They've got the (old) CTC and the Sustrans logos there, so let's hope it's properly joined up between the three organisation. Congratulations to them, though, for this image of a utility cyclist...
I doubt if I will renew in September when my sub runs out, CTC appear to have abandoned their local campaigners
.
I also heard tell of constitutionally correct but morally dubious appropriation of bank reserves, built up locally by traditional DA/member groups, for campaigning purposes, by means of an influx of members (of the national CTC but not the member group in question) to AGMs. The implication was clearly that this was supported?organised? by head office.
I don't know but I think it unlikely because I think the difficulty it would present for possible mergers was discussed extensively when CTC converted to a charity a few years ago. (In other words, it was always known that the more likely merger partners were not charities and would be unwilling or unable to merge with one.)
How would an influx of members change anything? I thought member groups got a flat rate not linked to how many members they had since 2012 (example), which is part of the reason that some of the more active groups have converted to affiliate groups (example) which charge their members per member like FNRttC does.
The suggestion AIUI - and I merely pass it on, not vouch for it - was that the DA had built up substantial reserves (£20k+) largely through running events, and intended it for touring/racing/social purposes fitting the traditional activities of a DA. The influx of members not previously involved in that DA voted to use the money for campaigning instead.
Ah, I see. Up until 30 or 40 years ago, campaigning was also a traditional activity of many DAs, but I know what you mean.
That's the thing about semi-democratic organisations. Supporters can sign up for three quid and take barking mad decisions against the long-term interests of the organisation and the wishes of long-standing members.
The parallel is of course quite a good one - both organisations having created a "membership light" category to expand the membership. In CTC's case, AIUI Kevin Mayne had a bonus-linked target to expand the membership and (logically from that narrow perspective) decided the easiest way to meet the target and earn the bonus was to give membership away for free or almost free.
I feel there are signs of a mellowing in BC attitude with regard to helmets, possibly in order to pick up those feeling homeless since the change of emphasis at CUK.
