No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 14649
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Post by gaz »

The results will have been measureable, otherwise CTC would never have been granted the funding.

The BBR site says:
... thousands of people up and down England took part in The Big Bike Revival ...

At the launch of NBW:
... CTC’s Bike Week Coordinator, Jonathan Sharpe said: “With tens of thousands more bikes being brought back to life through CTC’s recent Big Bike Revival, ..."

I can find nothing more concrete but CTC employs at least one Monitoring and Evaluation Officer to gather and present the evidence of success. I half expect something to be announced at the AGM.
High on a cocktail of flossy teacakes and marmalade
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Post by mjr »

TonyR wrote:
mjr wrote:Things have moved on from that now that all of the campaign groups are broadly agreed on use of high-spec facilities when appropriate (and other measures like making streets nicer when they're appropriate).

<....>

Nevertheless, I feel we are finally moving forwards on design at least in theory - even if there's lots to do to get all the practice up to snuff - and that's partly thanks to a general consensus between most cycling organisations (even if we wish Sustrans would be a bit more ambitious).


So a minimum width 1.5m segregated cycle lane in each direction counts as "high spec facilities" and a move forward in design? ...

No. It's also not what any cycling group asked for but it is better than what went before or even what is still going in in some of the more backwards boroughs. Did you enjoy riding the Embankment's previous layout? Can you see the majority of people ever riding that?

Not a major one but it is a step forwards and moving forwards does not mean we've arrived but similar collaboration on other aspects would probably help.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
User avatar
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15191
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Post by Si »

TonyR wrote:
I thought their stuff "really worked" -at least that's what they claimed when they made their bids for yet more £10's millions in public money. So why trust them this time?


If you base your philosophy on "I thought" and "trust" then you'll continue to wass in the wind. Better, perchance, to actually look at results and make a judgement based on data.
For instance, how many people can i see in my area that have started riding or got back into riding due to the CTC. Answer: 0. How many due to the previous Sustrans project? Answer: getting on for 1000. So, as an LA, where am I going to spend my money?
In your area YMMV, but I speak only based upon the data I have.

Personally I'd much rather CTC were heavily involved in the project, and, indeed, they have been invited to be involved....but they didn't even bother to decline, they just ignored it. Although it could have been worse - they were invited to help out on a previous project but all that they offered was an A4 sheet listing funding opportunities. Then when the project proved to be highly successful due to the work of the volunteers on the ground, the CTC tried to claim it as their own. Thankfully a number of staff changes have happened since then.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Post by thirdcrank »

There's been a perceptible increase around here in the numbers of commuting cyclists. Change of mode, in the lingo. FWIW, my own, totally unscientific assessment of the, ... er ..., drivers for this is that there are three. In no particular order: UK successes in competitive cycling; the Norman Tebbit effect; a recognition that on congested roads, with deteriorating public transport and no workplace parking, cycling is the way to go. Since the typical cycling commuter in these parts seems to ride a road bike with a rucksac on their back I fancy - again totally unscientific - that the influence of the BCF in this is greater than that of the CTC: also, few seem to use panniers and even fewer have full mudguards. There is, of course, the full range of mountain bikes, from cheap to very expensive, most looking out-of-place on-road, so I suspect few of their riders have had technical advice from anybody about bikes suitable for commuting.

I can't speak for Sustrans as I'm not in the habit of riding across fields, but I do see a lot more bikes on roofracks or hanging off the backs of vehicles. I know that some commuters drive to where the free parking stops and then finish their journeys by bike, but I suspect most car-mounted bikes are en route to some leisure or competition use.
JohnW
Posts: 6667
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Post by JohnW »

thirdcrank wrote:................Norman Tebbit....................


I thought that there was an embargo on the use of bad language on the Forum tc. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
User avatar
horizon
Posts: 11275
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Cornwall

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Post by horizon »

Si wrote:
Personally I'd much rather CTC were heavily involved in the project


Or perhaps not. Maybe it's better that other organisations do the on-the-ground delivery stuff while the CTC shouts loud and clear on the telly and radio.

My fear about the charitisation of the CTC was that it would do precisely that - deliver funded projects rather than changing the political climate. The furore over CJ is not just that he was a technical officer but that he was a radical one and spoke up technically for a different way of cycling.

As thirdcrank says, we are mainly in roof-rack cycling a lot of the time and the idea of the CTC delivering that (not your project BTW) is depressing to say the least.
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher
User avatar
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15191
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Post by Si »

Yep, I understand where you are coming from (ticks off another Americanism sure to get people's backs up) but I view it in a slightly different way. The sustrans method is to parachute the troops in to get the job done. I would see the CTC using the MGs to deliver with support from NO. This would, of course, mean lots of volunteers doing stuff in their own time, and there will be plenty out there who aren't interested, just wanting tor ride their bikes. But I also guess that there are plenty within the MGs who really would like to support grass roots cycling if they were given the right backing, support, training, etc from NO.....I know that in my own area a number who just went to the MG to ride their bikes are now taking very active volunteer roles in our non-CTC project. the benefit of doing it this way is that when the funding dries up and Sustrans would move onto a new project, the MG run initiative will still be going strong. The power of the CTC is in its MGs, it's just got to workout how to use them properly. As for money....again there will be those who don't want their subs going to such things - fair enough. With a little help from outside my project has raised around £10k in funding....CTC NO should be in a position to teach MGs how to tap into similar funding schemes so that they can finance this kind of project.

As for shouting loudly in the Halls Of Power - I agree that this is a job for the CTC....but BC also seem interested in this area and they have the big guns.
JohnW
Posts: 6667
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Post by JohnW »

JohnW wrote:
gaz wrote:
JohnW wrote:After being present at the AGM when the final charity-isation resolution was passed makes me very, very uneasy about vesting my vote in the chairman. We must all exercise our vote. The chairman can, quite legally and constitutionally, vote the way he/she wants and ignore the wishes expressed by those who did express their wishes.

At the 2012 AGM the chairman cast the undirected proxy votes he had received from members in line with the wishes expressed by those members who did express their wishes: viewtopic.php?f=45&t=92645&p=854091&#p854091


Oh absolutely gaz - I said in my post that the chairman acted quite legally and constitutionally, I made no suggestion of anything 'dodgy' at all - it wasn't suspicious in any way, and I presume and accept that the chairman acted in what he believed to be the best interests of the club. I did not, and I do not make any suggestion of skulduggery.

The fact was, however, that his vote was at variance with the wishes expressed by those members who had expressed their preference...............If my memory is incorrect, and I'm wrong, then I'll admit it, retract, apologise and shut up for ever.


gaz - following our 'discussion' (above) I have consulted the memories of some others, and the memories confirm mine. We are confused by the record as shown.

However, as I've said, my post wasn't about the matter which was the subject of that vote, it was an attempt to encourage as many members as possible to vote at the forthcoming AGM and to illustrate what can happen if too many members don't (bother to) vote and if too many vest their vote in the chairman.
User avatar
Chris Jeggo
Posts: 577
Joined: 3 Jul 2010, 9:44am
Location: Surrey

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Post by Chris Jeggo »

CTC AGM - and why I am resigning

I have just posted a piece which I think is too long for this forum on the West Surrey CTC Forum, at:

http://westsurreyctc.co.uk/forum/topic/ ... july-2015/
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Post by mjr »

Chris Jeggo wrote:I have just posted a piece which I think is too long for this forum on the West Surrey CTC Forum, at: http://westsurreyctc.co.uk/forum/topic/ ... july-2015/

Thank you for the report. I remain cross about CTC's attempt to hijack our shared "Space for Cycling" campaign and take credit for it while avoiding answering your motion properly.

I hope that you do indeed keep in touch - not only with WSCTC but with forums like this - and find more fun things to do elsewhere in the everyday/touring cycling movement.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
SA_SA_SA
Posts: 2360
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 1:46pm

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Post by SA_SA_SA »

Will the full AGM minutes be available to ex-members online?

How long remains on the CEOs contract, seeing as he isn't volunteering to leave?
------------You may not use this post in Cycle or other magazine ------ 8)
PH
Posts: 13106
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Post by PH »

Chris Jeggo wrote:CTC AGM - and why I am resigning

I have just posted a piece which I think is too long for this forum on the West Surrey CTC Forum, at:

http://westsurreyctc.co.uk/forum/topic/ ... july-2015/


Sad reading and very sorry that you and others find you can no longer be a member.
As I put on the FB group, the shocking thing for me is that out of the 67,000 members less than 2,000 voted for any resolution. I'm at a bit of a loss to think just what would need to happen for more than 3% of the membership to get involved. Maybe they've already decided there's nothing to be done, or maybe they're largely happy with the way things are being run, maybe those of us who see this as a club are in a minority. Without some active participation we'll never know.
SA_SA_SA
Posts: 2360
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 1:46pm

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Post by SA_SA_SA »

Maybe they don't know, because it wasn't described clearly in Cycle magazine.
(the editor of a cycle magazine who was a CTC member didn't know about the Technical Officer redundancy till I told him).
------------You may not use this post in Cycle or other magazine ------ 8)
User avatar
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15191
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Post by Si »

I'm at a bit of a loss to think just what would need to happen for more than 3% of the membership to get involved.


the offer of a chance to win a free jacket? :wink:
User avatar
gaz
Posts: 14649
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent

Re: No more CTC technical officer ** NO HOAX **

Post by gaz »

Yes indeed, I remember the dizzy heights of the 6% turnout at the 2010 AGM :roll: .
High on a cocktail of flossy teacakes and marmalade
Post Reply