CI AGM 1 November 2014

Harrybelafonte · 14-10-2014 7:35pm

If things look bad for road racing funding-wise, how about MTB, BMX or track? When people here speak of racers, are these categories included?

wav1 · 14-10-2014 7:37pm

morana wrote: »

Surely they have been involved in the fingal issue as the treasurer is from the swords club. I know they have met with the park people hence the alternative circuit a few years back.

From my perspective I would like to see them look at things completely away from racing and HP. I think too much money goes on HP. What was it 40% of budget on 40 people iirc...

All aspects of the sport should be catered for and aided,but next to impossible to achieve at present.Others know more than me,but my info is that the Fingal type of problem is far from reaching a resolution.

One thing that strikes me here is that will the suggestions,discussion etc on here,is that come the AGM 90% of the talks will be road related.90% of the delegates will be road related and almost all the board are from a road background

Beasty · 14-10-2014 7:48pm

One of the points is that CI did put resource into the track, and more is likely to be required if the velodrome proposal proceeds. Money was certainly well invested in Corkagh Park. BMX is possibly not getting any direct subsidy but I know CI are trying to help move a few projects on around the country

Bottom line is though that racing in Ireland across all disciplines relies heavily on subsidy, be that the time and efforts of volunteers, one or two generous sponsors and even a few supporters who will help with some direct funding support. I actually think Ireland is remarkably lucky in the variety and standard of cycling opportunities available give the severely limited resources available

Beasty · 14-10-2014 7:54pm

wav1 wrote: »

my info is that the Fingal type of problem is far from reaching a resolution.

The resolution is reached even if it may not be particularly palatable - racing is only permitted on fully closed roads or with the Gardai directly supporting the event in the way they support the Ras (which is going to be impractical at club league level and probably with Open races also). This will not change unless there is a change of approach within the Gardai, and there has been no sign of any such change. TTs done entirely within the RoTR (which means observing yield and stop signs for example) have though resumed

Harrybelafonte · 14-10-2014 7:58pm

Still think it's ridiculous that MTB is not better funded considering the boon other countries have shown it can be for tourism etc if supported properly.

Lusk_Doyle · 14-10-2014 8:19pm

morana wrote: »

Surely they have been involved in the fingal issue as the treasurer is from the swords club. I know they have met with the park people hence the alternative circuit a few years back.

From my perspective I would like to see them look at things completely away from racing and HP. I think too much money goes on HP. What was it 40% of budget on 40 people iirc...

How long now since club and open races happened in Fingal? Three years? Not much help there from ci. Swords reduced to racing in Meath. Pathetic in my opinion and that is not a slur against the club committee in any way.

Beasty · 14-10-2014 9:08pm

Lusk_Doyle wrote: »

How long now since club and open races happened in Fingal? Three years?

Just to clarify Open races took place in Fingal this year on open roads. I do not expect the same to happen next year though and I do not believe CI have any say on the matter

GMCI · 14-10-2014 9:09pm

While 17% of clubs only promote in Leinster, am I right in saying that on the Road calendar, you could count the number of weekends with no events, on one hand and have fingers left over?
I know Ulster complain that they have too many events and struggle to resolve calendar clashes.
Munster and Connacht are the provinces with the majority of free weekends with no racing.

In terms of the Nationals, I will agree that CI involvement is minimal from an organisation point of view and only supply a pathetic grant of a couple hundred Euro. This year was a little different as a result of the Saturday accident in that CI did pick up a lot of the expenses for the Commissaires who travelled and worked on the event on both occasions. Yes the cost is stated of being in the region of 20k - for the June weekend only, but do the maths and workout the intake in entry fees across the board plus any sponsorship received also. If there wasn't the re-run, the losses would not have been that great, if any at all with such a professional promotion by Lakeside Wheelers.

When people say about the lack of CI representation in resolving racing matters in certain areas such as when it came to the crunch meeting for the Phoenix Park, only the volunteer organiser was present with the CI representative a no-show after committing to the meeting. Meetings in relation to Fingal apparently have been represented at times by Paid members of staff with no Cycling Background or full appreciation for what would be at stake at these meetings.

But when people say CI should do more for the domestic calendar, could you specify exactly what they could do? Rule out finances beyond what is already made available. What else could CI do to assist race organisers in the promotion of their event? I know that even if CI got their act together and provided worthwhile support for Organisers, a lot of organisers simply wouldn't trust them and opt to go it alone anyway.

It will be interesting to see how the HP budget fairs out at the AGM. In the last 2 AGMs the HP budget has been overspent. For 2012, the Olympics was the excuse. Last year it overspent by just over 30k, no excuse was given. More interesting is the CEO is also the HP director, so who answers to who when justifying running over budget?

Beasty · 14-10-2014 9:13pm

GMCI wrote: »

More interesting is the CEO is also the HP director, so who answers to who when justifying running over budget?

The CEO must answer to the Board for any overspending. They are ultimately responsible for the allocation of funds

wav1 · 14-10-2014 9:29pm

TBH I think there are some unhappy campers on the board at present,who feel they are beating their head off a wall.Its a thankless job anyway,and I think going forward in yrs to come,places on the board will be harder to fill.

wav1 · 14-10-2014 9:31pm

Beasty wrote: »

Just to clarify Open races took place in Fingal this year on open roads. I do not expect the same to happen next year though and I do not believe CI have any say on the matter

Some have been applied for,in the hope I suppose that there will be further advancements.I really hope there are.

ragazzo · 14-10-2014 9:33pm

GMCI wrote: »

While 17% of clubs only promote in Leinster, am I right in saying that on the Road calendar, you could count the number of weekends with no events, on one hand and have fingers left over?
I know Ulster complain that they have too many events and struggle to resolve calendar clashes.
Munster and Connacht are the provinces with the majority of free weekends with no racing.

In terms of the Nationals, I will agree that CI involvement is minimal from an organisation point of view and only supply a pathetic grant of a couple hundred Euro. This year was a little different as a result of the Saturday accident in that CI did pick up a lot of the expenses for the Commissaires who travelled and worked on the event on both occasions. Yes the cost is stated of being in the region of 20k - for the June weekend only, but do the maths and workout the intake in entry fees across the board plus any sponsorship received also. If there wasn't the re-run, the losses would not have been that great, if any at all with such a professional promotion by Lakeside Wheelers.

When people say about the lack of CI representation in resolving racing matters in certain areas such as when it came to the crunch meeting for the Phoenix Park, only the volunteer organiser was present with the CI representative a no-show after committing to the meeting. Meetings in relation to Fingal apparently have been represented at times by Paid members of staff with no Cycling for what would be at stake at these meetings.

But when people say CI should do more for the domestic calendar, could you specify exactly what they could do? Rule out finances beyond what is already made available. What else could CI do to assist race organisers in the promotion of their event? I know that even if CI got their act together and provided worthwhile support for Organisers, a lot of organisers simply wouldn't trust them and opt to go it alone anyway.

It will be interesting to see how the HP budget fairs out at the AGM. In the last 2 AGMs the HP budget has been overspent. For 2012, the Olympics was the excuse. Last year it overspent by just over 30k, no excuse was given. More interesting is the CEO is also the HP director, so who answers to who when justifying running over budget?

It is the bolded section that I wonder about.
Why would the National Governing Body for cycling act in this manner. Do the Board and CEO believe that burying their heads in the sand and ignoring the issues will solve the various problems that face road racing.
Do they represent the discipline of road racing at all? Although road racing is the largest discipline there is no need for a road racing commission?

Beasty · 14-10-2014 9:49pm

Having been involved in one of those meetings with Fingal when CI sent their CEO and a Board member was in attendance, I can assure you it would not have made any difference if the full Board, Stephen Roche, Sean Kelly and Paul Kimmage had turned up

GMCI · 14-10-2014 9:51pm

ragazzo wrote: »

It is the bolded section that I wonder about.
Why would the National Governing Body for cycling act in this manner. Do the Board and CEO believe that burying their heads in the sand and ignoring the issues will solve the various problems that face road racing.
Do they represent the discipline of road racing at all? Although road racing is the largest discipline there is no need for a road racing commission?

As Beasty says it really does seem like CI are going off on a tangent versus the wishes of the membership through the Board. Just seems like bad management, but also a tricky situation when CI have to answer to and satisfy the Irish Sports Council and they tend to only want to listen to Paid contracted staff rather than a Board of volunteers.

The Board generally represent the issue of Road Racing. The paid staff represent the Company element. So other disciplines suffer without representation on the Board. The Road Commission failed because whenever it made recommendations to the Board, they were either shot down or the Board did their own thing. The Commission are meant to be the experts in relation to a discipline. But the Board are in the majority, road orientated and so are effectively the Road Commission.

Im sure there are plenty of Leisure & Commuter members of Cycling Ireland on Boards. What would they like to see from Cycling Ireland that justifies their €25 euro membership fee?

rab!dmonkey · 14-10-2014 11:01pm

Having read the AGM final notice (and CI's technical regulations), I must say that I am SHOCKED and APPALLED at their flagrant abuse of SI prefixes and unit symbols. No spaces between the quantity and the unit symbol, capital 'K' used to indicate 'kilo', unit symbols being pluralised: they run the gamut of transgressions. It's almost as though they've never read the SI Brochure! If I were Secretary, I would reject any non-SI-compliant motions. Alas, I have other callings…

Leaving aside those most egregious errors for a moment, there's the issue of CI seemingly elevating the business of road racing to the level of the AGM - a dedicated commission for the discipline being beneath them, apparently.

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

Still think it's ridiculous that MTB is not better funded considering the boon other countries have shown it can be for tourism etc if supported properly.

To be fair to CI, it's not generally NGBs who fund MTB infrastructure. It usually comes from government at some level (local/regional/national). The whole public liability issue is a major stumbling block which is largely outside of CI's hands. That said, on all of the evidence I've heard from my well-informed sources, CI's top brass has shown no interest in fighting the corner of MTB when it comes to interaction with the state/semi-state bodies.

QueensGael · 14-10-2014 11:16pm

Related to earlier posts about how many volunteers and sponsors it takes to run a major cycling event - this is hot off the press from the good folks at Rás na mBan. Even as one who is close to (but not involved in) the Rás, I'm amazed at just how many people and organisations are behind it - chapeau a tout!
http://ht.ly/CKyj5

morana · 15-10-2014 9:50am

GMCI wrote: »

It will be interesting to see how the HP budget fairs out at the AGM. In the last 2 AGMs the HP budget has been overspent. For 2012, the Olympics was the excuse. Last year it overspent by just over 30k, no excuse was given. More interesting is the CEO is also the HP director, so who answers to who when justifying running over budget?

well its simple really the HP/CEO answers to the board. They have responsibility to ensure that this overspend doesnt happen.

fortis · 15-10-2014 12:16pm

wav1 wrote: »

All aspects of the sport should be catered for and aided,but next to impossible to achieve at present.Others know more than me,but my info is that the Fingal type of problem is far from reaching a resolution.

One thing that strikes me here is that will the suggestions,discussion etc on here,is that come the AGM 90% of the talks will be road related.90% of the delegates will be road related and almost all the board are from a road background

Because I think the essence of the sport is racing. And CI is principally a sports organisation.

The leisure end is kind of self sustaining in that people do a few events a year in the summer and these are generally run for profit (like the Sean Kelly series).

People using bikes in general for communting etc (which more an more do thanks largely to the btw scheme and the rental bike sceheme in Dublin) is a kind of separate issue akin to infrastructure, health promotion, carbon reduction etc etc in general and it is debatable if CI should be the ones tasked with this as it's more general day to day government/council/governance/policy issues.

I think if you did a straw poll of the general population and asked them what they thought "Cycling Ireland" was for they would probably say bike racing. Same as if you asked same question of "Athletics Ireland" the response would probably be promotion of athletics.

And the focus of the AGM backs this up (it's all racing based as those are the people who care/are interested).

So if that's where the interest is, that's where the money should go (would agree with Morana that there is perhaps too much focus on the high performance aspect tho) .

Maybe the focus of the organisation is far too broad as it is and the cycling promotion/health aspect parts should be spun off for the government to take care of as they should be doing anyway? Who knows!

Beasty · 15-10-2014 1:16pm

fortis wrote: »

I think if you did a straw poll of the general population and asked them what they thought "Cycling Ireland" was for they would probably say bike racing. Same as if you asked same question of "Athletics Ireland" the response would probably be promotion of athletics.

A "poll" was taken of the CI membership earlier this year. Around 10% of the membership participated and the overriding conclusion was that more focus should be away from racing, and that CI should for example become more involved in lobbying for cyclists interests

fortis wrote: »

Maybe the focus of the organisation is far too broad as it is and the cycling promotion/health aspect parts should be spun off for the government to take care of as they should be doing anyway? Who knows!

A change in focus would probably require a vote amongst the members. Not only that but CI is dependent on the Sports Council and a similar body in NI for some of its funding. They would certainly have a say on such a matter, and I cannot see either government being prepared to accept responsibility in such an area (and to be clear British Cycling has a similar remit for GB, making it difficult to imagine the UK government would support a significantly different approach in NI which probably already benefits from more of a "racing" focus than it's GB equivalent)

wav1 · 15-10-2014 1:42pm

Beasty wrote: »

A "poll" was taken of the CI membership earlier this year. Around 10% of the membership participated and the overriding conclusion was that more focus should be away from racing, and that CI should for example become more involved in lobbying for cyclists interests

A change in focus would probably require a vote amongst the members. Not only that but CI is dependent on the Sports Council and a similar body in NI for some of its funding. They would certainly have a say on such a matter, and I cannot see either government being prepared to accept responsibility in such an area (and to be clear British Cycling has a similar remit for GB, making it difficult to imagine the UK government would support a significantly different approach in NI which probably already benefits from more of a "racing" focus than it's GB equivalent)

What is the remit of cycling GB?Do they put much emphasis on the lobbying of Gvt etc on behalf of the greater cycling fraternity or is their focus more racing minded generally.Just curious for comparissions

Beasty · 15-10-2014 1:54pm

wav1 wrote: »

What is the remit of cycling GB?Do they put much emphasis on the lobbying of Gvt etc on behalf of the greater cycling fraternity or is their focus more racing minded generally.Just curious for comparissions

From their "about us" section

British Cycling is the national governing body for cycling as recognised by the UCI – the international federation for the sport.
As such, British Cycling works across all levels and six disciplines of the sport (BMX, mountain bike, cyclo-cross, road, track and cycle speedway), from providing the support and encouragement people need to get riding their bikes for the first time, to being home to the hugely successful Great Britain Cycling Team.
There have never been more opportunities to ride a bike, be it for fun or sport and British Cycling is at the heart of this growth. British Cycling also works hard to represent cyclists’ interests at all levels, including campaigning on important issues including road safety

The first para clearly focuses on the competitive part but the remit is widened by the second para and includes "campaigning on important issues"....

wav1 · 15-10-2014 2:01pm

Beasty wrote: »

From their "about us" section

The first para clearly focuses on the competitive part but the remit is widened by the second para and includes "campaigning on important issues"....

At the end of the day,we can all have our say about where we think we should be going,and theres really no right or wrong,just different opinions about riding bikes.
Impossible IMO to keep everyone happy,mainly I feel due to a huge hole in the resources we have available,including the root of all evils...Money..Suppose we all just have to get on and do the best we can.

Beasty · 15-10-2014 2:01pm

I would add that their financing is massively supplemented by lottery funding - it comes out at around £30m or so over each Olympic cycle. Any tail off in performance though would jeopardise some of that funding, which is why there is a very heavy focus at the elite level. However I also think their focus has widened on the back of some of the funding they get and they have been encouraged by the government to expand more into and support the non competitive side of it in recent years

Having said that that now have 100,000 members - ie 4-5 times as many as we have across the island of Ireland which clearly has a much smaller population proportionately

CramCycle · 15-10-2014 4:14pm

Beasty wrote: »

A "poll" was taken of the CI membership earlier this year. Around 10% of the membership participated and the overriding conclusion was that more focus should be away from racing, and that CI should for example become more involved in lobbying for cyclists interests

Is this not an indication that alot of the membership don't fully understand what cycling Ireland is. It is by its very definition the representative organisation for the SPORT of cycling, not cycling in general. I think the youth programmes like sprocket rocket are great and these types of things are great for both giving back to the community and promoting the sport at a young age but my understanding is that CI is not a lobby group for the greater cycling community nor is it in it's remit.

I think their should be a cycling lobby group similar to DCC or GCC, on a nationwide level but I don't think that is CIs place.

My only issue with CI at the minute is similar to what is being voiced before, that alot of sports are either sidelined or ignored at the AGM. Some people will say it is that these sports don't communicate with the central body well but after talking to some of them, other than insurance, they don't see any benefit to CI, certainly they have asked for help in the past and generally been rebuffed.

fortis · 15-10-2014 4:41pm

CramCycle wrote: »

Is this not an indication that alot of the membership don't fully understand what cycling Ireland is. It is by its very definition the representative organisation for the SPORT of cycling, not cycling in general. I think the youth programmes like sprocket rocket are great and these types of things are great for both giving back to the community and promoting the sport at a young age but my understanding is that CI is not a lobby group for the greater cycling community nor is it in it's remit.

I think their should be a cycling lobby group similar to DCC or GCC, on a nationwide level but I don't think that is CIs place.

My only issue with CI at the minute is similar to what is being voiced before, that alot of sports are either sidelined or ignored at the AGM. Some people will say it is that these sports don't communicate with the central body well but after talking to some of them, other than insurance, they don't see any benefit to CI, certainly they have asked for help in the past and generally been rebuffed.

I would guess that the net was cast wide to get more members in as others have pointed out, funding is largely based on numbers.

Not disparaging leisure members but their contribution to cycling as a sport is minimal and most of them don't know what Cycling Ireland is or care. I put myself in that bracket for a number of years until I grew more interested in cycling in general and graduated to racing a number of years back

I've seen it in a micro scale in the club I'm in. Many drift in and out, but the ones genuinely interested in cycling, generally tend to race a bit (even just club level) watch it on tv, know the people involved (at a macro level, both Irish and international) and dig in and help out (mostly!). Others just do a bit if and when it suits them. "Fair Weather" I guess you could call it. Again I'm not saying there is not a place for that. Just that fair weather cyclists tend to always be like that and not have much of an interest in the sport other than a few outings a year. And that's what €25 gets you I guess

So I'm not surprised that the AGM is dominated by racing and issues/discussions around it.

And yes I agree their remit should be cycling as a sport. And the promotion thereof (of cycling as a SPORT. Not as a way to lose weight avoid a heart attack etc,etc! :eek: ). There are other avenues for that.

CramCycle · 15-10-2014 5:06pm

fortis wrote: »

Not disparaging leisure members but their contribution to cycling as a sport is minimal and most of them don't know what Cycling Ireland is or care. I put myself in that bracket for a number of years until I grew more interested in cycling in general and graduated to racing a number of years back

I was much the same, I watched some on TV and I knew that Crossans in Longford town had a club as a child but I had no knowledge of CI till I started Audax events. I was then asked would I join as writing out one day insurance forms was a pain in the h**p for the organisers. I joined as a leisure member, then Audax set up their own club affiliated with C.I. unlike before where they were only affiliated with ACP and C.I. membership was through other clubs.

I missed the first few AGMs as a member as I didn't even get a mail about them and I was the secretary of a club at the time.

I help out when ever I can with both my clubs when I have time and with others if I have time as well. I am probably in the fair weather group as unfortunately with work I do not know from week to week if I am free to help anyone.

Now that I have an understanding of C.I. I do see it as a disappointment that certain cycling sport groups seem disillusioned with the central CI team and just keep to themselves. This seems to be from issues in the past, and in no way represents the team that are there now, and I can't help but think there is alot to be gained for the organisation if more of an effort is made to bring these groups closer to the running of C.I. centrally, maybe I am wrong though, maybe it works for these groups to be insular, maybe the members of these groups feel that it works better to be focused only in their area..

2x4 · 15-10-2014 6:14pm

it seems CI is setup to put most of its resources into competitive cycling. I cannot find CI's accounts on their website but if there are 17,000 non competitive cyclists paying €25 each that nets CI the very tidy sum of €425,000. Other than basic insurance cover and an inadequate on-line calendar what do the 17,000 non-competitive cyclists get for their €425,000?

Someone with more inside information can correct me on the figures.

Beasty · 15-10-2014 6:40pm

CramCycle wrote: »

Is this not an indication that alot of the membership don't fully understand what cycling Ireland is.

CI is a members organisation - ie it is its members and those members actually determine its remit within any limitations imposed by the fact it itself is part of the UCI and the governing body for the sport within the island of Ireland. There will be some restrictions laid down by bodies such as the Sports Council to allow their funding to continue. However beyond that it's for the members to decide "what" it is.

That is part of the reason for the survey earlier this year and there will be an update on that survey the AGM.

Yes a lot of the "direction" is driven by the racing membership, but it was suggested earlier there are around 4,000 racing licences in place - that's around 16% of the membership. Indeed the racing membership perhaps did not make their feelings known in that earlier survey (not in sufficient numbers anyway), which may help explain some of the results of that survey. However those results cannot be ignored and CI need to strive to prioritise some of the points highlighted in the survey.

Ultimately though, as a members organisation, decisions are governed by the voting population, which within CI is mainly the club delegates. They have the power to vote in the Board, make proposals and vote on those proposals which can bind the organisation (depending on the nature of such proposals). That voting structure itself is likely to result in a bias towards the racing side of things but the wider membership, their views and indeed their preferences cannot be ignored.

Beasty · 15-10-2014 6:44pm

2x4 wrote: »

it seems CI is setup to put most of its resources into competitive cycling. I cannot find CI's accounts on their website but if there are 17,000 non competitive cyclists paying €25 each that nets CI the very tidy sum of €425,000. Other than basic insurance cover and an inadequate on-line calendar what do the 17,000 non-competitive cyclists get for their €425,000?

Someone with more inside information can correct me on the figures.

The insurance alone eats up a lot of that €25. If people wish to participate in any club-organised events they get that as well. Some perhaps dip in and out, only joining in years they have a specific reason to, which may simply be the insurance for a couple of events. Others perhaps make a lot more of their membership and join in with club events, incluiding training or pure leisure spins in an environment the may feel more comfortable in than simply going it alone

ragazzo · 15-10-2014 6:45pm

2x4 wrote: »

it seems CI is setup to put most of its resources into competitive cycling. I cannot find CI's accounts on their website but if there are 17,000 non competitive cyclists paying €25 each that nets CI the very tidy sum of €425,000. Other than basic insurance cover and an inadequate on-line calendar what do the 17,000 non-competitive cyclists get for their €425,000?

Someone with more inside information can correct me on the figures.

Not sure if it is a conspiracy with insiders only reaping the benefits of knowledge.

€25 is a good price for a years insurance. There are also discounts available for various cycling related products based on CI membership.
Beasty links to the relevant page of the CI website in an earlier post.

The Board and the various committees can only be as strong as the membership allows.
You, too, could be a Board or Committee member. Any member is entitled to go forward for election provided they follow the necessary procedure.
Most of us will never go forward to help out and we forget that moaning about CI is really moaning about the strength, or lack thereof, of the general membership and their willingness to improve the current situation.

Having said that, it would be nice to feel that your particular interests were being looked after although I would only expect CI to represent and fight for sporting issues rather than be seen as some form of lobby group.

RayCun · 15-10-2014 9:57pm

fortis wrote: »

I think if you did a straw poll of the general population and asked them what they thought "Cycling Ireland" was for they would probably say bike racing. Same as if you asked same question of "Athletics Ireland" the response would probably be promotion of athletics.

Very different structure in AAI. All members are members of clubs, there is no free-floating membership option, and no different licence types. At the same time, most runners you see in local races or Dublin marathon are not AAI members. About half the membership are juveniles. Racing scene is quite different too because most road races are expected to make money, and so there are a lot of races organised by commercials or non-athletic bodies.

(excuse my butting in, I find this fascinating)

Beasty · 16-10-2014 9:22am

Back on the lobbying point. I've just seen this - an academic paper published by British Cycling on the benefits of cycling pubished to co-incide with a parliamentary debate on cycling

Lusk_Doyle · 16-10-2014 9:32am

ragazzo wrote: »

Having said that, it would be nice to feel that your particular interests were being looked after although I would only expect CI to represent and fight for sporting issues rather than be seen as some form of lobby group.

What would they be expected to lobby for other than sporting issues? I for one, expect them to lobby for govt, local authority and garda cooperation wrgt road racing.

jinkypolly · 16-10-2014 10:18am

Are CI's accounts available online?

wav1 · 16-10-2014 10:24am

jinkypolly wrote: »

Are CI's accounts available online?

They would normally be circulated soon[just pre AGM]

Beasty · 16-10-2014 11:04am

wav1 wrote: »

They would normally be circulated soon[just pre AGM]

They form part of the delegate pack and one of the jobs of the AGM is to approve them. They are therefore currently "draft" and can only be considered "final" once approved at the AGM

morana · 16-10-2014 11:29am

CI is branching into other non racing areas. The bike for Life program, Women in sport (not just sport but physical activity) and National cycling standards program which is all good in my view.

I would like to see them engage with Waterways Ireland for example and try to get local councils to make the canal paths fully ridable. In the future CI might need to split if its to offer sport and other cycling activities to all of its members

ragazzo · 16-10-2014 1:06pm

Lusk_Doyle wrote: »

What would they be expected to lobby for other than sporting issues? I for one, expect them to lobby for govt, local authority and garda cooperation wrgt road racing.

Some people might expect CI to become involved in all sorts of general issues regarding cycling. Retention of the bike to work scheme, improved cycle lanes, better facilities for cycling commuters in workplaces, reducing speed limits in certain areas and banning heavy trucks etc etc.
I would prefer the obstacles facing competitive cycling to be overcome and CI to concentrate their efforts on these problems.

morana · 16-10-2014 1:44pm

ragazzo wrote: »

Some people might expect CI to become involved in all sorts of general issues regarding cycling. Retention of the bike to work scheme, improved cycle lanes, better facilities for cycling commuters in workplaces, reducing speed limits in certain areas and banning heavy trucks etc etc.
I would prefer the obstacles facing competitive cycling to be overcome and CI to concentrate their efforts on these problems.

but its a members organisation and the vast majority of the membership are non racing so it has to do something for this cohort. It has been focusing on racing since its inception in 87!

Regarding the bike to work scheme CI was involved with the Bike retailers of Ireland in the past to try ensure the BTW's future. As part of this the members of the IBBA would distribute CI informational material and potentially sign up people who buy new bikes.

While us racers think the be all should be racing the membership numbers influence the core grant from the ISC. Most of this would go to pay the costs of staff office and some programs such as Sprocket Rocket..

CramCycle · 16-10-2014 2:41pm

morana wrote: »

but its a members organisation and the vast majority of the membership are non racing so it has to do something for this cohort. It has been focusing on racing since its inception in 87!

Other than saying that they would like something done, the better question would be, will they come to the AGM to ask for these changes? The online survey did not require you to be a member of Cycling Ireland, how accurate it is could be open to question. I am sure it probably is quite close to accurate but if those who want CI to do something else do not come forward to help then it simply won't happen no matter what a survey says. The motions in for the AGM at the minute would indicate that they won't.

Others will argue that there is no representation for non affiliated members, which is true but I also know there are several clubs who would put forward any motions to get such recommendations if they were handed up.

Alot of members use CI for insurance, nothing else, I was the same myself.

As a matter of interest when things like the greenways projects come up, who do government officials go to in the cycling community for advice. Have cycling Ireland much experience in this regard, is it possible to facilitate the demand members maybe looking for.

While us racers think the be all should be racing the membership numbers influence the core grant from the ISC. Most of this would go to pay the costs of staff office and some programs such as Sprocket Rocket..

As a matter of interest what would be the labeling of the grant from ISC be? Is it a general, do whatever you want with it? or is it earmarked for sports development (including youth programmes like sprocket rocket).

How does CI accomplish this shift if it is the way forward. First you will need truly passionate people about these issues on the board, those who know how to place themselves in government as a lobby group. Are their active volunteers within the organisation who would and could take on these roles?

fortis · 16-10-2014 2:44pm

RayCun wrote: »

Very different structure in AAI. All members are members of clubs, there is no free-floating membership option, and no different licence types. At the same time, most runners you see in local races or Dublin marathon are not AAI members. About half the membership are juveniles. Racing scene is quite different too because most road races are expected to make money, and so there are a lot of races organised by commercials or non-athletic bodies.

(excuse my butting in, I find this fascinating)

I think this is interesting (though perhaps an aside to the general discussion here)

Most road races here seem to be run at break even or a loss. So there is no incentive for a club to run one, not financially anyway. SO it's down then to tradition mostly which is why the same events are run year in year out by the same clubs and very rarely does a new event happen

And CI don't help here in that the entry fee is fixed (€15) and they send commisars which the event organisers have to pay for (accommodation expenses). They don't help out with the running of the race or say with providing cameras or any technology to get results.

Contrast this with athletics races and say Triathlon. Where races are run for profit.

I know there are many arguments against this for cycling, cost being the principal one (as the barriers to entry are already high) but....Other sports similar to cycling are doing it so....

I think perhaps cycling is a little behind the times in this respect and perhaps it needs to be recognised that in order to provide a quality product (i.e a full calendar of well run races) then perhaps people need to dig a bit more deeply for that. Again not disparaging the existing races which are all run to a top notch standard imo often on a shoestring budget.

Running is probably not a good example as it's quite easy to enter a running race and cheap (well the gear). Triathlon tho would be closer to the mark.

And from what I have seen and heard, the youth and female scene in triathlon is quite vibrant despite the aforementioned barriers to entry..

Just a thought

ragazzo · 16-10-2014 2:50pm

morana wrote: »

but its a members organisation and the vast majority of the membership are non racing so it has to do something for this cohort. It has been focusing on racing since its inception in 87!

Regarding the bike to work scheme CI was involved with the Bike retailers of Ireland in the past to try ensure the BTW's future. As part of this the members of the IBBA would put CI informational material and potentially sign up people who buy new bikes.

While us racers think the be all should be racing the membership numbers influence the core grant from the ISC. Most of this would go to pay the costs of staff office and some programs such as Sprocket Rocket..

That might be true but there are as many, if not more, obstacles to racing now as in 1987.
Ignoring those problems does not make them less real or important.

Everyone that rides a bike from A to B is not necessarily a member of CI. They might wear the kit and have purchased their bikes on the BTW but may not have subscribed the €20/25 to CI.

I am not sure how CI can cater for their leisure members. TBH, it does not really catch my attention. Some year it might be of interest to me but at the moment my concern is for the continuation of a full road racing calendar.

I acknowledge that CI have a greater responsibility as an organisation than my narrow needs.

wav1 · 16-10-2014 3:07pm

Is the time coming as someone alluded to earlier,where there will be a body to look after the ACTIVITY of cycling and a body for the SPORT of cycling.Impossible IMO to be looked after as it is now with the resources and finance available

Beasty · 16-10-2014 3:10pm

CramCycle wrote: »

The online survey did not require you to be a member of Cycling Ireland, how accurate it is could be open to question.

Just on this specific point - yes the survey was open to non members and a number of non-members participated. However my recollection is it was a very small proportion of the total of getting on for 2.5k who participated (less than 10% I think)

kerry4sam · 30-10-2014 5:26pm

Beasty wrote: »

Just on this specific point - yes the survey was open to non members and a number of non-members participated. However my recollection is it was a very small proportion of the total of getting on for 2.5k who participated (less than 10% I think)

Just on the point of Cycling Ireland and online survey/poll. I received my e-mail re: CI Membership Awards. The image chosen is that of a standard Irish polling booth, private & confidential here. How & Ever, before completion of the poll it asks for Membership ID thereby making their chosen image null & void.

Is it just a case of unfortunate choice of image?

Thanks,
kerry4sam

jinkypolly · 30-10-2014 5:47pm

kerry4sam wrote: »

Just on the point of Cycling Ireland and online survey/poll. I received my e-mail re: CI Membership Awards. The image chosen is that of a standard Irish polling booth, private & confidential here. How & Ever, before completion of the poll it asks for Membership ID thereby making their chosen image null & void.

Is it just a case of unfortunate choice of image?

Thanks,
kerry4sam

It's a cartoon graphic added to a web page, don't read too much into it.

morana · 30-10-2014 8:21pm

kerry4sam wrote: »

Just on the point of Cycling Ireland and online survey/poll. I received my e-mail re: CI Membership Awards. The image chosen is that of a standard Irish polling booth, private & confidential here. How & Ever, before completion of the poll it asks for Membership ID thereby making their chosen image null & void.

Is it just a case of unfortunate choice of image?

Thanks,
kerry4sam

Just to stop ppl voting multiple times

GMCI · 31-10-2014 12:58pm

The AGM handbook available online for viewing.

http://www.cyclingireland.ie/downloads/agm_booklet_2014.pdf

Beasty · 31-10-2014 1:12pm

GMCI wrote: »

The AGM handbook available online for viewing.

http://www.cyclingireland.ie/downloads/agm_booklet_2014.pdf

Was looking at that yesterday. Looks like page 4 of the agenda is missing (there's nothing on the board elections in that version for example)

Beasty · 31-10-2014 1:19pm

Just on the accounts, it looks a little odd that Northern Ireland only provides around 10% of the grants received with the Irish Sports Council providing around 90%. Does anyone know if Sport NI provide any direct funding, perhaps to Cycling Ulster? I guess at the "elite" level they also have to provide support for those representing GBR and will also have funded the Commonwealth Games team this year, but their overall contribution does appear quite low in comparison to what is provided from the ISC.

CI AGM 1 November 2014

Comments