Simon Wilson
New member
The CNCC has a straightforward democratic structure which depends on club representatives being elected by an informed club membership and the CNCC committee being elected by those representatives.
Over the last few weeks I have discussed the CNCC online with the whole club and in person with our club Secretary, Treasurer, Meets Secretary, Tackle Master and about a dozen club members. I can, therefore, say with confidence that as far as possible I truly represent a reasonably large caving club and I could say the same in the past when I represented Burnley Caving Club.
About 25 years ago there was a proposal by the largest club (RRCPC) that a club should be allowed to have more than one person on the committee. BCC and our close friends the EPC both objected because we feared it was a slippery slope which could lead to one or two clubs being totally dominant. The proposal was eventually passed with the proviso that any club still only had one vote. The wording of the constitution is obscure but that is what it is intended to convey. The majority of the committee is still made up of the larger clubs; RRCPC, BPC, CPC YRC and YSS are all on the committee and always have been and that to me seems fair and just. In theory at least, the democratic structure of those clubs should ensure that the views of the majority of each club are represented at the CNCC.
It is an important feature of the democratic structure of the CNCC that there is an elected committee. It is not guaranteed but it should be assumed that the member clubs will accept that the largest clubs who represent the greatest number of cavers should be the first ones elected onto the committee. The right to one vote resides with a club and only clubs elected to the committee can vote at committee meetings.
In the committee minutes for 2007 Les Sykes, Glenn Jones and Jim Sloane are all recorded as representing Lancashire Underground Group (LUG) so they would have one vote between them. From 2008 onwards Jim is recorded as representing LUG but both Les and Glenn are not recorded as representing any club until 2013 when Les is recorded as representing Elysium Underground Group (who? ) and Glenn as representing CNCC Technical Group. EUG and the CNCC TG are not on the list of committee members elected in 2007 and there has been no election since then. Furthermore, the CNCC TG presents a report to every meeting of the CNCC after the Training Officers report. They are clearly an incorporated part of the CNCC and not a caving club and so not even eligible for election.
I have been told that one club on the committee has 3 members. I have not been able to find out how many members there are in Elysium or LUG.
In the draft agenda for the 2014 CNCC AGM there is a proposal which will effectively abolish the committee and give one vote to all full member clubs. The proposal is for the constitution to read as follows:
?Each member club of the committee shall have one vote; any additional attending Full member club representatives will have one vote. The Chairman shall not have a casting vote?
This would automatically give ?micro-clubs? the same voting power as some clubs with over 200 members without them having to go through the process of being elected onto the committee.
The proposed change would be a dangerous move and it is important that it is rejected and an elected committee retained.
Over the last few weeks I have discussed the CNCC online with the whole club and in person with our club Secretary, Treasurer, Meets Secretary, Tackle Master and about a dozen club members. I can, therefore, say with confidence that as far as possible I truly represent a reasonably large caving club and I could say the same in the past when I represented Burnley Caving Club.
About 25 years ago there was a proposal by the largest club (RRCPC) that a club should be allowed to have more than one person on the committee. BCC and our close friends the EPC both objected because we feared it was a slippery slope which could lead to one or two clubs being totally dominant. The proposal was eventually passed with the proviso that any club still only had one vote. The wording of the constitution is obscure but that is what it is intended to convey. The majority of the committee is still made up of the larger clubs; RRCPC, BPC, CPC YRC and YSS are all on the committee and always have been and that to me seems fair and just. In theory at least, the democratic structure of those clubs should ensure that the views of the majority of each club are represented at the CNCC.
It is an important feature of the democratic structure of the CNCC that there is an elected committee. It is not guaranteed but it should be assumed that the member clubs will accept that the largest clubs who represent the greatest number of cavers should be the first ones elected onto the committee. The right to one vote resides with a club and only clubs elected to the committee can vote at committee meetings.
In the committee minutes for 2007 Les Sykes, Glenn Jones and Jim Sloane are all recorded as representing Lancashire Underground Group (LUG) so they would have one vote between them. From 2008 onwards Jim is recorded as representing LUG but both Les and Glenn are not recorded as representing any club until 2013 when Les is recorded as representing Elysium Underground Group (who? ) and Glenn as representing CNCC Technical Group. EUG and the CNCC TG are not on the list of committee members elected in 2007 and there has been no election since then. Furthermore, the CNCC TG presents a report to every meeting of the CNCC after the Training Officers report. They are clearly an incorporated part of the CNCC and not a caving club and so not even eligible for election.
I have been told that one club on the committee has 3 members. I have not been able to find out how many members there are in Elysium or LUG.
In the draft agenda for the 2014 CNCC AGM there is a proposal which will effectively abolish the committee and give one vote to all full member clubs. The proposal is for the constitution to read as follows:
?Each member club of the committee shall have one vote; any additional attending Full member club representatives will have one vote. The Chairman shall not have a casting vote?
This would automatically give ?micro-clubs? the same voting power as some clubs with over 200 members without them having to go through the process of being elected onto the committee.
The proposed change would be a dangerous move and it is important that it is rejected and an elected committee retained.