Vote still to come?

A place to discuss the issues relating to the proposed change in the national CTC’s structure.

Re: Vote still to come?

Postby John Catt » Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:36 pm

[quote="Regulator"}
John
Go and read the Mem & Arts. You clearly don't understand the Article 36 procedure.
[/quote]
36.A poll of the whole Club shall be taken if either one third of the members of the Council or 200 members of the Club shall within three months of the passing of a resolution in a Council Meeting or General Meeting lodge with the Secretary a petition in writing signed by the petitioning members Protesting against such resolution and Containing a requisition that a poll of the whole Club be taken upon such resolution.

Upon receipt of the petition the Secretary shall publish in the next issue but one of the Club magazine to be distributed after the petition shall have been lodged with him full details of the petition and incorporate a voting slip therein specifying the date (not being less than 28 days after the date of publication) when all votes must be received by the Secretary. When voting has closed as aforesaid the votes shall be counted and the resolution confirmed or rescinded in accordance with the majority of votes cast. If the voting be equally divided the resolution shall be confirmed. Provided always that any action taken upon such resolution prior to receipt of such petition shall be valid.

37.All decisions arrived at by a poll of the whole Club shall bind the Club and the Council for six months


Can't see where I am wrong on article 36. If the poll succeeds it will be off the agenda for 2011 but not for 2012 by my reading. Another resolution in favour of charitable status would be required along with one amending the M&AA. However the motion in favour would be the minor hurdle, compared to the 75% required to amend the M&AA.

Regards,

John
John Catt
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 6:08 pm

Re: Vote still to come?

Postby meic » Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:41 pm

I get it. :lol:

You can vote No as often as you like.
You only have to vote Yes once.

A reversal of the motion 8 will only be binding for 6 months and nothing is set to happen in those 6 months anyway.
It really makes absolutely no difference.
Yma o Hyd
User avatar
meic
 
Posts: 13250
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:37 pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Re: Vote still to come?

Postby Regulator » Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:44 pm

meic wrote:I get it. :lol:

You can vote No as often as you like.
You only have to vote Yes once.

A reversal of the motion 8 will only be binding for 6 months and nothing is set to happen in those 6 months anyway.
It really makes absolutely no difference.



Oh - but it does. It's just some councillors haven't grasped the significance of it.

We'll let them ponder on it - we wouldn't want to spoil the surprise. :wink:
Regulator
 
Posts: 507
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 10:13 am

Re: Vote still to come?

Postby meic » Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:47 pm

Do some councillors have to stand for re-election before then, by any chance?
Yma o Hyd
User avatar
meic
 
Posts: 13250
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:37 pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Re: Vote still to come?

Postby Simon L6 » Tue Nov 30, 2010 12:08 am

John Catt wrote:
workhard wrote:
As the skinflint Concillor who suggested that members pay their own postage on this poll, it is because it doesn't make any difference and ERS costs money.
........Read the submission form from the proposer and the unedited submission to Cycle and judge what you think it is about.

At best this is an "opinion poll".

Regards,

John
John, people say nice things about savethectc's campaigning skills. It's flattering, but frankly statements like this make our task a good deal easier. If Resolution 8 is defeated by a poll of the entire Club then the merger with the Trust is dead. That's why you and others are using every lever at your disposal to swing the vote, and having the named ballot papers sent to National Office is one of those levers. There are staff members who would vote against the resolution in a secret ballot who just won't dare not to vote in favour because their boss is going to be checking the ballots.
User avatar
Simon L6
 
Posts: 1394
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 12:43 pm

Re: Vote still to come?

Postby John Catt » Tue Nov 30, 2010 8:26 am

meic wrote:Do some councillors have to stand for re-election before then, by any chance?


We had elections this summer after the AGM. If I recall correctly 3 were elected unopposed and of those where there was competition both the incumbents were re-elected.

SavetheCTC are very good at being the "Loyal Opposition" but don't appear to have any candidates for Council.

Regards,

John
John Catt
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 6:08 pm

Re: Vote still to come?

Postby John Catt » Tue Nov 30, 2010 8:39 am

Simon L6 wrote:
John Catt wrote:
workhard wrote:
As the skinflint Concillor who suggested that members pay their own postage on this poll, it is because it doesn't make any difference and ERS costs money.
........Read the submission form from the proposer and the unedited submission to Cycle and judge what you think it is about.

At best this is an "opinion poll".

Regards,

John
John, people say nice things about savethectc's campaigning skills. It's flattering, but frankly statements like this make our task a good deal easier. If Resolution 8 is defeated by a poll of the entire Club then the merger with the Trust is dead. That's why you and others are using every lever at your disposal to swing the vote, and having the named ballot papers sent to National Office is one of those levers. There are staff members who would vote against the resolution in a secret ballot who just won't dare not to vote in favour because their boss is going to be checking the ballots.


For the record as far as I am aware putting addresses on the ballot papers or a secret ballot never came up at Council and as far as I can recall I wasn't consulted on the issue. You may have a point. The advantage of the system as set up is that people could if they wish check up how their vote had been recorded. The M&AA say nothing about a secret ballot so perhaps you might like to put an amendment to the next AGM. Somehow I don't think staff votes will swing it.
John Catt
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 6:08 pm

Re: Vote still to come?

Postby Si » Tue Nov 30, 2010 9:19 am

<Please be careful about how you put across comments with regard to the legitimacy of this voting procedure. Although it is fine to question the mechanics chosen for the vote, suggestions or inferences that the method was chosen because someone _will_ be checking up on how people vote will not be tolerated unless you can supply clear proof of your belief.>
User avatar
Si
Moderator
 
Posts: 12314
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2007 7:37 pm

Re: Vote still to come?

Postby thirdcrank » Tue Nov 30, 2010 9:55 am

si

I think the point is that an independent organisation the ERS, as a subsidiary to its main campaigning work, provides an election service that is beyond reproach (at a price) which is used by organisations such as trades unions to pre-empt any suggestion that the vote was not kosher. Pointing out that a chosen system has obvious flaws, does not amount to an attack on the integrity of those responsible. In my own more general experience, the type of people who make these gaffes do so because of their own high level of integrity, which leads to a sort of innocence, naivety even, when they don't anticipate how something will look to others.
thirdcrank
 
Posts: 20383
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 2:44 pm
Location: Gildersome, Sth Leeds

Re: Vote still to come?

Postby Si » Tue Nov 30, 2010 10:02 am

As I said, nothing wrong with highlighting potential problems with the process. What we don't want is for people to take the opportunity to use these problems as an attack on those running the process by claiming that there is some sort of big evil conspiracy (unless, of course, there is a big evil conspiracy and the accuser supplies unquestionable proof for all to see).
User avatar
Si
Moderator
 
Posts: 12314
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2007 7:37 pm

Re: Vote still to come?

Postby Simon L6 » Tue Nov 30, 2010 10:13 am

Si wrote:As I said, nothing wrong with highlighting potential problems with the process. What we don't want is for people to take the opportunity to use these problems as an attack on those running the process by claiming that there is some sort of big evil conspiracy (unless, of course, there is a big evil conspiracy and the accuser supplies unquestionable proof for all to see).

Si - you've got to be a bit more careful here.

1. A former staffer tells me that he/she thinks that staff will not vote against if the ballot is not secret.
2. On April 13th Kevin sent this e-mail to staff....

> From: Kevin Mayne
> Sent: 13 April 2010 13:27
> To: Adam Coffman; Adrian Lawson; Alec McCalden; Alex Wise; Amanda Salt;
> Andrew Hawes; anna cipullo; Beccy Marston; Cherry Allan; Chris Juden; Chris
> Peck; Chris Williamson; Clare Gussin; Clive Andrews; cotterall; CTC
> Membership; Damian Bonsall; Dan Cook; Dan Joyce; Dave Holladay; Debra Rolfe;
> Diane Roe; Elizabeth Barner; Frances Chaloner; Gavin Wood; Ginny Leonard;
> Greg Woodford; Groups; Gwenda Owen; Heather Evans; Helen Biggerstaff; Holger
> Schiller; Ian Richardson; Ian Taylor; Ian Warby; intranet.test; iris test;
> John Storms; Jonathan Sharpe; Julie Foxton; Julie Rand; Juliet Jardine;
> Karen Carter; Katherine Judge; Kevin Mayne; L Roberts; Lesley Farmer; Lizzie
> Evered; Lorraine Roberts; Mark Gumbs; Mark Tancock; Mark Waters; Martyn
> Bolt; Martyn Broomfield; Matilda Keane; Melanie Davies; membership 1;
> membership 2; mtb; Nick Fish; Nigel Williams; Patrick Carr; Patrick Trainor;
> Peter Jackson; Richard Monk; righttoride; Rob Fuller; Roger Geffen; Rosanna
> Downes; Rose Rickford; Ross Adams; Ruth Bean; Sara Basterfield; Sarah Troke;
> Sarah Walker; Seamus Kelly; Steve Marsden; Steven Bailey; Sue Cherry; Tamina
> Oliver; Tejesh Mistry; Temp CTC; test; Trina Hatschek; Victoria Hazael;
> Victoria Leiper; York Cycle Show

> Subject: Your contribution to the Charity Vote at the CTC AGM.
>
> There are just over 4 weeks to go to the CTC AGM.
>
> The first flurry of voting activity has now passed, now it is down to
> electoral hard work to get support for our merged charity proposal. Counting
> our allies and making sure they have voted is a case of personal action, not
> taking "later" for an answer and making sure each form has gone in. I am
> counting on CTC staff as a vital part of the process, but we do have to act
> now.
>
> I will be asking some of you to send out tailored messages to some targeted
> groups but what really matters now is the personal impact of individuals.
> Most of you work for CTC Charitable Trust, you know the sort of nonsense
> that has been said about your work, but you also now that you are making a
> huge difference for cyclists everywhere on a daily basis. You have friends,
> families, contacts and clubmates who care about cycling and CTC but may not
> regard voting as relevant to them, it is your job to get them to vote. To
> avoid complexity they can complete the form with just one tick, giving their
> proxy to the Chair of the meeting.
>
> I am now walking round with a bag of voting forms knowing full well that
> many of my friends and contacts will already have lost their paperwork and
> if I leave it to them at home it will never happen, so I give them a hard
> copy. If they don't know their membership number I offer to get it for them,
> and I'll even post the forms to ERS.
>
> I also have the link on standby
> http://www.ctc.org.uk/resources/About_U ... g_Form.pdf so I can
> email it to anyone I think might need a prompt and so they can send it to
> their friends.
>
> Sounds painful doing it vote by vote, but it is the way of our democracy.
> Set yourself the target of getting at least 10 votes a week for the next 4
> weeks and we can make a real difference.
>
> If you have any questions please ask, and let me know how it is going.
>
> Kevin Mayne
> Chief Executive
> CTC and CTC Charitable Trust


now are you seriously telling us that it is unreasonable to suggest that staff won't feel wary about voting against resolution 8 if the ballot papers are individualised and sent to National Office?
User avatar
Simon L6
 
Posts: 1394
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 12:43 pm

Re: Vote still to come?

Postby Regulator » Tue Nov 30, 2010 10:32 am

John Catt wrote:
For the record as far as I am aware putting addresses on the ballot papers or a secret ballot never came up at Council and as far as I can recall I wasn't consulted on the issue. You may have a point. The advantage of the system as set up is that people could if they wish check up how their vote had been recorded. The M&AA say nothing about a secret ballot so perhaps you might like to put an amendment to the next AGM. Somehow I don't think staff votes will swing it.



Council were presented with a fait accompli about how the voting would be carried out. The question of why ERS wasn't being used was raised. The Chairman shut down that discussion fairly quickly and it was diverted off into haggling over the use of reply-paid envelopes.
Regulator
 
Posts: 507
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 10:13 am

Re: Vote still to come?

Postby swansonj » Tue Nov 30, 2010 10:43 am

John Catt wrote: Somehow I don't think staff votes will swing it.


John

Of course, you are right, it is highly unlikely that the staff votes will swing it (and if the result were so close that the staff votes did swing it, the result would almost certainly be challenged and set aside anyway because of the errors in sending out ballot papers). But that's not the point, the point is the attitude that is betrayed by proceeding in this way. For me, and I suspect for others, our objection to the merger isn't about the technicalities of charity law, it's about the way the club is run: it's about the impression that comes over of arrogance, of at times contemptuous-seeming disregard for members or, in this instance, staff, of being more interested in the size of grants and the closeness to the seats of power, in short an impression of running CTC for the benefit of the staff and management rather than the members or even of cyclists. I realise that in saying this, I am straying close to the limits of moderation rules, but for me it is unavoidable to describe this impression, because it is at the heart of my increasing despair at CTC. I am sure you did not intend your comment to seem dismissive or disrepectful of the staff, and I gratefully acknowledge that you did say to Simon L6 "you may have a point" (and I am sure that if I joined you on a club run we'd get on great together and find many shared attitudes) - but can you recognise how this sort of approach comes over to others?

John
swansonj
 
Posts: 320
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 9:53 pm

Re: Vote still to come?

Postby meic » Tue Nov 30, 2010 10:53 am

John Catt wrote:
meic wrote:Do some councillors have to stand for re-election before then, by any chance?


We had elections this summer after the AGM. If I recall correctly 3 were elected unopposed and of those where there was competition both the incumbents were re-elected.

SavetheCTC are very good at being the "Loyal Opposition" but don't appear to have any candidates for Council.

Regards,

John


You are implying that Save The CTC are the only opposition to the merger. There was no need for them to stand any opposition candidate in my area, there are plenty of other people who dont like the merger and are nothing to do with them.

Like for example one of these re-elected incumbents that you mentioned, whose main "manifesto promise" was to fight this merger and that is one manifesto promise that I believe.

This opposition isnt something that Save the CTC created, it is something that the Council itself created.
Yma o Hyd
User avatar
meic
 
Posts: 13250
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:37 pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Re: Vote still to come?

Postby Simon L6 » Tue Nov 30, 2010 11:35 am

to be fair, it has to be said that 'savethectc' is not so much an organisation, more a few souls bumping in to each other at rides and on the internet. It may be that Greg, Jeff, Colin and John speak for a great number of members, but not in a structured way. And it's also fair to say that the spread of opposition to the merger is geographically patchy - it's strong in parts of Wales, in London and the Southeast, in parts of Manchester, parts of Scotland and parts of the Southwest.

There's a very good reason for this. If you're a CTC member in the northeast or Scotland you might not even be aware that there's a debate about the future of the CTC going on if you passed over my original piece in the Mag. The Councillors put their names to e-mails that were sent to every member and there was no mention of the savethectc website or the nature of the case against the merger. Plenty of unpleasant personal stuff, but I'm going to get over that one of these days.
User avatar
Simon L6
 
Posts: 1394
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 12:43 pm

PreviousNext

Return to CTC Charity Debate

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest