trust charges the Club rent for a portion of the building.

I have just read this post, sorry Simon I must have missed it earlier. If this has any foundation whatsoever. the matter needs an independent investigation. This confirms to me information from others which I put in an earlier posting, namely; council members have been bullied and cajoled into going along with matters they are not totally happy with. You cannot have people put under the time constraints of 15 minutes on a policy matters like this. And where then was the membership's agreement prior to this action?

[irc]

Well, the answer to that is if we put the two sets of accounts in to one we will never know...and if the Trust goes belly-up it will take the Club with it..

Well that's a good enough argument for me to vote against the change unless convinced otherwise that there are huge advantages to the club from the merger..

[George Riches]

Given that the funds of the Club have been pillaged by the Trust in a seven figure kind of way already (putting to shame the £50,000 stamp duty referred to above) you might ask - so what? Well, the answer to that is if we put the two sets of accounts in to one we will never know...and if the Trust goes belly-up it will take the Club with it.

Plenty of individuals and companies transfer assets to trusts, isn't it a tax dodge? E.g. The rent that a company has to on its premises is tax deductible. If the landlord has to pay tax, there's no net tax advantage. But if charitable status means less tax on income ...

[John Catt]

John - if you can just itemise the member benefits that will be deemed charitable, and itemise the Trust expenditure over the last (say) three years which has been deemed charitable, and put some amounts to these items, we'll all be much the wiser....

And if you could set out the thinking behind the proposed Executive Committee, that would be helpful too.

I've attempted to deal with your questions.

Re.

itemise the member benefits that will be deemed charitable

See http://witherthectc.blogspot.com/2009/1 ... vices.html

Re.

itemise the Trust expenditure over the last (say) three years which has been deemed charitable, and put some amounts to these items

See http://witherthectc.blogspot.com/2009/1 ... r-ctc.html

Re.

And if you could set out the thinking behind the proposed Executive Committee, that would be helpful too

I'm not familiar with any detailed proposal for an Executive Committe. I have yet to attend a Board meeting and I do not become a Councillor until the new year. No doubt various options are being looked at by various members.

If the governance of the CTC is to be changed, that is the makeup and election of the Council, that will be a matter for members.

If the Council chooses to delegate to sub-committees (as it already does I understand), one of which might be described as an Executive Committee, then that falls within the remit of the Council (in the same way that most local authorities delegate power to a Cabinet with the full Council scrutinising rather than managing).

Regards,

John

[bikepacker]

Why do we need a blogspot when we have a perfectly good forum topic going for any debate?

Are your figures on the blogspot the same ones that could have been subjected to a high degree of creative accountancy? Or are they a new set of your own?

As you have not yet taken up your post as councillor, how do you know your submissions of what has gone on, are correct?

[John Catt]

Why do we need a blogspot when we have a perfectly good forum topic going for any debate?

Personal preference. In a forum we go shooting all over the place. With a blog I can set up a page to try and deal with each issue and try and avoid going back over the same old ground.

Are your figures on the blogspot the same ones that could have been subjected to a high degree of creative accountancy? Or are they a new set of your own?

They are taken from the published accounts. I included the link to these so you can check my figures if you wish and read the explanations of what the expenditure related to in the accounts.

As to creative accounting, if you don't think a true and fair view of the financial position is being presented, perhaps you should propose the appointment of different auditors at the AGM. As far as I am aware there is no reason to doubt the professionalism of our current auditors.

As you have not yet taken up your post as councillor, how do you know your submissions of what has gone on, are correct?

I don't. But but what I have stated is based on my understanding or what is in the public realm.

[millimole]

I would like to see the CTC returning to its roots as a nice friendly organisation catering for solely cycle tourists and would like to see a separate pressure group set up that campaigns for everyday practical commuting type cyclists.

Well, yes, but - there's a world of a difference between the CTC returning to its roots and the sepia-viewed vision that I have encountered within local CTC groups which thought they were living inside a Patterson drawing. We do need a modern organisation, but I agree that the current national CTC is unfocussed and trying to be all things to all riders, and potential riders, and local authorities, and critics of cycling, and government, and, and, and.
I'm also not convinced that the CTC has, for the best part of its history, been one that catered *solely* for cycle tourists, I do think that the utility and 'fitness' rider are also, or should also, be on the radar.

[John Catt]

namely; council members have been bullied and cajoled into going along with matters they are not totally happy with. You cannot have people put under the time constraints of 15 minutes on a policy matters like this. And where then was the membership's agreement prior to this action?

If this is what you believe then you should find and campaign for others to stand for the council who will not be "bullied and cajoled". Since the Council and members subsequently approved the report and accounts, including the property transfer, the whole episode is water under the bridge.

The situation is that the bulk of the Club's assets are held by a charity, so in future they can only be used for charitable purposes. Even if the trustees chose to liquidate the trust, all the assets including the offices would have to pass to another charity with similar objectives.

[John Catt]

I would like to see the CTC returning to its roots as a nice friendly organisation catering for solely cycle tourists and would like to see a separate pressure group set up that campaigns for everyday practical commuting type cyclists.

The only problem with this is that the "nice friendly organisation" would be probably be very small. Based on the "DA" membership of about 700 in Leicestershire and Rutland, with probably about 100 at best actively involved with the DA and other Groups, the national organisation would have about 12,000 members.

Through cycle campaigning I know of many members who have never been on a cycle tour and know nothing of the local groups, and aren't interested. These probably form the majority of the membership.

I'd also point out that if you check out the main CTC objectives (which are listed at http://witherthectc.blogspot.com/2009/1 ... ional.html ) it is apparent that "campaigning" was the prime reason for the formation of the Club.

This post may also be of interest http://witherthectc.blogspot.com/2009/1 ... ughts.html .

Whilst the organisation may need to be better focused and efficient (as do most of the organisations I have or ever have had involvement with), this is an issue regardless of whether or not the Club is a charity. Having one management structure and one set of accounts would seem to me to make it easier to improve the organisation.