Cycling UK Forum

Dear Member,

In the latest addition of Cycle there appears an article by Simon Legg who was asked to present the No case for CTC becoming a charity and then merging with our subsidiary company CTC Charitable Trust. However, Simon has taken the opportunity to make and infer a whole series of unsubstantiated criticisms which are not relevant to the charity issue.

As your CTC Councillor for Yorkshire and Humber I feel it my duty to refute his misinterpretations. Please find attached above my more detailed response.

Yours faithfully,

Xxxxxx Xxxxx.

Dear Member,

I’m your member of CTC Council representing Yorkshire and Humber; I write to tell you that much of what is purported as fact in the Cycle Magazine article by Simon Legg is, [u]hearsay and innuendo that does not stand up to close scrutiny![/u]
I have a 30 year background of serving the voluntary sector as a volunteer committee member. This has included both local and national charities and not-for-profit organisations on a large scale. I donate my time, skills and integrity to CTC Council freely, having done so for 6 years.

Simon was invited by CTC Council to write opposing Council’s forthcoming recommendation that the Club become a registered charity by approving resolutions at the May AGM. However, the opportunity has been taken to present [u]numerous misrepresentations. [/u] While I welcome free speech, I can assure you that CTC is neither, loosing money or in chaos. I deeply deplore these suggestions which are it seems being spread to serve the ambitions of a London based minority[u]. Truth must surely come before propaganda.[/u]
Simon is in total error when he says that there is a proposal for CTC (the Club) to be taken over by the CTC Charitable Trust, the exact opposite is the case.

The recommendation of CTC Council is that CTC (the Club) becomes, (through modification of its governing Memorandum and Articles) a registered charity, and then is merged with its subsidiary CTC Charitable Trust. Thus preserving and extending CTC democratic traditions of governance to a unified organisation. The proposal is not a whim and has involved much professional advice and Member consultation. It involves you, in that all CTC Members have the right to a vote by proxy at the forthcoming AGM.

Some of Simon’s article is laudable, we all want to promote fellowship between cyclists and CTC wants to be able to represent the interests of all cyclists as effectively as it can. There remains much work to be done particularly in the spheres of building local Member Groups and being closer to our Right to Ride Network. Policies are beginning to move in that direction but it will take time, resources and commitment all round.

It is easy to make criticism of past and present performance without reference to the realities of the time. For example, when I joined Council we were in the midst of Foot and Mouth, membership was falling, money was tight, the circumstances in Godalming were not for efficiency, but there was a determination to try and build the organisation for the longer term. A strategy was devised that sought to promote cycling for all, upon which we are moving forward with a wide range of success. We now have a much higher profile evidenced by media coverage, higher membership, increasing campaigning strength, and importantly we’re demonstrating what cycling can do for health and society generally. We are shortly to improve our web communications.

We all know the frustrations of our cause, but withdrawing to our shell isn’t what these circumstances demand, we have to engage with people and organisations in new ways to get our message across. Simon’s approach would undermine and narrow the path of our progress diminishing respect for CTC. Being a Society of 3rd Party Insured Cyclists, active at the weekend or as lone cyclists, just won’t do it! Our seeking only to be part of the transport lobby would clearly be myopic, cyclists aren’t physically engineered they’re educated so!

Accusations are made by Simon on CTC’s finances, baldly asserting that Member subscriptions are “propping up” externally funded projects. This is not true and gross misrepresentation! CTC the Club and CTC Charitable Trust are in a symbiotic relationship that is financially advantageous to the Club. Some of our “traditional” activities, like campaigning, are undertaken by the Trust for which the Club “pays” by a donation; similarly, some services are provided to the Trust by the Club, invoiced and paid for. This system of donation and recharges produces tax efficiencies within a demarcation of funds. It is the policy of Council that Member funds are not used to support externally funded projects within the Trust. The Trusts externally sourced income produces healthy surpluses which reduce the donations made by the Club, thus leaving more reserves within Member funds. To assure Members on this point, three CTC Councillors each possessing accountancy qualifications and each with extensive professional experience, have recently undertaken a hands on review and reported to Council on the integrity of our finances. Simon Legg’s assertions are baseless and refuted!

The picture is painted of a membership system in chaos. Whilst there have been errors and it is accepted that the change to Member Groups has not run as smoothly as hoped, an independent review commissioned of Membership Services performance indicates that they are now within industry standards. Yes, there have been errors, yes staff aren’t as 100% perfectly consistent as we all would like, and they’re only human. Simon offers no solutions just the negatives. What did he do when a Member of CTC Council? I can’t recall much of a practical contribution, in this he is consistent?

Yes, we have cycling wisdom, yes we have long traditions, we are a democratic club and will remain so whether a charity or not, we don’t want to be as Sustrans. There’s a need to bring cycling people together; we are national; our view of the world really does extend outside of Simon’s London; to the English Regions, to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Since the 2006 Charities Act the way is open for CTC (the Club) to become a charity, which will improve our standing not restrain us in our quest for a cycling society. It re-affirms our democracy, and should secondarily help improve our finances through Gift Aid.

I hope you will join me and support the progress that is being made and in CTC becoming a registered charity; rather than take the negative view that has held CTC and cycling back for too long. I regret having to write to you in these terms but rebuttal is necessary.

Councils full arguments for CTC becoming a charity are to be found as FAQ at: http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=5364 .


Xxxxxx Xxxxx.
CTC Councillor.

JT wrote:Good grief. That is an appalling communication, on so many levels.

The result of the vote may have been inevitable from the outset - I've no idea - but if the proposal is rejected, this email campaign may well have been a turning point.

malcd wrote:I wonder if anyone has considered the consequences of charitable status for political campaigning for cycling, charitable status will prevent any such campaigning in future which is a good reason for a No vote. I was surprised to receive an e-mail from Richard Bates the SE councillor since it was the first time I have had any communication from anyone in the SE Region or even the local DA. I did ask for clarification on what had been said in the e-mail and that has not been forthcoming.

The lobbying from the CTC makes me suspicious of the purpose of any such decision and on the information I have so far I shall be voting very firmly NO.i

patricktaylor wrote:Campaigning by unsolicited mailshot is totally out of order, by whichever side of the case. It's nothing more than spam in my view.