 Poster: A snowHead
|
On 29 April the SCGB Council will discuss the role of secrecy in the Club's accounts and minutes. This is very much a members' issue, and is probably best discussed internally, which is why I've opened a thread on the SCGB members' forum about it.
If you have views, and you're a member, it would be very interesting to see them.
If you're a non-member and have encountered this issue in other organisations, it would be very interesting to know how they dealt with it, especially if it demonstrably strengthened those organisations.
Last edited by Poster: A snowHead on Thu 22-04-04 14:29; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
I'm not a ski club member, and as long as things like this need to be discussed, probably never will be.
Secrecy has never been an issue in anoy of the bodies with which I've been involved. Sure, management by committee can get messy when the "management" is the entire membership, so that's why you have the concept of management committees who discuss the issues and take decisions on behalf of the membership - however the decisions reached and the reasoning behind those decisision must be transparent in order to re-inforce the support for the incumbents, otherwise no-one outside the management has a real idea of what's going on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
Very succinctly put, nbt. Which bodies have you been involved with? Are they accessible via the web?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
DG - how did you find out that secrecy was on the agenda?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Mostly volleyball bodies David - local volleyball clubs and the like, although I was webmaster for the London Volleyball Association for a while and help out from time to time with the English Volleyball Association. I'm also involved with the currently fledgling imba-uk, the uk branch of the International Mountain Bike Association. There, the problem is also secrecy, although more in the sense that the membership think that things are going on without them when in fact the truth is that the management are too busy either trying to earn a living, or working on fine detail stuff that they are too busy to tell people what's going on - although this has been recognised as a problem and willl hopefully be addressed soon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Quote: |
| however the decisions reached and the reasoning behind those decisision must be transparent in order to re-inforce the support for the incumbents |
Agree to an extent, but the bodies I've been involved with (charities, one national, as well as sports club committees) could only go as far as what I would describe as 'need-to-know transparency'(!). Charitable institutions are under a statutory obligation to reveal a minimum of details about their accounts, however the decision-making process can only be transparent within certain pragmatic constraints. They just wouldn't be able to function effectively if every tiny decision was subject to public scrutiny.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Members can propose new councillors and vote them in at the AGM if they don't like the way things are run.
Mind you, if council members feel they will be continually sniped at publicly, they may not wish to volunteer in future 
As a member, I have been pleased, overall, with the way the club is run - so I hope people - fellow club members, after all - will continue to offer themselves for election.
Action, if appropriate, should, I think, be directed towards AGM actvity.
The way the club is run has been argued ad nauseam on this and the SCGB sites. There seems little point in continuing here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm quite new to this so I'm hardly an expert on scgb affairs but there's been a lot to read about it over the last few weeks and I find myself wondering if the conclusions I'm drawing are close to the truth.
I have read that:
-The club council meets in private
-What they discuss and the decisions they come to are absolutely secret except, at their own discretion, what they choose to tell the members.
-They do not inform members what subjects will be discussed or voted on in advance of the agm even when it is a matter as weighty as a change in the club's constitution. (They do still tell members where and when the agm is though don't they?)
-If you disagree with the decisions of the council your only recourse is to nominate new councillors that need to be voted in at the agm.
-A great many members, as a matter of course, lodge their vote with the chairman. (I get the impression many more than attend the agm).
The conclusion I draw from this is that the only person with any power at all is the chairman who in fact has absolute power in running something more akin to a secret society than a snowsports club.
I'm sorry if this is seen as critical of the scgb and I'm really not out to get them but it really is the impression I've got over the last few weeks.
1) the council made the mo decision in private
2) they implemented it without notice
3) the affected members expressed their horror
4) the council gave sporadic and conflicting explanations for the action
5) the council returned to behind their veil of silence
so...
6) if anyone wants to take the issue further they must elect (or be elected as) new councillors at the agm
7) the chairman has most of the votes so if the chairman wants someone else, they will get in instead.
Please tell me I've got this wrong somewhere because I haven't been a member long (I joined back just before mo day) and I'm thinking i might have made a mistake. I'm not sure if I want to belong to something quite so 'freemasons on ice'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| el Hen wrote: |
| I'm not sure if I want to belong to something quite so 'freemasons on ice'. |
As one of those who played a small part in setting up snowHeads I trust that I will not be seen as an apologist for the SC(GB), but if I may play Devil's advocate - did any of those points about the way the Club appears to be run matter to you before you joined? why did you join? if the Club is still providing the benefits/services for which you joined do any of those points matter now? if so, what has changed your view? (I'm assuming that you did not join simply for the benefit of gaining access to the (then) members' only forum).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When we look back on these things, it's tempting to be super-rational (benefits vs costs etc) but, as far as I can recall, I joined the SCGB because it seemed like a good thing. And the general snottiness around MO made it seem like less of a good thing. Still interested in possible reforms though - i.e. greater transparency. Sense something of a backlash however - DG not in good odour, with accusations flying that he's out to destroy the Club and sarcasm abounding ("much as it hurts me to agree with you, David" etc.).
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Well let us define "benefits/services" in as broad a way as possible - from discounts in shops, through Club Holidays and Insurance etc to simply joining "because it's The Ski Club Of Great Britain", which, I have a strange feeling, is probably why most of the existing 27000 or whatever members are members 
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| Quote: |
did any of those points about the way the Club appears to be run matter to you before you joined?
|
well yes, in theory though not in practice as I wasn't really aware of these points in relation to scgb then. One doesn't think to ask, "By the way, is this club really governed by a hyper-secretive politburo style committee with one foot in the fifties?" 
| Quote: |
if the Club is still providing the benefits/services for which you joined do any of those points matter now?
|
well no they're not but the irony is, I've come to think they really never were. I spent increasing amounts of time around the forum as this season got going and it was all so vibrant and friendly and positive - everything I feel in the mountains. I took this to be the feeling of the club and thought it was something worth being part of. I admit, I was curious about the members only parts of the web site and the chance of skiing with the reps to help discover the ways of a new resort was probably the most appealing member benefit but in the end, I just got a bit excited about it all and sent off the coupon in the ski and sowboard guide.
Even before my members pack had turned up, it all went wrong and the impression I have now is that what was happening on the scgb forum occurred not so much by the will of the scgb as in spite of it.
I've not used the reps service this year either. I was all keyed up to in March but then I met another scgb member who told me she'd been told by the rep a couple of days before that if she wasn't experienced off-piste, she needn't bother that week. I was a little disappointed but I can't say that, by that point, I was very surprised.
Most of the pack I got in the post seems to be about off-piste this and powder that and I may not be super-cool for saying this but I don't really like all that stuff. I find a few inches rather tiring so the prospect of 'fields of powder' is more than a little intimidating really.
I do rather get the impression I might have joined the wrong club.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
...I met another scgb member who told me she'd been told by the rep a couple of days before that if she wasn't experienced off-piste, she needn't bother that week.
|
That is very wrong. That's exactly the sort of thing that brings the Repping service and the Club into disrepute. If you are still in contact with this Ski Club member, suggest to her that she put a complaint in, or complain yourself. There should be days during the week to suit all standards except beginners. The Repping service is a valuable (and costly) part of the Club that you pay for. You shouldn't be excluded.
Would any Reps like to comment on this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Quote: |
if she wasn't experienced off-piste, she needn't bother that week
|
Pity that you didn't speak to the rep yourself, there might have been a misunderstanding by the other member.
As Peter said, if it was so, the rep was quite out of order. Worth following up to the Rep's officer - preferably by the member who talked to the rep.
Generally, the reps help everyone past beginner stage to have an enjoyable time. The club is certainly not just for off-pisters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
Standards of reps qualifications are raised elsewhere in this forum so, no point in wearing my fingers out on that one here.
Secrecy......
In most publically funded bodies {governing bodies of sport} save for areas which are commercially confidential all minutes of meetings etc have to be available to all. An extreme skiing example is the English Ski Council {snowsport England now} which used to {I don't know if it still does} open board meetings to members to observe. Note; I don't know how well this went, and understand that the board had informally decided that if a metaphorical coach party arrived they would not all be welcomed in for reasons of practicality.
There is an important philosophical point - collective organisations are owned by the members. The members have the ABSOLUTE RIGHT to know what their elected representatives are doing on their behalf, with thier organisation and with their money. They can then make their own minds up as to the effectiveness of their board/council whatever and vote accordingly.
A culture of secrecy prevents members making informed decisions as to the effecitveness of their elected representatives.
It seems to me that the current position with the club is that information is regarded as a privilige, not a right. Sorry chaps, wrong ! Open the books, put the minutes on the web. If someone asks they have a right to know. 'Dissent' in organisations often comes not from anything sinister happening in the corridors of power but rather because of a suspicion. This is fuelled by any reluctance to answer questions.
The presumption in any collective organisation should always be that information is available to the membership unless;
it is commercially confidential,
it relates to staffing issues {in the sense of perhaps disciplinary issues for employees}
other issues which for legal reasons one would not/should not have in the public domain {an extreme example might be unsubstainiated accusations against a member}.
I actually find it breathtaking that this needs to be discussed - or that anyone might think that a presumption of non release of information might be aceptable.
| Quote: |
Members can propose new councillors and vote them in at the AGM if they don't like the way things are run.
|
They can - but without full disclosure of information how can the members actually know what they re voting for ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Quote: |
When the Club started, over 100 years ago, its purpose was the same as today:
to share ski information
to encourage people to ski
to have a great time skiing together in the mountains |
taken from the SCGB Home Page, Main Aims.
Secrecy seems to be somewhat in contradiction of item 1 - sharing information.
And the open forum must have contributed greatly to that also and look what happended to that. I thought 99% of el Hen's points above reflected my feelings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Elizabeth B,
Um. Can't see any minutes of the governors, or the Director General's meetings.
Can't see any minutes of an AGM for licence holders, either - but then the BBC gets round that by not having one - even though the technology for a virtual meeting with interactive voting exists.
Didn't think we covering geneal overview reports - but since you have raised that, I think that, bearing in mind the resources of the club relative to the BBC, the annual report is a reasonable effort. I don't think most members would want more staff time put into it, for cost reasons. It is, of course, posted to members pre the AGM - and I see it is on the web site, too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Nick, please don't make comparisons with the BBC.
The BBC is funded by a specific taxation and the people paying that tax have absolutely no say in how the BBC is run.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The BBC does have a certain quality standard in its news reporting, but no more so than Sky news. People choose whether they wish to buy Sky services. There is no choice with the BBC (other than not being able to receive a TV signal). Effectively it is paid for by an enforced tax on almost everyone, including people who do not wish to pay for its daily spewing out of pro-terrorist, anti-British/American ideology. Fortunately with the advent of modern (digital) technology it is likely that it will lose its tax revenues, and may even cease to exist, within twenty years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You are right Terry, the BBC is soooo pro-terrorist I even heard them allowing Bush to be broadcast without his words being spoken by an actor! This should truly be stopped. Down with the BBC!! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
Terry Wells,
| Quote: |
| its daily spewing out of pro-terrorist, anti-British/American ideology |
I bet you're a big fan of the French 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is getting away from the point.
The Ski Club of Great Britain is supposed to be a Club. Not a secret society, nor a dictatorship, which is what something becomes when the undemocratically elected leaders enforce their views on the members, and try to enforce their views on others - e.g. businesses.
My only comment about the BBC is that if being anti-American means we don't have to sit through the obscene drivel CBS broadcast last night, deeming it newsworthy, then I'm right there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
WTFH is correct - the BBC is not a collective organisation like the Club - any comparison is completely fallacious. Ultimately organisations are responsible to their owners - in this case the membership. If any organisation refuses to trust the membership with {non sensitive} information then you have to ask why, what do they have to hide.
The answer may be nothing, they just keep things quiet because they've always done that, it may be that there's a 'nanny knows best' mentality. It may be becasue there are one or two areas where the answers might cause a red face or two. Who knows...... but if it's hard to get answers it makes you wonder.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
There's always another factor it doesn't do to overlook in the functioning of any organisation. Simple inefficiency.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| DavidS wrote: |
| DG - how did you find out that secrecy was on the agenda? |
I know the above sounds a little flippant - but I am a little curious as to why this issue is being discussed now, whether glasnost is in prospect etc etc
My impression is that the SCGB is making efforts to be a little more open - the mem and arts, minutes from the last AGM etc only appeared on the web relatively recently. Let's have more, say I.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Quote: |
the BBC is not a collective organisation like the Club - any comparison is completely fallacious. Ultimately organisations are responsible to their owners...
|
Ah! So it's not our BBC 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
Nick Zotov, please stop deflecting the argument. Of course it's not our BBC. It's uncle Tony's.
In the same way that the SCGB does not represent British snowsports enthusiasts, nor does it care about them to the point of wanting to openly share ski information or to encourage people to ski.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Nick Zotov wrote: |
| Not seen to much internal stuff obvious on it's web site. |
The BBC is covered by the freedom of information act - which, from 2005, will provide any individual with the right to access much of the information it generates.
Nick's protestations notwithstanding, it has a whole section of its website covering this issue: http://www.bbc.co.uk/foi/
Exceptions are made for "information the disclosure of which would be an actionable breach of confidence, information likely to endanger the health and safety of an individual, or information that breaches an individual's right to privacy under the Data Protection Act."
As a broadcaster, the BBC benefits from a further exception - it does not have to disclose information related to the content of its programmes (the script for next week's Eastenders, for example).
I would have no problem if the SCGB used this approach as a model...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Hmm. I've looked at at www.bbc.co.uk/foi/act.shtml, David.
| Quote: |
This means the Act does not apply to material held for the purposes of creating the BBC's output (TV, radio, online etc), or material which supports and is closely associated with these creative activities.
|
As the BBC is supposed to be about just that, I shan't be holding my breath concerning anything meaningful being available in the way of meeting minutes, then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
I think it's fairly clear that this exclusion is intended to cover information closely related to programme-making - i.e. the script for Eastenders as I suggested above. Not "information about the BBC's constitution, how the Corporation is managed and run, and other administrative information."
The wider point, which you ignore, is that the BBC has a coherent and well-expressed policy on making information freely available.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
The minutes of the board of Governors are visible in the same website section as far as I can see.... example
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
These points aside - we're with you all the way Nick.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
PG, nice one 
Must admit I really only have time for a short when I jot down this stuff - thanks for your diligent research.
The records are just summaries, and are open to interpretation - "postive progress of Freeview" I saw in one set of minutes could mean anything.
That said, there is more there than I had realised. Perhaps it is our BBC!
Anything there on detailed spending?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There's 40 pages from the accounts. In addition - and from Jan 1 - one can request any information and it's up to the Beeb to provide it or come up with a good reason why the information is exempt under the act.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A fair amount....
Entering "spending" in the Beeb's own search facility I got this ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
Ta,
I shall read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest - when I get a roundtuit (got a shortage of those, Here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| PG wrote: |
| I bet you're a big fan of the French |
The French should have Savoy confiscated from them and it should be reunited with Italy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
