The Annual General Meeting is on 30 November...

A snowHead

...and this year's could be quite interesting, given everything that's happened, so it would be good to see combined SCGB-snowHead members down in Wimbledon.

Put the date in your diary!

One interesting thing is the continuing ambiguity over free drinks. Last year the Club newsletter promised "drinks and music". The music didn't materialise but the drinks did flow, with (surprisingly) unlimited free drinks available at the bar. This could be viewed as a controversial use of Club funds.

This year "drinks and music" have again been promised, though the latest 'Clubtalk' simply says "The Club bar will be open after the meeting" and doesn't mention the music. If that means the bar won't be free, and the Wimbledon Air Guitar Band are playing I'm all for it.

The AGM is for serious and semi-serious discussion, with lots of old ski friends turning up for a chat. This is easier without a brass band or Elvis impersonator in the background.

So, is it in your diary, and are you going to be there?

A snowHead

I agree david why should they be free should have to pay for them and any proffit made goes to the club to help fund getting more people in it

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

I stated my aim to be there just after the MO decision was taken, and fully intend to be there - may as well make use of my membership until it expires.

Any ideas on how snowHeads should identify themselves to one another?

You need to Login to know who's really who.

Mark Hunter, how about with "forum member" stickers?

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

I'll be in all-white tenniswear. This remains a Wimbledon regulation, and quite right too.

You'll need to Register first of course.

I think I'll go.....I'm curious to meet you lot! Also, you'll discover that I'm really quite a nice fellow.

Would a Class War tee shirt be acceptable attire?

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

Mark Hunter, funny handshake?

After all it is free

I'll be there - live nearby down the A3 - should be an interesting evening!

I won't be going 'cos it's miles away, however, if there are free drinks could someone get ten pints of lager and post them up to me. Hate to feel I wasn't doing my share.

Are we allowed to vote on anything over the net ?? I'll check tomorrow but Snowheads more interesting right now.

If not could somebody suggest it for next year.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

Electronic voting is attractive to politicians whose supporters are computer literate and computer active. Electronic voting is unattractive to politicians whose supporters are not comfortable with computers.

Provided that electronic voting is secure and operated by an independent body then it has an important role for the future, but it would have to supplement postal voting since the process mustn't discriminate against those who don't own computers.

At present Ski Club of GB annual votes are counted by Electoral Reform Ballot Services. ERBS do not, as I understand it from ERBS, distribute SCGB ballot papers (which are not numbered), and do not verify the ballot papers as they come in. The extent of ERBS's work is to count votes only.

snow reports

Nick Zotov, did your professional institution hand over its database to Electoral Reform Ballot Services? How was the issue and receipt of ballots managed?

I believe these raise issues under the Data Protection Act. ERBS would need access to membership data to verify any vote properly, and this is why I don't quite understand what their service amounts to in terms of verification and scrutiny.

You know it makes sense.

David Goldsmith, as I remember, we entered a secure site, and gave a password and identity number (not sure now if that was our membership number or a specific one for the job).
The bye-laws of the Institution specifically allow for ballot-papers to be in electronic form. The Institution is very well run. I have absolutely no doubt that the Data Protection Act is allowed for.
As for the Club, I would be happy if membership numbers were passed to the Elecoral Reform Services soley for voting scrutiny purposes. If need be, the Council or AGM could give its consent for that to happen once members had been told.

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

Having trawled through the SCGB thread I think electronic distribution would surely actively promote the involvement of far more members. Which I'm sure everyone would agree is a good thing ??

The SCGB could send an email to members, with a link to secure section of website showing details and with options to vote.

Currently unless your livid about something and/or live near by it's impractical to attend. Greater transparency should reveal the suspicion of a club within a club and the rules being stacked in favour of retaining the current status quo to be false.

A snowHead

I'll add a post on SCGB site later. Increase the noise.

A snowHead

Must admit I am mildly bemused at this sudden interest in the AGM. No binding new resolutions can be introduced in it. The real way to influence policy directly is to be on the council - nomination procedure was widely advertised - but only the number required to fill vacancies have appeared, I believe.
So those who wish to influence policy directly have had their chance. The AGM will be a good social occasion, I suppose. A chance to meet with movers and shakers - and one another.

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

Nick, I'm mildly surprised that you're mildly bemused. The annual general meeting is the opportunity for members to put questions to the Club's executive and officers, regarding the annual report and accounts (which are yet to be published) and a chance to discuss the Club's policies from the floor. Obviously these questions should be bona fide and (IMHO) geared towards the broad interests of the membership rather than personal interests.

The attendance last year was 49, out of a 27,000 membership, which could be improved. If the Club is to have a vibrant and ambitious future, then AGM attendance must be regarded as a barometer of interest and involvement. Otherwise one simply takes the view that a club should comprise a passive membership, like the customers of a mail order company or something.

Which of these positions do you take, Nick?

I imagine that a very small percentage of Ski Club members have ever seen the headquarters, which contain interesting ski exhibits, paintings and photos, plus the library. So it's a good opportunity to see the place.

And yes, it's a chance to have a chat and a drink. And maybe bump into somebody you thought had disappeared, or was dead.

You need to Login to know who's really who.

Is the meeting only open to members?

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

You'll need to Register first of course.

do u think they might let me go if I bring a couple of utility bills? Wink

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

After all it is free

won't be able to make it to far for me to travel so someone drink my share of free beer seems a shame that they give it away when the money could go towards promoting the club

Of course the real question regarding the AGM is the number of proxy votes given to the chair and how they re used. With 49/27000 {0.18%} atttending, and one assumes voting it wouldn't take that many proxies to influence the outcome of any resolution.

If as DG suggests
''At present Ski Club of GB annual votes are counted by Electoral Reform Ballot Services. ERBS do not, as I understand it from ERBS, distribute SCGB ballot papers (which are not numbered), and do not verify the ballot papers as they come in. The extent of ERBS's work is to count votes only''

then frankly an envelope full of proxies would allow the chair to get any resolution they wanted passed,. I might be a wee bit of a cynic here, but a few calls to 'supporters' would be all you'd need to do what you want - perhaps reminding the reps who their duty is to, that sort of thing.

Perhaps someone could answer the following;

1 On avarage how many proxies are given to the chair

2. How are the votes used by the chair ?

The apathy amongst the membership regarding AGM s might in part relate to an inability {percieved or real} to change anything. - that and the fact that anyone who lives any distance from the M25 {if one is charitable} is going to have to take a day off work to attend. Add that to the prospect that any vote against the 'status quo' is likely to be defeated by a bag full of proxies and, well the expression wasted day springs to mind.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

I intend to be there. Looking forward to puting bodies to a lot of names. I was also looking forward to a whole load of free booze, so will have to hope young Goldsmith is chatting to old friends and not noticing me intent on recouping my membership fee in beer. I have sent in a number of questions that I hope will be answered. I have no idea where this new club building is (I did once visit the Victoria building, and think the move to Wimbledon quite stupid - much better to have moved near where I live than to some backwater at the end of the district line).
Will you be there arnold lunn?

snow reports

Here's how to find the Club
If you are going by underground, wander up the hill from the station, turn right onto Church Road, The White House is obvious

a. Because it's white.
b. Because it has a thumping great logo on the side facing you as you walk down.

I wont be there for the same reasons as previously stated on SCGB website last year. There is life north of London - we do exist. The majority of large organisations swap venues for their conferences / AGMs. Harrogate is a lovely place and the Institutue of Personnel Management are having their conference there at the end of October. SCGB dont seem to know we are hear ! I spelt it like that by the way because we have a voice ! Puzzled

You know it makes sense.

Paul Mason, you got a Ball. What more do you want? Good grief! You're not even really part of England.

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

I'd rather be part of Scotland - the nice people north of the border are much more fun than the soft southern shandy drinkers ! Lager top !!!!! Very Happy

A snowHead

Just out of interest (assuming most people discussing this on this thread are Ski Club members?) - why is this topic of interest to people who aren't?

PS to Arnold. I don't know what you think a "bag full of proxies" means, but a proxy vote is a vote like any other and it is scrutinised as such.

PPS To all the members here, please do vote whether by proxy or in person! javascript:emoticon(' Very Happy

')

A snowHead

poshtoff,
Welcome to snowHeads Very Happy

I love your name! Are you one?

maggi (non-member riff-raff)

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

poshtoff, welcome.

It concerns me because of my interest in the racing scene, bearing in mind the continued role of the Ski Club in the sport's governing body.

There is currently a "Modernisation Working Group" examining the problems of a federation that has suffered considerable difficulty in getting up to speed. However, the MWG is made up from representatives of the very bodies that bear a considerable degree of responsibility for the current difficulties - lack of communication, funding, you name it.

The MWG appears to be comprised of one of each of the old Member Groups as per the constitution (Ski Club, Armed Services, BARSC, Home Nations and BASI if I remember right), and chaired by Fiona McNealy, recently retired from SSGB.

I may not be a member of the organisation in question, but I can still be affected by its actions.

You need to Login to know who's really who.

poshtoff (any relation to poshspice?) I guess the SCGB is of continuing fascination to UK skiers generally because 97% aren't members of it though they know of its longevity and involvement in the sport. A fairly high percentage of British skiers probably read the Club's famous snow reports but haven't converted to membership.
An even higher percentage aren't members of other clubs such as The House of Commons or House of Lords but are reasonably intrigued by them, too.

People are interested in all sorts of 'people organisations' perhaps because they dream of another life, be it a fantasy, nightmare or curiosity. Most skiers want more out of skiing, and are pleased to be aware of organisations and clubs that can help them get more out of skiing. Maybe they want to dip in, test the water, and see if they want to join. The business of an AGM, be it the the SCGB or M&S, reflects the character and aspirations of the organisation involved, so it's a worthwhile subject for all.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

You'll need to Register first of course.

poshtoff, problems with many proxies can come in two forms; proxies can be given to the chairman to vote on their behalf - that is to say, a specific vote is not nominated and the decision is left to the chairman; alternatively the proxy can specify the vote but is not at the meeting to hear the discusion so this is prejudging maybe with a lack of information.

Personally I abhor proxy voting.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

john wells, it would be interesting to explore this further. The issue of 'Chairman's proxies' tends to be murmured about, but most people are in the dark as to the issue's significance.

Presumably you object to the concept because it grants powers to the Chairman that you feel are inappropriate. Let me play devil's advocate: are there any benefits to an organisation from proxy voting?

Can you illustrate your point with respected national organisations, such as specific clubs, that do not accept proxy votes? [Obviously we know that they are not part of our parliamentary electoral processes. A citizen on the electoral register must vote in person.]

After all it is free

I agree with John - the difficulty here is that proxy votes, especially in the context of a meeting with perhaps 50 from 27 000 voters actually being present, have a tendancy to favour whatever it is that the chairman wants.

Generally that can be to keep the status quo, but equally proxies can be used to conduct a coup. I do not know how many proxies are cast at AGMs but it seems to me that it is important that this issue is discussed. Let's assume, on the one hand that there are no {chairman's} proxies and that the {say} 50 votes cast are it..... Then with a bit of careful telephoning amongst 60 or so of your best ski friends you could easily arrive with enough votes to grind the club to a halt. There is a separate discussion to be had about the timing of and tabling of resolutions etc, but as a general principle a small number of proxies in this context could, with almost no member support precipiate a significant change in the direction of the club.

Take the other position - 50 votes cast in person and 60 {0r indeed 600, it doesn't matter} proxies in the chairman's hand. You could have 50 people who bother to attend voting one way and suffering a resounding defeat because of proxies {frequently given with little understanding of how they're used}.

Proxies are often less significant but in an election with such a ludicrously low turnout they could be used in what might be argued to be an undemocratic way {before we have 10 posts questioning my useage of democratic, I mean in the sense of the votes not reflecting the views of those who have taken an active, as opposed to essentially passive decision as to their vote}.

It seems to me that in O.M.O.V. {as opposed to block vote elections} proxies are a bit of an irritant which should be avoided. In an election where in percentage terms alomost none of the electorate votes they could be used in a VERY unconstructive way, frankly, and in my view the club should avoid accepting any until/unless a larger % of the membership votes.

PG - frankly the MWG sounds like a recipie for disaster ..... Home nations and possibly barsc are the bodies with a role to play in the process. Unless of course there is a much bigger change than any of these bodies would countenance: a sort of DSV model with an all encompassing organisation - individaul members, professional instructor members, coaching members, a performance/events division all under one umberella. However my feeling is that to some extent the increasing federalisation of the UK makes this increasingly improbable, or if you prefer there is a tension between centripetal tendancy from some bodies to become more British {note; should be UK for the constitutional illiterates who selected the GB nomenclature} and the centrifugal arising from a devolved political settlement. In effect there's pressure to become both more UK and similtaneously more English, Scottish etc.

A further thought, and, rarely for me a mild correction to David G. In fact proxy voting is a part of the GB electoral system. A very brief summary is at;

http://news.bbc.co.uk/vote2001/hi/english/voting_system/newsid_1196000/1196730.stm

It is possible for someone to nominate a proxy to vote on their behal. Of course the principle above still applied. Even though voter turnout continues to flag the ratio of proxies to other voters is such that it would be difficult to 'steal' an election through their use.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

Very interesting, arnold. Despite your advancing years you've lost none of that precision. It must be all those winters you spent in Switzerland.

Help!!

The Annual General Meeting is on 30 November...

snowHeads Forum Index >>> Ski Club of Great Britain