I give below the complete text of the 'Letter' only part of which was published in the Dec04/Jan05 issue of 'Cycle'.
10th October 04-----Oxby
OUR CLUB’S DEMOCRACY
The statement has been made in our journal, Cycle, that our Club, the CTC, is against the compulsory wearing of cycling helmets. This letter is not to express whether or not I agree with this view, but it is against how this view was derived. I have had extensive email correspondence with our Club’s Director but he has not been able to prove that the number of members expressing the ‘view’ was greater than 500, which is less than 1% of our membership of 55000 !; my own estimate is less than 250, i.e., ½%, based upon the numbers of our members elected to represent our views on Council and the Policy Committee, the possible number known to have written to their MPs, and the number attending any AGM at which the matter was discussed.
I have informed him that, no matter the excuse for not doing so, if a ballot of the whole membership has not been carried out and the majority of those voting were in favour, then it is a lie, or at least deceitful, when the statement is made that ‘the CTC is against the compulsory wearing of cycling helmets’ since this is clearly intended by these 1% or less of our members, to imply to the outside bodies reading the statement, that the majority of the membership of 55000 has this same view.
Even if a similar ‘view’ has been passed at a recent AGM, that cannot be accepted as the democratic view of the Club since on average less than 100 members attend an AGM, and the ‘view’ has never been put to the vote of the whole membership of 55000. Neither can our committees of elected representatives claim that their view is also the view of the membership unless they have correctly ascertained what our views are !. We elect our representatives to committees, not to present their own views or even to guess what our views would be if they took the trouble to ask us, but to represent our views---and to do that they have got to ask us !.
I have suggested to our Director that until the consensus view of the whole membership has been obtained in a correct democratic manner, then, in order for the statement to be truthful, it should be prefixed with the words “The Council of the CTC---“, if the ‘view’ has been correctly passed at a recent Council Meeting, or by “The Policy Committee of the CTC---“ if it has been passed there, but he would not agree to this.
Just because some members feel very strongly about their view, it does not make it the correct democratic view of the whole Club, no matter who they are. Neither should they use words deliberately intended to express to outside bodies that their view is also the consensus view of the whole membership, even if they feel that by telling the truth their own personal standing and that of the Club is weakened when they make statements to external bodies.
If some members are so desirous that, in their own opinion, the view they hold is so important that it should be put forward as that of the CTC, then no matter which position they hold in the Club or which committee they are part of, or which experts they have consulted, that view should be put to a ballot of the whole membership. This could be easily and inexpensively done by enclosing a loose voting slip in our journal, ‘Cycle’, as recently done in the October/November issue of ‘Cycle’ which included a CTC Member Survey. The numbers who actually take the trouble to return these slips will, in all probability be small, enabling counting to be conveniently and quickly undertaken. But unless this, or equivalent democratic action is undertaken, a view originating from Council, or from another CTC committee or individual, cannot truthfully be claimed to be that of the ‘Club’, but only of the body, experts or individuals giving rise to that view.
I would be grateful to receive members’ opinion on this letter, especially from amongst the ‘99%’.
Clem Oxby, 6 Holt Park Green, Leeds LS16 7RE-----clemoxby@hotmail.com
CTC Democracy
-
gerry
Re:CTC Democracy
It's like any other democracy. Those that can be bothered to vote (by going to AGMs at the various levels) elect representatives who are empowered to formulate policy on behalf of the club. There is no need to have a referendum on every issue (just as the government does not have a referendum on every decision which they make- that way the only decisions that they make are what to have a referendum about!)
The only question is: are those that are unable to attend AGMs disenfranchised? So possibly a postal vote for all club officers at all levels from DA upwards would be better? I doubt it- if you are interested go to your AGM, where you can look your representatives in the eye.
The only question is: are those that are unable to attend AGMs disenfranchised? So possibly a postal vote for all club officers at all levels from DA upwards would be better? I doubt it- if you are interested go to your AGM, where you can look your representatives in the eye.
-
Marc
Re:CTC Democracy
Clem
I ask you whats is your personal opinion on this debate? Mine is definatley not to make helmets compulsory, however I wear one!
As former motorcyclist who had BSI kitemarking as one specific standard by which helmet construction and testing was organised and whose test methododlogy was accepted worldwide, I find no body has yet come up with a definatve standard by which bicycle helmets can be compared. There are a number around, but the same rigorous methodology pro compulsion folks will site to support their claim cannot be said of these disparet and non comparable standards. Therefore what are those who support compulsion asking those compelled to wear, at the moment a hotch potch of more cosmetically designed helmets as opposed to those with agreed design and ergonomcs. Surely that cannot be a good thing as it will be false protection that is being pedalled (pun) not actual safety.
I see thise debate as premature as unlike seat belt, Motorcycle helmet and even drink driving I cannot find significant research from which the pro compulsion debate find their vigour. There is too much anecdote which gets made into science.
I look to buying a soundly researched and designed helmet, my Bell helmet uses the Snell standard thats about 10 years old.
Come lets join a lobby for helmet rersearch and possibly then both camps will have sound evidence based facts on which to procede intil then it must remain personal in my humble view.
cheers Clem, now where do ypu personally stand on that simple question pro or against complulsion?
safe cycling
Marc
I ask you whats is your personal opinion on this debate? Mine is definatley not to make helmets compulsory, however I wear one!
As former motorcyclist who had BSI kitemarking as one specific standard by which helmet construction and testing was organised and whose test methododlogy was accepted worldwide, I find no body has yet come up with a definatve standard by which bicycle helmets can be compared. There are a number around, but the same rigorous methodology pro compulsion folks will site to support their claim cannot be said of these disparet and non comparable standards. Therefore what are those who support compulsion asking those compelled to wear, at the moment a hotch potch of more cosmetically designed helmets as opposed to those with agreed design and ergonomcs. Surely that cannot be a good thing as it will be false protection that is being pedalled (pun) not actual safety.
I see thise debate as premature as unlike seat belt, Motorcycle helmet and even drink driving I cannot find significant research from which the pro compulsion debate find their vigour. There is too much anecdote which gets made into science.
I look to buying a soundly researched and designed helmet, my Bell helmet uses the Snell standard thats about 10 years old.
Come lets join a lobby for helmet rersearch and possibly then both camps will have sound evidence based facts on which to procede intil then it must remain personal in my humble view.
cheers Clem, now where do ypu personally stand on that simple question pro or against complulsion?
safe cycling
Marc
-
Clem Oxby
Re:CTC Democracy
###################
Dear Marc,
Sorry, but I'm unwilling to accede to your request. What I'm concerned about is that even though statements are issued being described as those of the CTC, the CTC Membership haven't been asked to agree on those statements.
I believe that such statements should be presented as the view of the CTC bodies which issued them and not those of the CTC.
But thanks for emailing me--------Clem Oxby
###################
Dear Marc,
Sorry, but I'm unwilling to accede to your request. What I'm concerned about is that even though statements are issued being described as those of the CTC, the CTC Membership haven't been asked to agree on those statements.
I believe that such statements should be presented as the view of the CTC bodies which issued them and not those of the CTC.
But thanks for emailing me--------Clem Oxby
###################
-
Clem Oxby
Re:CTC Democracy
#################
Dear Gerry,
This is my third attempt in the last few minutes of trying to get a reply posted to you; so here I go again !.
You are quite correct in what you say except when our goverment issue a view, they do not claim it as the view of the British People but only as their view. Likewise, and this is the point of my letter, when a view is issued by a CTC committee it should not be presented as the view of the CTC but only of the committee.
How would you react if the goverment claimed that going to war on Iraq was the view of the British People ?---which they daren't do of course.
I've suggested that when a view is generated by a committee it could be described, for example' as "The view of Council is-----" and not as "The view of the CTC is----".
Only when a view is considered so important that it requires it should be described as that of the CTC, need a ballot of the CTC's Membership be done.
Let's try to "Submit" this again. Best Wishes-----Clem Oxby
#######################
Dear Gerry,
This is my third attempt in the last few minutes of trying to get a reply posted to you; so here I go again !.
You are quite correct in what you say except when our goverment issue a view, they do not claim it as the view of the British People but only as their view. Likewise, and this is the point of my letter, when a view is issued by a CTC committee it should not be presented as the view of the CTC but only of the committee.
How would you react if the goverment claimed that going to war on Iraq was the view of the British People ?---which they daren't do of course.
I've suggested that when a view is generated by a committee it could be described, for example' as "The view of Council is-----" and not as "The view of the CTC is----".
Only when a view is considered so important that it requires it should be described as that of the CTC, need a ballot of the CTC's Membership be done.
Let's try to "Submit" this again. Best Wishes-----Clem Oxby
#######################
-
Tony
Re:CTC Democracy
In my experience, the Government DOES refer to its decisions as the "will of the people". Many MPs are actively opposed to such things as referenda as they "undermine" parliamentary democracy. What I'm not clear on here is whether your objection is based on objecting to views being presented by the CTC as being "yours"without an all-member vote, or whether you have a specific gripe about the helmet debate. There are mechanisms in the CTC to present your views, from the AGM to DAs; imagine how this country would function if we required an all-voter referendum for every issue put before Parliament!
My own views? If the issue is big enough, there should be a membership ballot.
Helmet compulsion? I want to be able to make MY OWN informed choice.
Simple, really, and that is the view that the Club is putting forward.
My own views? If the issue is big enough, there should be a membership ballot.
Helmet compulsion? I want to be able to make MY OWN informed choice.
Simple, really, and that is the view that the Club is putting forward.
-
Clem Oxby
Re:CTC Democracy
########################
Tony,thanks for your 'posting'. I've no strong views either way on the helmet issue. My argument is that a view generated within the CTC Organisation such as Council should be presented as that of Council, unless it has been submitted to and apporoved by the membership,when it can then be truthfully presented as that of our Club, CTC. The facts are that a CTC body which generates a view has only a few members---Council has around 25 for example, and an AGM around 100---whereas the Club, CTC, has 55000 members !.
I'm suggesting phrases such as " The view of Council is----" could be used instead of "The view of the CTC is----"., when presenting a view which has not been submitted to the Membership for approval.
I hope this explains that my objective is to obtain correct democracy within our Club of 55000 members.
Thanks again, good cycling, ---Clem Oxby---
######################
Tony,thanks for your 'posting'. I've no strong views either way on the helmet issue. My argument is that a view generated within the CTC Organisation such as Council should be presented as that of Council, unless it has been submitted to and apporoved by the membership,when it can then be truthfully presented as that of our Club, CTC. The facts are that a CTC body which generates a view has only a few members---Council has around 25 for example, and an AGM around 100---whereas the Club, CTC, has 55000 members !.
I'm suggesting phrases such as " The view of Council is----" could be used instead of "The view of the CTC is----"., when presenting a view which has not been submitted to the Membership for approval.
I hope this explains that my objective is to obtain correct democracy within our Club of 55000 members.
Thanks again, good cycling, ---Clem Oxby---
######################
-
nigel
Re:CTC Democracy
Eh??????
Clem, what exactly is your problem? I couldn't even be bothered reading all of your first posting. Utter twaddle.
It should be obvious to all but the most awkward jobsworth-types and solicitors that the CTC's stance is : If you want to wear a helmet, wear one. If you don't want to wear a helmet, don't wear one.
And that, my friends, is all there is to it.
Clem, what exactly is your problem? I couldn't even be bothered reading all of your first posting. Utter twaddle.
It should be obvious to all but the most awkward jobsworth-types and solicitors that the CTC's stance is : If you want to wear a helmet, wear one. If you don't want to wear a helmet, don't wear one.
And that, my friends, is all there is to it.
-
Clem Oxby
Re:CTC Democracy
Hi Nigel,
You've got hold of the wrong end of the stick----as the saying goes.
In the inital letter and in the several replies I've posted here I've attempted to clearly state that the helmet issue is not the subject of my concerns. If you don't believe me please read the letter and posted replies.
My concern is try and establish correct democratic procedures within our Club.
As you will read what I am suggesting is that a view generated within the Club by one of its committees such as our Council, should be presented just as the view of that Committee, and only presented as the view of the Club after if it has been put to the Membership and the majority of all those voting were in favour of it.
Thank you for your response----Clem Oxby
#####################
You've got hold of the wrong end of the stick----as the saying goes.
In the inital letter and in the several replies I've posted here I've attempted to clearly state that the helmet issue is not the subject of my concerns. If you don't believe me please read the letter and posted replies.
My concern is try and establish correct democratic procedures within our Club.
As you will read what I am suggesting is that a view generated within the Club by one of its committees such as our Council, should be presented just as the view of that Committee, and only presented as the view of the Club after if it has been put to the Membership and the majority of all those voting were in favour of it.
Thank you for your response----Clem Oxby
#####################
-
Clem Oxby
Re:CTC Democracy
#######################
Hi Nigel,
Don't worry---not a problem---as the sayings go.
With hindsight I should have written my initial letter more directly to the point and much much shorter !.
Happy cycling and thanks for both your 'postings'.-------Clem Oxby
#########################
Hi Nigel,
Don't worry---not a problem---as the sayings go.
With hindsight I should have written my initial letter more directly to the point and much much shorter !.
Happy cycling and thanks for both your 'postings'.-------Clem Oxby
#########################
-
drossall
Re:CTC Democracy
I disagree with Clem.
We need cyclists' views to be put. We need them to be expressed in a way that has some weight. Presenting something as the view of the CTC is much weightier than presenting it as the view of the CTC Council.
It is true that the views are expressed on our behalf rather than by consulting us. However, there is no way the CTC could respond to issues fast enough if they had to consult on everything. It is pointless to make a statement on something six months after it came to public attention, when no-one is listening any more, because Council had to consult.
My choices are to have a voice as part of a body which tries to speak on my behalf, or to have no voice. Getting to vote on everything is simply not an option. If the current leadership do poorly at representing me, I vote for different people next time. As evidence that there is support for the leadership, and that they understand members' views, just look how long the current policy has stood. Has anyone sought election to Council on a compulsory helmet ticket?
The other thing is that potentially we could be consulted and vote 51%/49%. Could Council then say something was our view? Would they have to say "63.24% of CTC members believe that yellow is the nicest colour for a bicycle" instead of "The CTC believes..."?
Since I wouldn't agree with every detail of the resulting policy if I did get consulted, I am very happy with the way the leadership goes about things at present. And yes, it is democracy. You are using "democracy" when you mean "direct democracy" as opposed to "representative democracy":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_%28varieties%29
We need cyclists' views to be put. We need them to be expressed in a way that has some weight. Presenting something as the view of the CTC is much weightier than presenting it as the view of the CTC Council.
It is true that the views are expressed on our behalf rather than by consulting us. However, there is no way the CTC could respond to issues fast enough if they had to consult on everything. It is pointless to make a statement on something six months after it came to public attention, when no-one is listening any more, because Council had to consult.
My choices are to have a voice as part of a body which tries to speak on my behalf, or to have no voice. Getting to vote on everything is simply not an option. If the current leadership do poorly at representing me, I vote for different people next time. As evidence that there is support for the leadership, and that they understand members' views, just look how long the current policy has stood. Has anyone sought election to Council on a compulsory helmet ticket?
The other thing is that potentially we could be consulted and vote 51%/49%. Could Council then say something was our view? Would they have to say "63.24% of CTC members believe that yellow is the nicest colour for a bicycle" instead of "The CTC believes..."?
Since I wouldn't agree with every detail of the resulting policy if I did get consulted, I am very happy with the way the leadership goes about things at present. And yes, it is democracy. You are using "democracy" when you mean "direct democracy" as opposed to "representative democracy":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_%28varieties%29
-
drossall
Re:CTC Democracy
Sorry, that link went wrong. There is no preview here so I can't check before trying again. If you cut and paste it works OK. Here is one more try:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_%28varieties%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_%28varieties%29
-
Clem Oxby
Re:CTC Democracy
###################################
Hi Drossall,
Thanks for your email. Like you, I don’t want to hinder or delay the most excellent work done by our staff and volunteers when looking after our interests with external bodies for which I’m very grateful. Certainly views generated within our Club by a committee, AGM or individuals should be presented without recourse to the Membership as they are at present but, and this is the point of my letter, they should be designated as the views only of the committee, AGM or individuals who are issuing the views. A delay would be introduced only if a view is considered so important that it requires it should be designated as that of our club, the CTC , when the view would then need to be submitted to a poll of the CTC’s Membership.
In order for external bodies to trust and rely on the statements and facts issued by our Club, it is essential that they are perceived as truthfull by them. At the slightest hint of deceit they will loose all respect for our Club. Our Club has 55000 members and a view can only be claimed to be their view, i.e.that of the CTC, if the view has been submitted to them and the majority of all those voting are in favour of it.
I hope this explains to you that I’m attempting to ensure that our Club is run in a true democratic manner giving each and all of our members an equal and effective opportunity in its running.
Thank you for your posting to me--------------Clem Oxby------------
#######################################
Hi Drossall,
Thanks for your email. Like you, I don’t want to hinder or delay the most excellent work done by our staff and volunteers when looking after our interests with external bodies for which I’m very grateful. Certainly views generated within our Club by a committee, AGM or individuals should be presented without recourse to the Membership as they are at present but, and this is the point of my letter, they should be designated as the views only of the committee, AGM or individuals who are issuing the views. A delay would be introduced only if a view is considered so important that it requires it should be designated as that of our club, the CTC , when the view would then need to be submitted to a poll of the CTC’s Membership.
In order for external bodies to trust and rely on the statements and facts issued by our Club, it is essential that they are perceived as truthfull by them. At the slightest hint of deceit they will loose all respect for our Club. Our Club has 55000 members and a view can only be claimed to be their view, i.e.that of the CTC, if the view has been submitted to them and the majority of all those voting are in favour of it.
I hope this explains to you that I’m attempting to ensure that our Club is run in a true democratic manner giving each and all of our members an equal and effective opportunity in its running.
Thank you for your posting to me--------------Clem Oxby------------
#######################################
-
J Cantrell
Re:CTC Democracy
I'm with you Clem - there do seem to be some issues of democracy with our club, and I cringe at times at the press releases and comments put out in all our names. The most recent example is from last weeks e-mail newslatter and concerns the Home Office National Policing Plan - our spokesman says ..."“While the Government focuses on terrorism and teenagers, it appears to be saying that it is quite okay to put lives at risk if you are in a car. The Home Secretary is sending out completely the wrong message and is failing to protect us all from the very real threat posed by motorised traffic.”
This is gibberish and he must know it or he completely misunderstands the role of the national policing plan. If every group that had a sectional interest was represented in the National Plan it would not set any priorities - there is lots of scope for local issues in police force local plans - and yet this statement has been put out in all our names!
This is gibberish and he must know it or he completely misunderstands the role of the national policing plan. If every group that had a sectional interest was represented in the National Plan it would not set any priorities - there is lots of scope for local issues in police force local plans - and yet this statement has been put out in all our names!