ORGANISATIONS > BCA

Consultation on Section 10.1 of the BCA Constitution

(1/17) > >>

andrewmc:
At the 2020 BCA AGM, a motion was passed requiring the BCA to propose a new form of words for Section 10.1 of the BCA Constitution at the next BCA AGM. In response, the BCA's Constitution and Operations Working Group is carrying out a consultation to explore BCA members' views on the current Section 10.1 of the BCA Constitution.

Attached is an explanatory document for this consultation, giving details of the context of the original AGM motion, and some possible strengths and weaknesses of the current Section 10.1. The consultation will be open for at least two weeks (at least until 21st May) but may remain open for longer. The consultation itself can be completed using this Google form:

https://forms.gle/PF6mkMTkiY1oPXGW6

The consultation is open to all BCA members, including individual members, clubs, access-controlling bodies, National Bodies, and regional councils. Please feel free to forward this consultation; for example, if you are a club secretary you may wish to forward it to your members. The Google form includes a link to the explanatory document attached to this email, so the forwarding the link to the Google form is sufficient.

As convenor of the Constitution and Operations Working Group, I thank you in advance for any response you are able to give.
Andrew McLeod

Badlad:
Hi Andrew

I was interested to find out a little about your Constitution and Operations Working Group.  When you were established as a group, how you might interact or differ from previous similar groups, what your remit was/wasn't and who was a part of the group.  However, there is no listing of your group under 'working groups' on the BCA website.  I guess this is still to be updated?

Can you point me at the information?

The 10.1 motion at the last AGM was proposed by me.  It was passed by 90% of the vote.  I've not been asked about it since (strange that I wouldn't consulted don't you think).  Glad to read that at least someone is acting on it.  Keep me posted if you will.

Cheers

JoshW:
I'll try and answer some of your Q's Badlad, as a member of the working group, and a member of council (but Andrew/other members of the group may expand/correct accordingly).

I think to some extent, by default, this group will encompass any previous similar groups remit, as well as having further aims going forwards.

Primarily the function of the group is to try and approach the AGM this year with proposals handling any of the previous AGM's proposals with regards to the constitution and manual of operations. I think technically this group was formed shortly after the last AGM (October 2020), but for various reasons, including but not limited to the change of members of the executive, the group possibly didn't get 'up and running' until fairly recently.

Andrew bravely stood forwards as convener of this group, and so far there is a fairly small group of us but with a wide range of backgrounds in it.

With regards to it being your proposal last year, I was of the understanding (but please as is often the case correct me if I'm wrong), that this was a proposal from the previous secretary, Matt, that you proposed in his place. If that is the case then I can perhaps see why you weren't approached as a 'proxy' proposer.

It's also important to note that although 90% of the votes were in favour of amending this section, that this doesn't necessarily offer any clarity as to what they wanted, and this is what I think Andrew is doing now, by expanding the range of opinions, from our little working group to the wider BCA membership, in order to be able to start forming an idea of what the membership actually wants to happen to this section.

Finally, bringing it back to your first point about no listing of the group on the website (or in the Manual of operations); this is something that everyone in the group really sees as an ongoing use for the group, to ensure that any changes that are proposed at AGM/council are discussed with the relevant people so that the corresponding changes to the MoO can be made. I think that over the years plenty of votes have been made at AGM's or council but without full awareness of how this may conflict with the constitution/MoO, and so this should be taken into account within the proposal. I understand that in the run-up to this AGM there will be an opportunity to discuss with this group any potential proposals to ensure that they fully account for these confections.

Hopefully, through council minutes and other reports, the work done by this group will be available to all to keep the membership updated.

Cantclimbtom:
Myself and I assume others here too, are card-carrying BCA members but with little or no involvement or appetite in politics and not aware of whatever precipitated the discussion. Without detailing too much and opening any old wounds/arguments... Please can anyone explain in an idiot proof single paragraph what the original purpose of 10.1, why it's of interest now + what kinds of improvement might be beneficial. The more simplified and idiot proof the better. Thanks

JoshW:
Hi CCT,

The document within the consultation form details as much as the group felt they could whilst retaining impartiality. The last page and a half should give you both sides of the argument.

https://cloud.british-caving.org.uk/index.php/s/eZrwJpf6poz7jSY

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Main Menu

Forum Home Help Search
Go to full version