After the Petition, what next?

A place to discuss the issues relating to the proposed change in the national CTC’s structure.
User avatar
Simon L6
Posts: 1382
Joined: 4 Jan 2007, 12:43pm

Re: After the Petition, what next?

Post by Simon L6 »

Barry - any chance of the unedited version of the professional advice being posted on this forum?

And has any further consideration been given to twin-tracking the subs to allow gift aid to be reclaimed by the Trust and allow the Club to remain independent?

And how would Council react to a motion at next years AGM calling for all loans to the Trust to be converted in to a share of the National Office?
Barry Flood
Posts: 7
Joined: 26 Nov 2010, 9:28pm

Re: After the Petition, what next?

Post by Barry Flood »

Dear Simon

Simon L6 wrote:Barry - any chance of the unedited version of the professional advice being posted on this forum?


May I remind you that an answer to this same point was sent to you just yesterday by our Financial Advisor. I append it to assist your memory;
"The report on the tax position was originally commissioned for the use of Council, and thus contained one section relating to engagement with the Inland Revenue to optimise the outcome for the CTC. As I'm sure you can imagine, publishing that section might be counterproductive in such discussions, so it was redacted from the publicly available copy. No conspiracy theory, no smoking gun, and indeed for that matter nothing to do with the current club / charity vote either.
For the purposes of transparency, I think it was originally me who noted the section had been included in the report circulated to Council and therefore suggested it be removed.
Simon Connell
Financial Advisor to Council"

Simon L6 wrote:And has any further consideration been given to twin-tracking the subs to allow gift aid to be reclaimed by the Trust and allow the Club to remain independent?


On this point, Council considered it already and was advised that this will not work for purely practical reasons. Effectively it would mean that the donation qualifying for Gift Aid to the Trust, say £19, would become a totally voluntary additional payment. Members would get all the membership benefits for which they currently pay £37 for merely £18 paid to the Club. There would be absolutely no incentive for them to make the balance of £19 as a voluntary payment. Hardly good financial management, but I would be interested to have you spell out in precise terms how to make this work without a large loss to the organisation's basic income.

Your third point is irrelevant to the matter currently before our members.

Regards

Barry Flood
CTC Councillor
User avatar
Simon L6
Posts: 1382
Joined: 4 Jan 2007, 12:43pm

Re: After the Petition, what next?

Post by Simon L6 »

so we're not going to see the unedited report?

and, actually, you make a very good point in relation to my second question, and your answer is one I'd commend any member to read carefully. If I could get the benefits of membership for eighteen quid would I pay the other nineteen quid for the Trust to do the Trust stuff? The answer is no, I wouldn't. And, I suspect I wouldn't be alone.

and you might not want to answer my third question now, and that's understandable, but come the AGM.....
User avatar
Laser157
Posts: 14
Joined: 31 Jul 2007, 12:13pm

Re: After the Petition, what next?

Post by Laser157 »

I am very much in favour of the CTC becoming an integrated Membership Charity and I was pleased that at the AGM the Members voted for the principle albeit by a narrow majority. I hope that the present vote will confirm that decision.

It is important that the debate is based firmly on relevant facts. Could the Regulator explain why the opportunity for a poll of the whole Club would be lost if we become a Membership Charity? The proposed M&A submitted to the AGM made no change to that provision as far as I am aware.
User avatar
Laser157
Posts: 14
Joined: 31 Jul 2007, 12:13pm

Re: After the Petition, what next?

Post by Laser157 »

Sorry I forgot to sign off my last post and as my username gives no clues, I want to correct that!

Martin Cockersole
CTC National Councillor
East of England
Regulator
Posts: 523
Joined: 27 Jan 2007, 10:13am

Re: After the Petition, what next?

Post by Regulator »

Laser157 wrote:
It is important that the debate is based firmly on relevant facts. Could the Regulator explain why the opportunity for a poll of the whole Club would be lost if we become a Membership Charity? The proposed M&A submitted to the AGM made no change to that provision as far as I am aware.


I think you're referring to my post on page 1 of this thread. I was actually referring to the Section 994 provision potentially not being available .

I'll edit the post to make that absolutely clear.
User avatar
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15191
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: After the Petition, what next?

Post by Si »

Laser157 wrote:Could the Regulator explain why ....


Just in case any misunderstanding has/should take place here, I would just like to point out that 'Regulator' is just a forum nick name, not a position (leastways, not as far as the forum is concerned :wink: ). Regulator/Greg is a member of the CTC Council and the SaveTheCTC group and so can speak as such, but is not a member of the forum staff. Thus it shouldn't be assumed that he has any way of influencing how the debate goes on the forum apart from by posting his opinions. I'm sure that no one was going to assume this but thought it best to make it clear given that he was referred to as "the Regulator" which sounds as though it is an official title.
Regulator
Posts: 523
Joined: 27 Jan 2007, 10:13am

Re: After the Petition, what next?

Post by Regulator »

Si wrote:
Just in case any misunderstanding has/should take place here, I would just like to point out that 'Regulator' is just a forum nick name, not a position (leastways, not as far as the forum is concerned :wink: ). Regulator/Greg is a member of the CTC Council and the SaveTheCTC group and so can speak as such, but is not a member of the forum staff. Thus it shouldn't be assumed that he has any way of influencing how the debate goes on the forum apart from by posting his opinions. I'm sure that no one was going to assume this but thought it best to make it clear given that he was referred to as "the Regulator" which sounds as though it is an official title.


Whoops! Sorry if my username is causing any confusion.

I'm 'Regulator' here as that is the username I use on a number of other fora - and when I first started using it I was actually working as a regulator.

As Si says, I do not have any administrative or managerial influence on this forum - I'm just a 'Plain Joe' like everyone else.
Karen Sutton
Posts: 608
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 11:18pm
Location: Greater Manchester

Re: After the Petition, what next?

Post by Karen Sutton »

Laser157 wrote:I am very much in favour of the CTC becoming an integrated Membership Charity and I was pleased that at the AGM the Members voted for the principle albeit by a narrow majority. I hope that the present vote will confirm that decision.


As far as I understand it, the members did not actually vote in favour of this. Of those members who specified their preference the majority voted against the motion. It was only carried due to the Chair casting his proxy votes in favour. There are some who say that those who submitted proxy votes to the Chair must have been aware that he would cast them in favour, so those members were indirectly voting in favour of the motion. One of the reasons the vote is being taken again is because sufficient members believed that the members who gave their vote to the Chair may not all have been supplied with sufficient information to support both sides of the debate.
User avatar
Laser157
Posts: 14
Joined: 31 Jul 2007, 12:13pm

Re: After the Petition, what next?

Post by Laser157 »

Hi Karen, I know that is one of the stated grounds for the re-vote, but it is not supported by the Club's legal advice which is quite clear that the Chairman acted correctly. If you have any other equally authoritative advice to the contrary it would be interesting to hear it.

Presumably the main motivation behind the demand for a re-vote is to defeat Council's intentions to move to an integrated membership charitable organisation.

I can understand the need for the provision for a vote of all Club members in a situation where a disputed decision may be taken at an unrepresentative and poorly attended AGM. I am less convinced that it is right to do this when all members have already had the chance to vote by proxy.

I hope that Members having considered the very strong case for the steps proposed by Council will vote to confirm the AGM decsion.

Martin

Martin Cockersole
CTC National Councillor
East of England
User avatar
Simon L6
Posts: 1382
Joined: 4 Jan 2007, 12:43pm

Re: After the Petition, what next?

Post by Simon L6 »

Laser157 wrote:Hi Karen, I know that is one of the stated grounds for the re-vote, but it is not supported by the Club's legal advice which is quite clear that the Chairman acted correctly.

I'm sorry, but that is absolutely not the case. At the Belfast AGM it was made clear that it was a convention within the CTC that the Chair exercised 'their' proxy votes to preserve the status quo. Conveniently, because it enabled the then chair to vote down a resolution setting tasks for the improvement of services to member groups.
swansonj
Posts: 322
Joined: 18 Sep 2007, 9:53pm

Re: After the Petition, what next?

Post by swansonj »

Laser157 wrote:Hi Karen, I know that is one of the stated grounds for the re-vote, but it is not supported by the Club's legal advice which is quite clear that the Chairman acted correctly.


Martin

I think you are possibly confusing legal justification with good practice. Everything I have read suggests that the Chair did indeed act perfectly within his legal rights in casting the proxy votes as he did. But there are suggestions that members may not have realised that is what he would do, there are suggestions it was contrary to a previously-stated CTC convention, and there are suggestions that there was something odd about the timing of his casting them, after other proxy votes. Those, I think, are among the grounds for the re-vote, not that his actions were legally wrong. Just because something is legal doesn't make it right (as we cyclists should be all too aware!)
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: After the Petition, what next?

Post by thirdcrank »

swansonj

Spot on.
User avatar
Laser157
Posts: 14
Joined: 31 Jul 2007, 12:13pm

Re: After the Petition, what next?

Post by Laser157 »

If I gave discretion to the Chair to cast my proxy vote I would not expect him or her to cast it against the position of Council. If I wanted my vote cast that way I would say so.

Simon - the vote in Belfast was tied and the Chair used her casting vote, which quite correctly should favour the status quo. This is not the same as casting proxies.
Karen Sutton
Posts: 608
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 11:18pm
Location: Greater Manchester

Re: After the Petition, what next?

Post by Karen Sutton »

Laser157 wrote:Hi Karen, I know that is one of the stated grounds for the re-vote, but it is not supported by the Club's legal advice which is quite clear that the Chairman acted correctly. If you have any other equally authoritative advice to the contrary it would be interesting to hear it.

Presumably the main motivation behind the demand for a re-vote is to defeat Council's intentions to move to an integrated membership charitable organisation.

I can understand the need for the provision for a vote of all Club members in a situation where a disputed decision may be taken at an unrepresentative and poorly attended AGM. I am less convinced that it is right to do this when all members have already had the chance to vote by proxy.

I hope that Members having considered the very strong case for the steps proposed by Council will vote to confirm the AGM decsion.

Martin

Martin Cockersole
CTC National Councillor
East of England


As swansonj points out, the Chair did not act illegally. I am perfectly aware of that. I would not attempt to be more authoratitive than CTC's legal team. I was offering my opinion of the situation as I see it. I would however say that the demand for a re-vote is not simply to defeat Council's desire to turn our Club into a Charity. It was also to revisit the issue in order to try to get more members to vote. Unfortunately the need for a more balanced information from both the "yes" and "no" camps campaign has not been met in my opinion.
Post Reply