Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?

A place to discuss the issues relating to the proposed change in the national CTC’s structure.
User avatar
mark_w
Posts: 292
Joined: 12 Aug 2009, 9:16am
Location: York, North Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?

Post by mark_w »

charitywonk wrote:There is a lot of nonsense being suggested here about charitable status limiting campaigning. I have worked within a number of charities and it doesn't help this debate if the facts are just wrong.

Charities in the UK have been responsible for some of the most effective and groundbreaking campaigning in our history. Nobody can surely be suggesting that the Ramblers, NSPCC, the Rowntree Trusts, Shelter, RSPCA, Terence Higgins Trust, Stonewall have ever been neutered by being charities. Indeed they have more independence and more influence than bodies who have to toe the political line such as trade unions.

The charity commission and government specifically recognise the role of campaigning charities in policy, and they have made it clear that campaigning is not linked to funding.

Frankly the insular, self centred CTC I joined in the 1980s deserved to loose its place at the campaigning table when the city campaign groups kicked off. A body whose remit is to serve society and therefore can speak as the voice of everyone who cycles is just what we need. Who do you want to represent us - Sky? Better to make CTC as good as it possbly can be by using the system to our advantage.


But this is the Cycle Touring Club, not the Cycle Touring Charity. Maybe if the CTC is self-centred, we need to do something about that and make it more what the members want, rather than turning it into something they don't.

Because at the end of the day, being a charity isn't what the CTC was formed for - it was for like minded cyclists to come together and ride (tour) with similar aims. It wasn't, and shouldn't be, a political tool, which is what it is turning into.
--------
Blog : My Bike Rides
Biking Bill
Posts: 10
Joined: 7 Apr 2007, 5:22pm

Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?

Post by Biking Bill »

My Councilor says there is an article in the magazine next issue and that Simon is writing it? Hardly lack of transparency? Or has it been vetoed?

And the circular to member groups from the Chairman said that the payment from the Club to the Trust was for CTC work such as campaigning. the charity does all the campaigning now, so isn't that correct? How else does it get done, governments don't pay for campaigning. You are on Council Regulator, surely you have sat in the meetings. How much are we paying for the old CTC work done by the charity?
Regulator
Posts: 523
Joined: 27 Jan 2007, 10:13am

Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?

Post by Regulator »

charitywonk wrote:There is a lot of nonsense being suggested here about charitable status limiting campaigning. I have worked within a number of charities and it doesn't help this debate if the facts are just wrong.

Charities in the UK have been responsible for some of the most effective and groundbreaking campaigning in our history. Nobody can surely be suggesting that the Ramblers, NSPCC, the Rowntree Trusts, Shelter, RSPCA, Terence Higgins Trust, Stonewall have ever been neutered by being charities. Indeed they have more independence and more influence than bodies who have to toe the political line such as trade unions.

The charity commission and government specifically recognise the role of campaigning charities in policy, and they have made it clear that campaigning is not linked to funding.


Nobody is saying that charitable status stops you from campaigning - it does, however, limit the type of campaigning you can become involved in.

As for government assurance that funding won't be linked to campaigning, that's about as credible as Tony Blair's dodgy dossier.

Frankly the insular, self centred CTC I joined in the 1980s deserved to loose its place at the campaigning table when the city campaign groups kicked off. A body whose remit is to serve society and therefore can speak as the voice of everyone who cycles is just what we need. Who do you want to represent us - Sky? Better to make CTC as good as it possbly can be by using the system to our advantage.


We are suggesting that we use the system to our advantage - by not taking up charitable status. That will allow us greater freedoms.
User avatar
meic
Posts: 19355
Joined: 1 Feb 2007, 9:37pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?

Post by meic »

Charitywonk wrote:There is a lot of nonsense being suggested here about charitable status limiting campaigning. I have worked within a number of charities and it doesn't help this debate if the facts are just wrong.

Charities in the UK have been responsible for some of the most effective and groundbreaking campaigning in our history. Nobody can surely be suggesting that the Ramblers, NSPCC, the Rowntree Trusts, Shelter, RSPCA, Terence Higgins Trust, Stonewall have ever been neutered by being charities.

I could add others to the list like Gardening Organic

Going back to their first line, if it is nonsense to suggest charitable status limits campaigning,
why do Greenpeace flatly refuse to become a charity when it would be of great financial benefit to them?

As an aside, can facts be wrong?
Yma o Hyd
User avatar
meic
Posts: 19355
Joined: 1 Feb 2007, 9:37pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?

Post by meic »

I have a memory of an advert which the RSPCA wished to put on the TV being disallowed because it was not allowed for them as a charity.
Can anyone fill in the details?

Or did I imagine this particular neutering?
Last edited by meic on 22 Dec 2009, 4:20pm, edited 1 time in total.
Yma o Hyd
Regulator
Posts: 523
Joined: 27 Jan 2007, 10:13am

Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?

Post by Regulator »

Biking Bill wrote:My Councilor says there is an article in the magazine next issue and that Simon is writing it? Hardly lack of transparency? Or has it been vetoed?

And the circular to member groups from the Chairman said that the payment from the Club to the Trust was for CTC work such as campaigning. the charity does all the campaigning now, so isn't that correct? How else does it get done, governments don't pay for campaigning. You are on Council Regulator, surely you have sat in the meetings. How much are we paying for the old CTC work done by the charity?


Simon has been asked to write an 'right to reply' article for the next issue of Cycle - without knowing what he is replying to. I've seen a draft of Simon's article and its good - but how much of it will get published without editing will be interesting to see.

With regards to the money, the Club pays the Trust for rent, facilities, and services provided. These payments can be easily found and tracked in the accounts. On top of this, there is also a 'loan' from the Club to the Trust of £388,000 - what for no-one is quite sure - plus various 'donations', these basically being bailouts for where the Trust has made a loss.

We've had the accounts 'deconstructed' by a qualified accountant. You'd be surprised by how poor CTC accounting practice seems to be. There are nominal amounts allocated to overheads, salaries etc in relation to project work - yet Council have been told that staff do not (and will not) log their time to specific projects... so where those nominal figures come from no-one knows.

Personally, I don't have a problem with CTC becoming a charity - but it needs to be in a fit state to do so. It isn't at the moment. There's a lack of transparency, a lack of proper accounting and governance controls, and a lack of interest in the membership and member groups.

Perhaps once these fundamental issues have been addressed satisfactorily, we can think of merging. If they're not addressed first, all that will end up happening is that any new organisation will be born with bad practice embedded from the start.
bikepacker
Posts: 2273
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:08pm
Location: Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?

Post by bikepacker »

With regard to previous mentions of membership involvement. I have researched some member based organizations that have converted to a charity and none have become more democratic or answerable to the membership as a result of the conversion. In fact they have all become less so.

Regard to write-ups and responses in Cycle magazine. Equal column space should be given to both sides. Also when either side is ask to respond they should be aware of what they are responding to. Should this not be the case and bearing in mind the mis-management previously cited, the Director should tender his resignation.

There is a need to keep this thread, or similar, ticking over along with any anti-charity webpage being set up. Then a surge in activity needs to happen in the weeks prior to the AGM.
There is your way. There is my way. But there is no "the way".
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?

Post by thirdcrank »

It seems that the emotive nature of the word 'charity' tends to obscure the issues. On the one hand we have the Authorised Version and Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians, on the other nobody wants to accept charity. Some of our national charities have almost mythical status. The RNLI carries out a function which I think is delegated to the navy or the equivalent of the coastguard everywhere else in the world but hin this country few can fail to be moved by the crew of the North Sunderland lifeboat "The Grace Darling" on Songs of Praise singing "Hear us when we cry to thee, for those in peril on the sea."

It's a pity there isn't another word for what in the present context is merely a very effective means of obtaining tax relief but with strings attached.

I find it significant that Regulator was apparently recruited to provide the expertise for the project and has turned against it. No doubt others think he is wrong. It would be interesting to hear the other side of the argument from somebody who also has specialist knowledge.
bodach
Posts: 323
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 7:31pm

Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?

Post by bodach »

I have been a member of CTC off and on for many years. I was also very involved at one time with SYHA and have been an AA member and also more recently Saga as well as other "membership" organisations.In all these latter cases the organisations were taken over by "modernisers". The result has been in my opinion ruination so far as the ordinary members are concerned with virtual destruction of the original concept into simply another greedy money generation machine. I feel there is a great danger that the CTC will simply become just another business where the interest of the business is more important than that of the members who are simply conned into thinking they are members but in fact are just contributors to a profitabe machine.Is the CTC going to remain as a membership base organisation or be taken over by managers whose ambitions are more political than membership benefit ?At my age this is really just an academic question since by virtue of age I am unlikely to see the longer term results tho' I still feel concern for the future of this organisation.
caldini
Posts: 79
Joined: 1 Apr 2008, 8:22pm
Contact:

Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?

Post by caldini »

As an RSPB member I get a nice glossy magazine four times a year and free entry to most of its bird reserves. Personally, I'd prefer it if they redirected the money used to print my edition of Birds to fund the charity work that they do - campaigning, and buying and maintaining more reserves. I do not expect a service from them - I just want them to help the birds.

When I joined the CTC my expectations were much more different. I was hoping that by paying money annually I would get a service. I was hoping I would have access to a wealth of resources, namely the information sheets, but these are hopelessly out of date and I can only find them using a bit of Google trickery that I'm sure would be beyond the capability of many members. I also thought that I'd be able to join up with my local group, but they didn't get in contact with me and when I turned to their website the information on it was again out of date!

However, I also feel that CTC as an organisation represents my views towards cycling (especially recently with regards to safety in numbers, fill that hole etc) so I also want them to continue campaigning vigorously on my behalf.

If the proposal goes ahead, will the member benefits be improved to a level where I am satisfied (or more) with them? Will CTC still be able to campaign independently? And to campaign independently does CTC need to make as much money as possible or no more than is required?
irc
Posts: 5192
Joined: 3 Dec 2008, 2:22pm
Location: glasgow

Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?

Post by irc »

I joined CTC for the benefits, 3rd party insurance, and the magazine. Supporting a national organisation that campaigned for cyclists was also an important factor. I'm thinking here of things like the Cyclist's Defence Fund, The Stop SMIDSY, and the lobbying against Highway Code Changes.

It seems to me though that the Charity side of things is becoming diverted away from working for members and other existing cyclists and is becoming involved in too many projects which go far beyond catering for existing cyclists.

For example Cycle Champions "Get active and join in CTC's cycling champions project which aims to increase the nation's health and fitness.". Increasing the nation's health and fitness was not what I joined CTC for and is getting more into the realms of social engineering.

The Workplace Challenge is similar - " * Getting 'non-cyclists' to take up cycling;
* Getting 'occasional cyclists' to start cycling regularly;
* Getting more people to cycle for transport; and
* Increasing people's level of physical activity "

I'd be interested to know what percentage, if any of membership income is diverted from the core services of CTC to what I would consider to be peripheral activities.

On this subject I've looked at the CTC website and it's not clear to me which activities are carried out by the CTC and which by the Trust. Could anyone break this down?

On the subject of funding as the original CTC presumably owned their premises before the CTC Charitable Trust was set up. Why was the building transferred to the trust so that membership fees are now being used to pay rent to the Trust?
No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?

Post by thirdcrank »

irc wrote:... I'd be interested to know what percentage, if any of membership income is diverted from the core services of CTC to what I would consider to be peripheral activities. ...


With any big transformation like this, it's important IMO to have what are are referred to by Sir Christopher Kelly as "showstoppers." i.e. the circumstances - identified in advance - when it would be right to pull the plug before things go badly wrong. (Of course, it's best if things do not go wrong, but having contingency plans is a way of ensuring they go right.) For an organisation hoping to increase its grant funding, the big issue just now is the imminent butchery of public spending. I hear only this morning that Mandy has taken the axe to higher education. The funding of the Olympics is also likely to have a big effect. That is a high profile, national prestige event which is already diverting £££ from other important areas. Cutting spending on promoting cycling is the sort of thing that is easy. It can even be dressed up as concentrating the limited funds on the cycling track team.

If there are no plans to keep things under review, any past diversion of membership £££ will be chicken feed, compared with what might happen in future.
User avatar
Simon L6
Posts: 1382
Joined: 4 Jan 2007, 12:43pm

Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?

Post by Simon L6 »

Biking Bill wrote:My Councilor says there is an article in the magazine next issue and that Simon is writing it? Hardly lack of transparency? Or has it been vetoed?

And the circular to member groups from the Chairman said that the payment from the Club to the Trust was for CTC work such as campaigning. the charity does all the campaigning now, so isn't that correct? How else does it get done, governments don't pay for campaigning. You are on Council Regulator, surely you have sat in the meetings. How much are we paying for the old CTC work done by the charity?
Kevin - perhaps you can address the question asked of John Catt?
charitywonk
Posts: 2
Joined: 22 Dec 2009, 2:23pm

Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?

Post by charitywonk »

thirdcrank wrote:I find it significant that Regulator was apparently recruited to provide the expertise for the project and has turned against it. No doubt others think he is wrong. It would be interesting to hear the other side of the argument from somebody who also has specialist knowledge.


According to the stuff on the web pages CTC got advice from CASS and Russell Cooke. They are both pretty respected names in the sector and neither of them would be willling to be dragged into the sort of mess Regulator is describing if they thought they were involved in something dodgy. CTC will be a pretty small client in their terms.

There are good and bad managements in every structure, this change won't resolve that if that is your beef. But at least with a charity you are legally obliged to show all your money goes to your purposes. At present the Directors could vote to send themselves or asmall group of their mates touring in Barbados and all we can do is deselect them at the next election. As a charity we have access to an independent regulator.
glueman
Posts: 4354
Joined: 16 Mar 2007, 1:22pm

Re: Are we looking forward to being a membership charity?

Post by glueman »

As one of the great un-clubables it's been with some reluctance that I've kept my membership going for nigh on 30 years. I did so because I felt it important that the knowledge of people on the ground, CTC members who know every nook and cranny, every byway and track, which roads were safe and which dangerous, how to fix things when they're broken, was kept under one umbrella. If the CTC is not a bottom-up organisation it is nothing.

The club became by default the leading UK campaigning voice, a necessary and important role but a charity? Is it not yet another step away from what it was for until like the YHA it forgets it's purpose so completely it becomes something else? I don't pretend to be smart enough to play the funding game or the quango tango much less understand the political instincts of those who are but there should be some compelling reasons why CTC should become a charity that go beyond an internal auditing system.

Can we expect to shake tins outside the supermarket on a Saturday and hand out stickers because we choose to ride a bike?
Post Reply