The proposals, benefits, drawbacks etc.

A place to discuss the issues relating to the proposed change in the national CTC’s structure.
User avatar
meic
Posts: 19355
Joined: 1 Feb 2007, 9:37pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Re: The proposals, benefits, drawbacks etc.

Post by meic »

Jonty wrote:A few quick points.
As Gaz says if some members gave discretion to the chair through the proxy vote mechanism when the issue was last voted upon, that was their choice. This is a perfectly valid way to proceed. To suggest that the members involved didn't know what they were doing is judgemental and demeaning. And to suggest that the process was flawed because of this is wrong and misleading.
Second, the ballot paper contained in the Cycle magazine is perfectly clear to anyone who can read. It is not misleading in anyway whatsoever. To suggest otherwise is wrong and misleading.
Third, I have been very impressed by people coming back and answering my questions. I thank all concerned.
Finally, in a previous life among my responsibilities was economic development and employment initiatives for a large local authority. This involved joint working with charities and companies limited by guarantee; in fact I was a director of 2 of them.
In all my professional life I have never come across so much information being made readily available to members to help to inform them to make an intelligent decision as in this case. Nor have I ever had the opportunity to be part of an on-going discussion such as the one taking place on a forum.
Compared with many of the bodies I've had dealings with, the CTC is a paragon of transparency, openness and responsiveness.
jonty


Well that ought to silence anybody who doesnt agree with you after all who wants to be called "judgemental and demeaning"?

In other organisations I have given my proxy vote and never bothered to find out how they used it. So I dont have any problem with the possibility that up to 465 out of 60,000 people did exactly that. Even if it makes me, by your decree, 'judgemental and demeaning'.

Is an election where .75% of the membership didnt correctly understand the procedure that unthinkable?

Trawling this area of the forum will show lots of concerns raised about this very issue before the vote.

465 people gave a blank proxy to the Chairman it was their vote and they could do with it as they like and it still counts. Yet I think that a good many of them may not have known or cared how it was cast. Somewhere around 57,000 threw theirs in the bin, that was without a doubt how the majority of the membership voted.

This time will be different as there is a Gore jacket to vote for.
Yma o Hyd
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: The proposals, benefits, drawbacks etc.

Post by thirdcrank »

meic wrote:... This time will be different as there is a Gore jacket to vote for.


Two ways of looking at that. The first is that in a democracy, high levels of participation are a good thing. It's probably true that a healthy democracy inspires everybody to take part. Since the opposite is also probably true, anybody whose credibility depends on their democratic mandate is likely to be pretty keen to maximise participation by every means possible. A recent example is said to have been the "Cheerful Chappy" AKA Bliar's crony and unelected placeman, the noble Baron Falconer of Thoroton's eagerness to introduce postal voting with inadequate safeguards against electoral fraud. In that context a Goretex Jacket is small beer.

The other interpretation is that I believe it's generally accepted that people prefer to say YES :D , rather than no :cry: , so with a vote based on a YES / NO choice, the YES campaign has an inbuilt advantage. That advantage is likely to be significantly greater within an electorate without strong views on the issues raised. So, if it is correct that something like 57,000 of the CTC's membership have little knowledge of the proposal and care even less, then the chance of a bit of breathability might just tempt a a couple of thousand to tick a box and post the Freepost envelope.
Edwards
Posts: 5982
Joined: 16 Mar 2007, 10:09pm
Location: Birmingham

Re: The proposals, benefits, drawbacks etc.

Post by Edwards »

I thought the Chairman was openly supporting the yes campaign, basically saying if a proxy was given to him he would use it how he wanted. How can any person who against give their vote to somebody who supports the principle being voted on.

So with the incentive to use your vote being a prize, I also wonder if a lot more people will enter this competition. Is only one entry per household allowed to enter the competition and is there more than one prize. Is it "Yes" I want the chance of a prize or "no" I do not?
Do you only win if you give the correct answer?
If so what is it?
Keith Edwards
I do not care about spelling and grammar
The Mechanic
Posts: 1922
Joined: 23 Jul 2010, 1:38pm
Location: Scotland

Re: The proposals, benefits, drawbacks etc.

Post by The Mechanic »

simonconnell wrote:
The Mechanic wrote:it is along the lines "please put your cross in the right place so we can become a charity". My understanding of ballots is that there should be a clear choice on the ballot paper and not a thinly veiled direction from those issuing the paper on how we should vote.


That's incorrect. The ballot paper says;

"At the CTC AGM in May, Motion 8 was carried. A petition from some members means that the members of the Club are now being asked to vote to either confirm or reverse that decision"

...

"Motion 8 Proposed by B Flood on behalf of the Council, seconded by A Spurr.

This AGM agrees that Cyclists' Touring Club should be registered as a charity and merge with CTC Charitable Trust to form a single, unified membership organisation with charitable status"


It's not a thinly-veiled direction. A majority of members voted in favour of the motion, passing it at the AGM. Members are now being asked either to accept or reject that decision, which at the moment still stands as the wish of both Council and the membership (the motion having been passed).


Selective quotes. it is a pity I have already posted my and it said what you quoted, but also something else. Post a scan of the form and we will all judge for ourselves.
Cancer changes your outlook on life. Change yours before it changes you.
User avatar
Guy951
Posts: 1599
Joined: 14 Jul 2009, 8:23am
Location: Mid Beds

Re: The proposals, benefits, drawbacks etc.

Post by Guy951 »

The Mechanic wrote:
Selective quotes. it is a pity I have already posted my and it said what you quoted, but also something else. Post a scan of the form and we will all judge for ourselves.

The actual words on the form are:
(at the top) PLEASE TAKE PART - YOUR VOTE IS IMPORTANT TO YOUR CLUB

(in the text) Please vote by putting a cross in the appropriate box...

Nowhere does it even hint at which way to vote, so I was able to vote NO with a clear conscience.

A picture of the actual form was put on this thread...
http://forum.ctc.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=44707&start=0
What manner of creature's this, being but half a fish and half a monster
toontra
Posts: 1190
Joined: 21 Dec 2007, 11:01am
Location: London

Re: The proposals, benefits, drawbacks etc.

Post by toontra »

Edwards wrote:I thought the Chairman was openly supporting the yes campaign, basically saying if a proxy was given to him he would use it how he wanted. How can any person who against give their vote to somebody who supports the principle being voted on.

So with the incentive to use your vote being a prize, I also wonder if a lot more people will enter this competition. Is only one entry per household allowed to enter the competition and is there more than one prize. Is it "Yes" I want the chance of a prize or "no" I do not?
Do you only win if you give the correct answer?
If so what is it?


This touches on something I'm uneasy about. The CTC literature is generally promoting the "yes" vote. The vote isn't secret. It's therefore possible to surmise that some members may be tempted to vote "yes" simply to increase their chances of winning the prize.

As is obvious, this is probably one of the most important votes in the 100+ year history of the CTC. Any hint of bias in the voting procedure is a very bad thing. That, together with the significant number of incorrect forms already reported, makes this all look rather shoddy and unprofessional.
The Mechanic
Posts: 1922
Joined: 23 Jul 2010, 1:38pm
Location: Scotland

Re: The proposals, benefits, drawbacks etc.

Post by The Mechanic »

Jonty wrote:[quote="simonconnell....
I think some very valid and perceptive points have been raised, particularly about the ability to understand CTC's activities through the published financial statements. This is why I perceive the change is a good thing. However, I think a large number of points have been raised (and continue to be raised) that are unrelated to the change; they are instead a 'wish list' of what individual members would like their CTC to look like.


The financial statements are complex. This is barely surprising given the financial interactions between several related entities including cross-trading. IMHO they would be virtually incomprehensible to the layman or even somone with some knowledge of financial statements. In fact they could give rise to all sorts of misunderstandings.
They need to be simplified and brought together to be more readily comprehensible. If the motion to form a combined charity is passed, I suggest that this be a priority.
jonty[/quote]


That would certainly get rid of the current alleged irregulatities :wink:
Cancer changes your outlook on life. Change yours before it changes you.
User avatar
meic
Posts: 19355
Joined: 1 Feb 2007, 9:37pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Re: The proposals, benefits, drawbacks etc.

Post by meic »

I do not think that the way people have voted will have ANY bearing on who wins the jacket.
I am pretty certain it will be picked blind from a barrel or the electronic equivalent of that.

and the other goodies.
Yma o Hyd
Jonty

Re: The proposals, benefits, drawbacks etc.

Post by Jonty »

meic wrote:
Jonty wrote:A few quick points.
As Gaz says if some members gave discretion to the chair through the proxy vote mechanism when the issue was last voted upon, that was their choice. This is a perfectly valid way to proceed. To suggest that the members involved didn't know what they were doing is judgemental and demeaning. And to suggest that the process was flawed because of this is wrong and misleading.
Second, the ballot paper contained in the Cycle magazine is perfectly clear to anyone who can read. It is not misleading in anyway whatsoever. To suggest otherwise is wrong and misleading.
Third, I have been very impressed by people coming back and answering my questions. I thank all concerned.
Finally, in a previous life among my responsibilities was economic development and employment initiatives for a large local authority. This involved joint working with charities and companies limited by guarantee; in fact I was a director of 2 of them.
In all my professional life I have never come across so much information being made readily available to members to help to inform them to make an intelligent decision as in this case. Nor have I ever had the opportunity to be part of an on-going discussion such as the one taking place on a forum.
Compared with many of the bodies I've had dealings with, the CTC is a paragon of transparency, openness and responsiveness.
jonty


Well that ought to silence anybody who doesnt agree with you after all who wants to be called "judgemental and demeaning"?

In other organisations I have given my proxy vote and never bothered to find out how they used it. So I dont have any problem with the possibility that up to 465 out of 60,000 people did exactly that. Even if it makes me, by your decree, 'judgemental and demeaning'.

Is an election where .75% of the membership didnt correctly understand the procedure that unthinkable?

Trawling this area of the forum will show lots of concerns raised about this very issue before the vote.

465 people gave a blank proxy to the Chairman it was their vote and they could do with it as they like and it still counts. Yet I think that a good many of them may not have known or cared how it was cast. Somewhere around 57,000 threw theirs in the bin, that was without a doubt how the majority of the membership voted.

This time will be different as there is a Gore jacket to vote for.


Meic
You are misrepresenting what I said. What I said was that to assume or say that those members who left it to the chairman to vote on their behalf through the proxy mechanism did not know what they were doing is to imply that they were rather stupid and incapable.
That in my view is a judgemental and demeanding to those members who cast their votes through the chairman in this manner.
I obviously have a higher opinion of the capabilities of CTC members that you have.
jonty
toontra
Posts: 1190
Joined: 21 Dec 2007, 11:01am
Location: London

Re: The proposals, benefits, drawbacks etc.

Post by toontra »

meic wrote:I do not think that the way people have voted will have ANY bearing on who wins the jacket.
I am pretty certain it will be picked blind from a barrel or the electronic equivalent of that.

and the other goodies.


I'm sure you're right, but the perception is almost as important as the actuality.
User avatar
meic
Posts: 19355
Joined: 1 Feb 2007, 9:37pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Re: The proposals, benefits, drawbacks etc.

Post by meic »

I dont expect them to be any more capable than I am AND in this particular vote a lot less interested.
Maybee as I am a part of the membership rather than apart from the membership.
Yma o Hyd
User avatar
Yorkshireman
Posts: 352
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 6:59am
Location: North Hykeham, Lincoln.
Contact:

Re: The proposals, benefits, drawbacks etc.

Post by Yorkshireman »

meic wrote:I do not think that the way people have voted will have ANY bearing on who wins the jacket.
I am pretty certain it will be picked blind from a barrel or the electronic equivalent of that.

and the other goodies.


It's to be hoped that the 'picking of names' to go in the barrel goes a bit better than the than the 'putting names' etc on the voting forms seems to have gone :wink:
Colin N.
Lincolnshire is mostly flat ... but the wind is mostly in your face!
http://www.freewebs.com/yorkshireman1/
User avatar
meic
Posts: 19355
Joined: 1 Feb 2007, 9:37pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Re: The proposals, benefits, drawbacks etc.

Post by meic »

I had forgotten that some sheets had more than one name on them.
Yma o Hyd
The Mechanic
Posts: 1922
Joined: 23 Jul 2010, 1:38pm
Location: Scotland

Re: The proposals, benefits, drawbacks etc.

Post by The Mechanic »

Guy951 wrote:
The Mechanic wrote:
Selective quotes. it is a pity I have already posted my and it said what you quoted, but also something else. Post a scan of the form and we will all judge for ourselves.

The actual words on the form are:
(at the top) PLEASE TAKE PART - YOUR VOTE IS IMPORTANT TO YOUR CLUB

(in the text) Please vote by putting a cross in the appropriate box...

Nowhere does it even hint at which way to vote, so I was able to vote NO with a clear conscience.

A picture of the actual form was put on this thread...
http://forum.ctc.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=44707&start=0



I apologise for my earlier comments regarding the wording of the voting form. However, I still maintain that the info I read that came with the Cycle magazine was trying to direct me to voting for the motion. I will have a look as the paperwork I still have and get back to you.
Cancer changes your outlook on life. Change yours before it changes you.
Jonty

Re: The proposals, benefits, drawbacks etc.

Post by Jonty »

meic wrote:But the whole point of the vote to come, is to dig over old ground.

If it was a clear cut case of the motion being passed by a majority of the members votes I would be voting "Yes" because I would not want to see it overturned on a technicality.
However it is easy to argue that the vote did only win on a technicality.

The rather more important point is the 57,000 or so who didnt vote.

Which is to my mind not compatible with "A majority of members voted in favour of the motion,"


Hi Meic
I suggest that when one talks about a majority of members in this context one is taking about a majority of those who voted. If 57,000 didn't vote perhaps one could reasonably conclude that many of them didn't feel particularly strongly about it.
But I agree with your point that if more members voted in would be a good thing. I suspect that is why the CTC is trying to encourage more members to vote.
jonty
Post Reply