[Will Hunt]

What irks me the most about this situation, is that Petigrew et al, have not run a direct campaign to achieve election to BMC office; or attempted to win over the majority with a policy of reform (as they see it). They do not attempt to convince the membership at large of the wisdom of their views. They wheedle and connive, through petty procedural quirks, to stall and obstruct. They fly in the face of the vast majority of the membership.
They are well aware that they are not in sync with the membership, that they cannot win over a majority. They simply think they are superior too and more important than, the actual members. It is as if they’re primary goal is to prune away all those who don’t conform to their world view.
Very much a “If I can’t have it, no one can” attitude that reeks of the worst kind of despotism.

It is an example of Brexitism(R)

 (yes you heard it here first folks..)

I'd like to chip in that we who voted against Bob are also engaging in Leaver behaviour - you lost the vote so now you should shut up.

As Ian Hyslop said - even after the vote, you continue to make the argument in order to temper the final outcome.

[shark]

The Open Forum took place last night. It was livestreamed and the footage is here:



Quite frankly I found the whole thing bizarre and unedifying and am not sure if I am fully reconciled to whether I was witnessing member democracy in action or realpolitik given the amount of horse trading that had evidently gone on.

The two protagonists at the front were Andy Symes who is the National Councils designated head of the Implementation Group who is finalising the National Council tier 3 based constitution and Jonathan White who was one of the signatories of the opposing teir 1 constitution. Tony Greaves was Chairing. Dave Turnbull also there in case facts need clarifying in a neutralish capacity and Crag Jones on the end for god knows what reason.

Rather than seperately arguing their cases Andy and John had clearly spent a lot of time together and Andy had made revisions to the Tier 3 motion to meet many of the criticisms of Jonathons group to extent that Jonathon said that he was sufficiently satisfied to recommend to the other signatories to withdraw the opposing motion. However, to what extent he was able to speak for the group was unclear and made more doubtful when another of the signatories in the room, Rodney Gallagher stood up and stated that both motions should be withdrawn   

I was extremely uneasy that a group of BMC members operating outside the normal democratic structures (area meetings, national council etc) have been able to exert so much influence on whatever the proposed constitution turns out to be, However, if this means that their proposal is withdrawn then I guess it was expedient and the ends justified the means to bring this whole protracted situation to a close.

However, if the new constitution means that the limitations exacted by National Council on the Executive are so onerous that the Board Directors have to ask permission to fart then it doesn't really matter if they have primacy or not as their decision making capacity will be so fettered that nothing substantive will have changed and the BMC will continue muddling along much as before. 

[Teaboy]

You seem to be objecting to the fact that the consultation period actually involved some consultation rather than the one and only proposal being waived through without question.

[shark]

You seem to be objecting to the fact that the consultation period actually involved some consultation rather than the one and only proposal being waived through without question.

The ORG consulted extensively via the largest and most comprehensive survey commissioned to date and meeting extensively with stakeholder groups including the BMC30 and outside affected partners such as Mountain Training etc. That was the consultation period.

The ORG made their recommendations on the most suitable constitutional changes to meet company law, Sport England requirements and best practice governance in an initial report. Consultation following the initial report then led to a few further changes.

The report and recommendations were then handed over to the National Council to do as they saw fit and NC set up an Implementation Group to carry out the constitutional aspects of the recommendations with an explicit brief to meet SE's tier 3 requirements. At this point a small pressure group was able to use influence to gain further concessions to their viewpoint using a tabled counter motion as a bargaining tool.

[Offwidth]

I'm happy with the horsetrading if it all comes off OK. The BMC has had enough damage from disruption and stalemate and the prospect of going into the AGM with a serious chance that the democratically formulated  BMC Implementation Group (IG) position on the ORG recommendations, as ratifed by the democratic elected National Council (NC) on the new Articles might not reach the 75% vote required was very worrying (last year was the highest vote numbers in AGM history but only 5% of the full membership). Like Shark, I wouldn't want to see the proposed new Board tied in knots such that it couldn't function properly but the proposed changes were pretty much putting the intent wrt the membership body (the new NC and new form of President), holding the board to account (from the perspective the IG expected)  into black and white in the newly proposed Memorandum of Understanding. It also puts any Independant Director candidates who meet the required skill set for the Board to an AGM member vote (rather than a board selected best candidate put to the AGM for ratification). I see both these particular changes as positive and only possible as the BMC/IG team have negotiated a bit of movement from Sport England as well as from negotiations with the sensible Tier 1 people, like Jonathon and Crag.

Some of the less sensible Tier 1 people at the meeting (not just Rodney) wanted more delay to be 'ultra-democratic'.  However this is in the context of a 2 year process started in 2015 and already given an exceptional extra year extension. Sport England rightly expect a decision this summer. The delays are because the NC left things to drift (yes those member reps with primacy that the Tier 1 folk wanted to retain most of their power and who also voted in the Climb Britain rebrand). I want to be clear these things happened in NC with no ill intentions but the NC do seem a bit detatched at times from ordinary member views and a bit slow at times to repond to externally set timetables: a situation that should go away with a board and the full membership (plebs) having a right to watch at AGM. The new structures have much improved direct pleb input (much to the horror of some of the highly experienced activists who exploited their power and influence in the past) like Live streaming and electonic voting at the AGM and areas. There are also proposals for a couple of direct member elected reps from the whole UK and a proper club rep (currently an observer). Also better codes of practice similar to best practice in modern organisations, that would prevent some of the worst abuses we have seen in the secret distribution of misinformation that were leaked (on which point I can show some folk at the Peak Area next week some of these letters that are not available openly online,  if you ask me there)

I can't see all the old troublemakers backing down from Tier 1 (so their motion might legally stand for an AGM vote)  but if the sensible end of the Tier 1 vote, led by Jonathon White and Crag Jones,  leave the motion the rest look pretty stranded to me. People still do need to vote or as it looks pretty certain those with undemocratic intent will try and scupper the Tier 3 plans; it will be much easier with electronic voting, but that applies on both sides.  The leaked letters from the remnants of the BMC 30 don't indicate any sign of peace: the most recent ones speculate on the upcoming Presidential contest and slip back into the same patronising, sexist attitudes we have sadly got used to. This is because, since the acting President is standing down, Lynn, as a current VP, has volunterered to wear the traditional BMC asbestos as the exec linked candidate to face the other candidate,  Les.

BTW for people with a life considering watching the BMC TV YouTube film of the Open Forum, it's 2hours and a bit long, so if you want a quick view, start watching at 1.58.00 to get a sense of the compromise and what needs doing next.

[Offwidth]

The latest from Andy Syme.... the rump of the opposition Tier 1 proposal is now down from 42 to 13 (there were 11 of the 42 from the leadership of the BMC 30, with a few missing, as away on expeditions) . So already well below the 25 formally required for a motion.

https://m.facebook.com/pg/BMCYorkshireArea/posts/?ref=page_internal&mt_nav=1