Application for BCA Secretary

[Ian Ball]

That is a disappointment, I do hope there will be an alternative candidate for the Old Guard to make feel humiliated  :doubt:

Who are this old guard?  All the people I've had dealings with in the BCA have been most helpful and welcoming.  I must have managed to steer clear of this old guard.

Good luck not_a_climber.

 

[alastairgott]

Who are this old guard?

My thoughts exactly, who are they, and what vision do they have for the BCA?

Perhaps a middle ground can be sought which is not as radical as proposal 4 (assuming this is where the friction is causing the old guard to squeal with Chinese burns) https://ukcaving.com/board/index.php?topic=24666.msg307058#msg307058

I thought i'd briefly take a look at a few other societies and organisations, the RYA have an interesting take on a one house system for both clubs and individuals:
"25.3  Subject to Article 25.4, on a poll at a general meeting, and on a ballot for the election of Nominated Directors (a) each individual Member has one vote; and (b) each organisation Member has one vote for each complete ?100 of the amount of the affiliation fee which became due and which was paid by it to the Association in the twelve months preceding the date of the notice convening the meeting. "
https://www.rya.org.uk/about-us/governance/constitution/Pages/articles-of-association.aspx

This would still make the bigger clubs more powerful, but wouldn't stop a mass movement of individual members.

You could apply the rule directly (ie total paid directly to the BCA, eg ?700 gives 7 votes*), or you could just harness some of the brackets of membership which already exist within the BCA.
I would say that a one house system based on the "number of members" cost basis could provide a fair representation.
http://british-caving.org.uk/wiki3/doku.php?id=membership:club

Increments of ?25 could be used. with the amount being rounded up.
Thereby:
No. of Members    BCA Fee      Number of Votes
up to 10              ?25            1
11-20                  ?35            2
21-30                  ?50            2
31-40                  ?60            3
41+                    ?70            3

This would take into account that sometimes clubs are not always run by the masses, and sometimes do not have to consult their members on BCA matters.

*but producing a direct translation of the ?100 rule would skew towards a club which had a lot of CIMS, clubs which encouraged DIMS or had a large proportion of DIMS would loose out.

 

[alastairgott]

and a direct translation of the ?100 rule would also skew out of favor of clubs with large numbers of student or youth members.

 

[NewStuff]

Shenanigans like this are exactly why we declined to renew (read as - fucked off) membership with the BCA, and now actively want f*** all to do with it until it changes. We will not be associated with a "governing body" that lets a small minority dictate against the wishes of the far larger masses. Here you have motivated people, actively volunteeing to do work and get stuff done. They have skill and experience in the relevant area they are volunterring for. Any other body would be overjoyed, not resentful and oust them. The idiots behind this cant seem to fathom that by "sticking with tradition", they're killing the very thing they claim to revere the most.

For anyone wondering - Not being a BCA member is *very* liberating. We can say what we want, when we want, go where we want, and the old farts can't do a bloody thing about it.  :icon_321:

Burn it down - it's not fit for purpose. Start afresh. We'll be happy to join a progressive body.

 

[ZombieCake]

I'm not very good at politics, but here goes.  I've very nearly ditched caving a few times 'cos of various politics.  What would be nice is to tell us people who aren't in the inner illuminati circle what the BCA does apart from insurance, because I genuinely don't know, I just get a green bit of plastic each year.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYQTL-ws6p4

 

[Madness]

Is there a list of Council Members and other Officers on the BCA website. I'd like to see the names of those supposedly representing us?

I don't know Matt, but from what I've read here he seems an ideal candidate. I hope that he reconsiders. I've never attended any sort of BCA meeting, but I'd attend the AGM to support and vote for him.

As for another representative body. I think the BCA would lose members in droves if another body offered Public Liability Insurance. Personally, I can't see why anyone would join the BCA for any other reason.

 

[2xw]

You'll find a list of council members here:

http://british-caving.org.uk/wiki3/doku.php?id=about:contact_bca

My name is there - I'd like to think I do reasonably good work.

 

[alastairgott]

Is there a list of Council Members and other Officers on the BCA website. I'd like to see the names of those supposedly representing us?

Or the most recent minutes are available here http://british-caving.org.uk/wiki3/doku.php?id=about:documents:council_meetings:start

They also show a list of names on the January 2019 draft. My name is nort there.

 

[droid]

As for another representative body. I think the BCA would lose members in droves if another body offered Public Liability Insurance. Personally, I can't see why anyone would join the BCA for any other reason.

I said in a previous thread (I'd  search it out, but being a bit of a gobshite.....life's too short....) that the main reason most people have *anything* to do with BCA is the insurance.

I was comprehensively shot down in flames. Mainly (if memory serves) by an individual who is now seriously disillusioned with BCA....

These shenanigans, and the absolute farce over CRoW and the Constitution have done little to change my opinion.

 

[Pegasus]

What would be nice is to tell us people who aren't in the inner illuminati circle what the BCA does apart from insurance, because I genuinely don't know, I just get a green bit of plastic each year.

Just back from holiday and catching up...

Remember this? 

During my time with BCA I designed (with help) this advert for publication in Descent - because 50% of the previous ones were about disease    The new advert gives a more positive message.  I showed the above at the start of my report at the last, ill fated (for me personally) BCA meeting - it was met with stony silence, I knew then it was going to be all down hill from there.  I had actually been excited to show what I'd been up to since the last meeting only to have procedure thrown in my face 

The advert isn't perfect, however is better than what went before.  Who's going to improve it for the next issue of Descent I wonder or will the above appear again and again?

It is a terrible shame, Matt has decided not to run for Secretary and I hope whoever has put him off thinks long and hard about what they have done.

Like it or not, BCA needs to modernise.  If you are standing in the way of this, please tell us why - what was so wrong about Matt's ideas??

 

[Cavematt]

Yesterday was rather a dramatic and busy day for me; I was contacted by email, PM on here, Whatsapp, text message and spent two hours on the phone last night, all with/from people trying to urge me to reconsider my choice to step aside. This is in addition to the posts above. The contact came also from several existing members of BCA Council.

I have been staggered by the enthusiasm for change; it has exceeded my expectations.

It seems that I have made a mistake. During my holiday last week, the ?final straw? for me was a very disappointing discussion with one existing and highly respected (by me and many others) member of BCA council. This played on my mind during my holiday and it really got to me; not least because this person is someone I respect immensely, and had not expected to be so opposed to the fairly radical modernisation I wish to see happen.

One of the biggest concerns I keep hearing is how bad it will be if key BCA individuals, who currently do a large amount of the work, are upset by these proposals and leave. I have heard it described as a potential disaster waiting to happen. I am certainly not here to upset anyone or cause any disasters.

It seems that more people support a modernising agenda than I had expected. I have been made aware in the last few days of numerous clubs and individuals who were going to turn up to the BCA AGM specifically to vote in favour of BCA modernisation; and some younger BCA council members who were considering stepping aside had this not happened. I have also had a long discussion by phone with an alternative modernising BCA Secretary candidate who was willing to take on the role, albeit reluctantly. He has been rather persuasive on me to step back into the arena.

Therefore, after some reflection, I am back, to stand as Secretary and to see my proposals to fruition.

This time, I go forward with confidence of a good show of support for my proposals, not only from UK Caving users (who have been nothing but supportive) but also from many individuals and clubs who I have heard over the past few days are going to be voting at the BCA AGM in June.

I also take on board Pitlamp?s characteristically very diplomatic and commonsense comment that there is no humiliation in putting forward well considered proposals that get rejected.

I am also encouraged to know that I will be joined on BCA Council by several other very progressive thinkers, who have voiced support not only for the vision I have personally presented, but beyond that. Thank you to Louise for putting yourself forward and publishing your statement here; I?m looking forward to working with you.

So apologies all for my ?wobble? and allowing a small handful of people to rattle my cage. It is clear that the time is now for cavers to rekindle their interest in our National Body and move it forwards out of the rut it is currently in, ideally with support from as many cavers as possible, young and old, newcomers as well as BCA stalwarts. 

Even if you feel that this is ?too much too fast? I?d urge you to see the opportunity here and respect that many people do want to see change. People DO want a better website, greater opportunities to participate electronically, and a national body that can be proud of and perceive as being more than just an insurance broker (which of course it is, as Pegasus has shown). Younger cavers are discussing our National Body more than any time I can remember. The BCA must embrace this, and I urge that all those with reservations about what changes may lay ahead to try to overcome these and work with the modernisers rather than against them.

It?s also worth saying that the term ?old guard? used here by some people can be interpreted different ways. It is easy to interpret this as a bunch of people who have held various roles for a long time and who are keen to keep control, and to view these people in the wrong light or talk about them disrespectfully, or to make assumptions about their motives. The term was used in this way five years ago to describe the then incumbent CNCC Officers. I see the term more as meaning individuals who have given up huge amounts of their free time to work in the interests of British Caving, and whose efforts should be acknowledged, and praised, regardless of whether you agree with their approaches. Mutual respect is needed if we are to move forward... but move forward we must!

I want the upcoming AGM to be about progress and positivity, not about personality clashes or regional disagreements. I hope to see lots of you (including individuals and club reps) there in June.

Matt Ewles

 

[Ian Ball]

Good for you

 

[rcfindlay]

Hope has been restored! Really great to hear you have changed your mind Matt.

We will miss you on all those holidays though.. 

 

[Pegasus]

Phew, thank goodness for that. Looking forward to voting for you, Matt

 

[christine]

You have just saved yourself some harassment from me then  :halo:

I was about to message you and try to get you to reconsider. I'm glad you have. That alone is refreshing that you're not so stubborn as to not be able to change your mind on something - a quality among many others that I suspect makes you the obvious choice for the job.

You have my 100% support.

 

[ahinde]

Well done Matt. I realise how difficult it can be to "get back in the saddle" when you have been brought down by  caving colleagues that you have always respected. It must be a bitter and deflating experience to see one's loyalty abused the way you have. It is a very brave decision that I am sure you will not regret. I will be encouraging support for you and your proposals at the AGM. Radical change can be distressing for some people ,but change will come. As I prepare to stand down from BCA I feel confident that the cavers coming forward to take on officer roles at BCA are of outstanding quality and will quickly earn the trust and support of the membership through their actions. I appreciate Matt's reconciliatory tone which I hope will not be abused.

 

[blackshiver]

Good Grief - a very sensible turnaround.

I don't think there is going to be enough parking space given the AGM is in Horton on the 9th of June.

Anyone wishing to do Sell Gill that Sunday might need to walk from Ingleton.

 

[GT]

Good man....

 

[Pitlamp]

Your most recent post above is cracking news Matt - I'm delighted.
Best of luck. 

 

[GarDouth]

Nowt like a good political u-turn (just kidding). I told you that you had lots of support.

Of course you have my full support and I will also continue with my roll in your proposals as required.

This does seem to be an odd thing to be typing as Matt is currently sat three feet away from me but we now only talk via the medium of UKC