Cycling Ireland AGM 2017

ednwireland

11th of November in the Canal Park Hotel, Newry.

several motions already
http://www.cyclingireland.ie/page/about/agm

anyone who complains about CI heres your opportunity

JK.BMC

And not a single motion about A4 racing and all that jazz? After all the talk, much of it quite relevant and borne out of genuine concern?
As suggested in the advance notice, such issues should go through the relevant commission. Since the road commission apparently has no specific motion on the A4 issue of any sort put forward, we can conclude that all is rosy on the A4 road race front?
It can be daunting to try disrupt the status quo; maybe there is too much negative emphasis on crashes in A4 racing but in all fairness, buying a bike, turning up to race without ANY sort of prior skill assessment does seem quite wrong. And fields of 130+ A4s also seem wrong. But that's just my opinion. Motions must come via clubs etc
As for the other chestnut about 'juniors' I think the position of the national junior coaches should trump any individual view put forward; at the end of the day, these guys are still kids. It will be an interesting debate.

ht9zni1gs28crp

Rumors abound in Ulster of a formation of an A5 group, a reduction of the 15 points in A4 and a separate category for the Juniors in A3.

What truth is in this I dont know, simply overheard during Autumn Gold Race. The guy seemed pretty adamant.

Beasty

This is your last chance.....

....get your cheap XMas shopping in before the sterling prices catch up.

Gekko1

So, who would go into A5 category? Those who will be new to racing 2018/19 season??

daragh_

Some useful proposals from the Road Commission around A4 and entering the sport. My italics and underlines.

To Chapter T3.2
Competitive newcomers to the sport will be granted a Limited Competition Licence and may only be granted an A4 licence the year following. Holders of an A4 licence may only compete with other A4 licence holders with the exception of handicap races and the National Masters Road Race Championships. Notwithstanding in events restricted to Juniors, Masters or Women, A4 licence holders may compete with other category riders. Those returning to the sport after an absence will normally be granted an A3 licence, however this may be reviewed following an application to the National Grading Officer.
Chapter T7.1 (20) After maximum include the following “/ minimum” and for A4 Riders replace 120kms with 70 kms minimum and 120 kms maximum.
Chapter T5.1 (11) Add an additional sentence. Any event limited to A4 riders may only accept a maximum of 110 riders.

JK.BMC

daragh_ wrote: »

Some useful proposals from the Road Commission around A4 and entering the sport. My italics and underlines.

To Chapter T3.2
Competitive newcomers to the sport will be granted a Limited Competition Licence and may only be granted an A4 licence the year following. Holders of an A4 licence may only compete with other A4 licence holders with the exception of handicap races and the National Masters Road Race Championships. Notwithstanding in events restricted to Juniors, Masters or Women, A4 licence holders may compete with other category riders. Those returning to the sport after an absence will normally be granted an A3 licence, however this may be reviewed following an application to the National Grading Officer.
Chapter T7.1 (20) After maximum include the following “/ minimum” and for A4 Riders replace 120kms with 70 kms minimum and 120 kms maximum.
Chapter T5.1 (11) Add an additional sentence. Any event limited to A4 riders may only accept a maximum of 110 riders.

I hadn't seen any of this - to be honest it is good to see some pro-active suggestions. Making a race "minimum" distance is very interesting. I know of some A3 races that are less that 70km as it is! Mick Lally/Newbridge GP come to mind in Leinster as it is. 5 laps of the Dunmurray Circuit for A4s in Newbridge will be utterly different to what has gone before.

daragh_

JK.BMC wrote: »

5 laps of the Dunmurray Circuit for A4s in Newbridge will be utterly different to what has gone before.

True - hard to imagine a massive bunch gallop after that.:D

If I'm interpreting this correctly - there is no mention of an 'A5' category, just that racers new to competition have to take out a Club Comp licence in their first year? Encouraging them to learn race skills in a Club or Inter-Club League environment?

I think this is a good idea and it's been floated here a lot. The issues that I can see are pressures on the existing Club Leagues.

Beasty

While I understand the desire of many to get their points across at the AGM, many of these matters really should be reserved for the Road Commission to implement themselves with oversight from the Board. they are not "company business" and certainly not "decisions" to be made at an AGM

On the specifics of a new category, that may be a possible solution to some of the issues, but it also potentially results in more groups on the same potentially short circuit. The alternative may be to stagger races or spread them about a bit more, but that requires more clubs/volunteers to step up to the plate

ht9zni1gs28crp

Gekko1 wrote: »

So, who would go into A5 category? Those who will be new to racing 2018/19 season??

It was mentioned as follows

Anyone in A4 with 11 points plus gets moved up into A3

Anyone in A4 with 1 - 10 points remain in A4

Anyone in A4 with zero points now form A5


God knows its a creative rumour :D

daragh_

Chance Whispering Stepmother wrote: »

It was mentioned as follows

Anyone in A4 with 11 points plus gets moved up into A3
Anyone in A4 with 1 - 10 points remain in A4
Anyone in A4 with zero points now form A5

God knows its a creative rumour :D

If that's the case then it puts the onus on Clubs to promote new A5 races on top of what they already do. That's a can of worms.

I think the idea of limiting new racers to club leagues for a year is more practical. Although it will put pressure on Clubs that run leagues.

Will be interesting to see how it plays out.

Chips Lovell

There's no motion proposing an A5 category though? Just one saying that newcomers must hold an Limited Competition licence for a year before taking out on A4 licence.

lukegjpotter

Road Commission motions change A4 upgrade from 15 to 13 points.
And also jiggle up the National Championships.

Good changes.

I'd imagine the Limited Competition for new riders will be open to exceptions, where a club can say this is a good rider. Providing proof from a club league.
Are there clubs without a club league to blood riders?

Good proposal by the Off-Road Commission on 6 female riders for a Senior Championship Event.
Good one by Saddle Rock, asking for the Friday races.

Chips Lovell

The A4 rule change could potentially kill a few birds:

• Discourage unattached riders (at beginner level at least)
• Encourage more clubs to run their own club leagues

JK.BMC

Beasty wrote: »

While I understand the desire of many to get their points across at the AGM, many of these matters really should be reserved for the Road Commission to implement themselves with oversight from the Board. they are not "company business" and certainly not "decisions" to be made at an AGM

On the specifics of a new category, that may be a possible solution to some of the issues, but it also potentially results in more groups on the same potentially short circuit. The alternative may be to stagger races or spread them about a bit more, but that requires more clubs/volunteers to step up to the plate

If I'm not mistaken, you have made the above points about 'company business' numerous times over the years and I see where you are coming from. But surely you must know by now that the Cycling Ireland AGM is not simply a 'business meeting' but a forum where significant sporting issues are thrashed out and changes to the regulations of the sport are proposed, passed or rejected. You may be technically correct but in practice this is how the cycling world operates; any club with a suggestion for change gets to air their view at a national forum, however crude that may sound to you or ne. And when we are regularly encouraged to 'make proposals' and put forward ideas, well isn't that what is happening? Some delegates just turn up to see who causes a row each year- it's a very Irish sort of 'point-of-order-mister-chairman' shouting festival sometimes at meetings like these but maybe it's not the worst way to do things

Beasty

They can have a "sporting" discussion outside the AGM. But that's also where power is delegated to Provinces and Commissions. The organisation should not be bound by such resolutions which are decided by who turns up on the day and indeed who gets their point across best (or even who shouts loudest although I really should not single out Gaybo like that!)

Sporting discussion can certainly influence those other bodies but in my view the decisions should be left to those who have committed time and effort be it at Board, Province of Commission level. And if people don't like decisions those bodies take they can always stand to get in the relevant body to try and push their own (of perhaps their club's) agenda.

Swim Ireland have a separate discussion of such matters. The IVCA have also moved to this model. It can take place at the same location on the same date but AGMs are a statutory obligation that should be dealing with "company" business. That's no different from any other limited company.

CramCycle

daragh_ wrote: »

If that's the case then it puts the onus on Clubs to promote new A5 races on top of what they already do. That's a can of worms.

I think the idea of limiting new racers to club leagues for a year is more practical. Although it will put pressure on Clubs that run leagues.

Will be interesting to see how it plays out.

You might see some of the more successful club leagues close ranks to stop it swelling too quickly, although I can see midweek races under the guise of club leagues popping up. Hopefully they can communicate well with other clubs who have been running races for years.

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

The A4 rule change could potentially kill a few birds:

• Discourage unattached riders (at beginner level at least)
• Encourage more clubs to run their own club leagues

Positives but as many who run club leagues know, keeping locals onside is very important , hopefully it won't lead to swelling of numbers in already crowded areas.

Beasty wrote: »

They can have a "sporting" discussion outside the AGM. But that's also where power is delegated to Provinces and Commissions. The organisation should not be bound by such resolutions which are decided by who turns up on the day and indeed who gets their point across best (or even who shouts loudest although I really should not single out Gaybo like that!)

Sporting discussion can certainly influence those other bodies but in my view the decisions should be left to those who have committed time and effort be it at Board, Province of Commission level. And if people don't like decisions those bodies take they can always stand to get in the relevant body to try and push their own (of perhaps their club's) agenda.

Swim Ireland have a separate discussion of such matters. The IVCA have also moved to this model. It can take place at the same location on the same date but AGMs are a statutory obligation that should be dealing with "company" business. That's no different from any other limited company.

Surely the road commission should be looking to host an AGM/meeting, and the CI AGM should shunt all of those proposals there.

lukegjpotter

CramCycle wrote: »

I can see midweek races under the guise of club leagues popping up. Hopefully they can communicate well with other clubs who have been running races for years.

There won't be any new leagues, once people see the organisation and co-ordination required to run one. There's only a certain number of ambulances available.

Currently there's:
Monday: free or Bank Holiday Stage Race stage
Tuesday: Mondello Series, IVCA Race, Women's Commission Series
Wednesday: free
Thursday: Traditional Club League Night
Friday: free or Three Day Opening Stage
Saturday: Open Race, IVCA Race
Sunday: Open Race


Regarding the "Road Commission Business", they perhaps see the CI AGM as a way to wrap it all into one. The CI AGM happens after the road season, Road Commission want their AGM after their season.
To make two separate events of it, would require interested parties to travel two weekends. With other commitments (family, work, off-season pizza and beer appointments), this is unrealistic.

Take for example, the Off-Road Commission AGM happens after the CX Nationals, presumably MTB is over for the winter at this stage. So in-effect it is the end of their season.

The solution would be to handle all the CI board motions before an intermission for Road Commission motions.

buffalo

lukegjpotter wrote: »

Currently there's:
Monday: free or Bank Holiday Stage Race stage
Tuesday: Mondello Series, IVCA Race, Women's Commission Series
Wednesday: free
Thursday: Traditional Club League Night
Friday: free or Three Day Opening Stage
Saturday: Open Race, IVCA Race
Sunday: Open Race

McNally Swords run their league on a Wednesday, as did Dublin Wheelers until this year.

Beasty

And Drogheda Wheelers run theirs on Mondays

Club Leagues are restricted to Monday to Thursday anyway. I have been suggesting for some time that they should be allowed to run at the weekend, particularly during February and March (when light conditions make midweek racing impossible). That in itself takes some of the pressure of the often overcrowded early season A3/A4 races and gives newbies the opportunity to try out Club League ahead/instead of Open Racing

The other issue remains the overcrowding of roads particularly across County Dublin and its surrounds, resulting in a higher chance of complaints and Gardaí attention. Hence I do think there is a significant co-ordination issue and opportunity particularly around some of the areas that are used quite regularly. The IVCA have been trying to move a little further afield and as the roads get busier we may see increasing pressure to have more consideration of other traffic (as well as safety issues resulting from busier roads)

morana

the idea of a separate sporting agm on the same day is a good one but alas i cant see this board going for anything like that. The board itself is bogged down in detail rather than operating at the strategic level.......

Beasty

Well the current President was promising new sponsors and dealing with the Fingal racing issue. All I've seen so far, certainly at a "strategic" level, is An Post and Skoda pulling out with no signs of any replacement. Yes there are a few smaller sponsors now onboard, but it is an area he claimed to be his specialism. Having said that I was saying at the time that I really could not see any high profile sponsors out there who would be prepared to pump significant amounts into Irish cycling, and equally that I did not think he could pull the strings he thought he could to get Open racing back in North County Dublin

No obvious progress on the Velodrome either, although I'm hoping some funding will be secured in the forthcoming Budget.

Michelin

Beasty wrote: »

Well the current President was promising new sponsors and dealing with the Fingal racing issue. All I've seen so far, certainly at a "strategic" level, is An Post and Skoda pulling out with no signs of any replacement. Yes there are a few smaller sponsors now onboard, but it is an area he claimed to be his specialism. Having said that I was saying at the time that I really could not see any high profile sponsors out there who would be prepared to pump significant amounts into Irish cycling, and equally that I did not think he could pull the strings he thought he could to get Open racing back in North County Dublin

No obvious progress on the Velodrome either, although I'm hoping some funding will be secured in the forthcoming Budget.

So he hasn't delivered on his manifesto after two years?

Beasty

Michelin wrote: »

So he hasn't delivered on his manifesto after two years?

I've not seen anything in those 2 areas. Of course there may be something in the background I'm not aware of. Maybe he's heading to a meeting with AGS in Balbriggan, and perhaps he's lined up Facebook as title sponsors to the Ras and Ras na mBan. Guess he'll have a chance to detail his achievements at the AGM as Carl Fullerton's name is down as standing against him for President.

As I indicated though, I was sceptical all along in both these areas, but he won the vote and deserved the chance to try and deliver

Michelin

Beasty wrote: »

I've not seen anything in those 2 areas. Of course there may be something in the background I'm not aware of. Maybe he's heading to a meeting with AGS in Balbriggan, and perhaps he's lined up Facebook as title sponsors to the Ras and Ras na mBan. Guess he'll have a chance to detail his achievements at the AGM as Carl Fullerton's name is down as standing against him for President.

As I indicated though, I was sceptical all along in both these areas, but he won the vote and deserved the chance to try and deliver

Sorry not been sarcastic just a genuine question . As I have not seen anything either of any real significance. I do remember a lot of promises also and criticism of the CI office with relation to lack of phone answering at the time. I remember thinking that was very harsh. Political power is very motivating for some. Maybe someone else can come up with something of significance to justify his tenure.

Beasty

I said all along I thought his focus was on male road racing and I've seen absolutely nothing since his election to suggest otherwise

He did raise a fuss about people not being there to answer the phone, but I've never had an issue contacting CI via e-mail - they usually get back to me within a few hours and that's a much more efficient use of their limited resources

I do think there has been progress in resurrecting the Road Commission, but the likes of the Women's and Track Commissions are largely left to their own devices. Hopefully now there is a new woman on the Board the profile of the women's side of things will rise, but equally I don't think Ciaran will do anything in these areas without pressure being applied

Unfortunately the AGMs are typically dominated by people who are heavily into the male road racing scene, meaning there is often a disproportionate emphasis on this side of things. It would be better, in my view, if a few more from the leisure side and other disciplines turned up and had their say (I know some do turn up but they are typically very much in the minority). I am often met with the argument that because these other areas don't shout as loud as some of the roadies they must be happy with their lot - Even though I am from the male racing side of things I certainly do not think the other areas get anything like the attention and support they deserve.

ednwireland

Didn't he justify the club competition license increase last year by saying that they could race loads more on that than an open license oh and they had expensive bikes (same argument he used against leisure cyclists).
He seems a very one dimensional character and after 2 years I'm still not sure what he actually stands for.

Michelin

ednwireland wrote: »

Didn't he justify the club competition license increase last year by saying that they could race loads more on that than an open license oh and they had expensive bikes (same argument he used against leisure cyclists).
He seems a very one dimensional character and after 2 years I'm still not sure what he actually stands for.

Time for change then

Beasty

Well that 's what was said 2 years ago. I think the prior President did move a number of things forward, alas not to the satisfaction of the roadies. From what I've seen I'm not convinced the current challenger will be any better. Having said that at least there is going to be an election which itself forces the candidates to put forward their respective manifestos.

morana

who is going for it?

Inquitus

morana wrote: »

who is going for it?

Carl Fullerton: nominated for the position of Honorary President by Saddle Rock CC

buffalo

Inquitus wrote: »

Carl Fullerton: nominated for the position of Honorary President by Saddle Rock CC

Was he the man who resigned from a position or a nomination before the AGM had properly started about two (maybe three) years ago?

morana

buffalo wrote: »

Was he the man who resigned from a position or a nomination before the AGM had properly started about two (maybe three) years ago?

yes he was running but withdrew before the vote i remember. I think he ran when me and orla were elected as well. I am sure he was elected 2 years ago.

JAck watsons time is up. he has to step down for 2 yrs after umpteen consecutive terms. however the 3 term rule only came in 3 terms ago.

CramCycle

lukegjpotter wrote: »

There won't be any new leagues, once people see the organisation and co-ordination required to run one. There's only a certain number of ambulances available.

True but it might be a way around the impasse of novice/A5 races and entry into A4. I think I said it before but a novice league with promotion into A4 once you have been signed off as competent by someone with experience, much like the track pink slip system would be reasonable. Might not even need a league, just an observer at the likes of Mondello and the various club leagues. Even something from a club sec saying Cyclist A has been out on several club/group rides and is competent in a group. Not saying they won't cause issues, just that, in theory, they know the bare minimum. Whether they bring that knowledge onto the road is another thing but that is the same in every cat.

Regarding the "Road Commission Business", they perhaps see the CI AGM as a way to wrap it all into one. The CI AGM happens after the road season, Road Commission want their AGM after their season.
To make two separate events of it, would require interested parties to travel two weekends. With other commitments (family, work, off-season pizza and beer appointments), this is unrealistic.

Having them as two separate event on the same day is one workaround. The road stuff takes up a huge chunk of time at the AGM and is the only reason many go. Other clubs who are not road orientated do not attend as heavily because their commission don't operate this way. Regrettably this means that many see CI as a functional insurer for them but not as a support, and it is all about the roadies.

Separating it out may alleviate this to some extent. The only reason you would need them on the same day is to insure quorum at the AGM.

The solution would be to handle all the CI board motions before an intermission for Road Commission motions.

Just have the CI AGM in the morning, without the road motions, it would be wrapped quite quick. And then the Road commision can start in the afternoon.

Beasty wrote: »

Club Leagues are restricted to Monday to Thursday anyway. I have been suggesting for some time that they should be allowed to run at the weekend, particularly during February and March (when light conditions make midweek racing impossible). That in itself takes some of the pressure of the often overcrowded early season A3/A4 races and gives newbies the opportunity to try out Club League ahead/instead of Open Racing

100% agree although it might be hard to organise with switching days of the week but it should be allowed, particularly before May if a club wants to do it.

The other issue remains the overcrowding of roads particularly across County Dublin and its surrounds, resulting in a higher chance of complaints and Gardattention. Hence I do think there is a significant co-ordination issue and opportunity particularly around some of the areas that are used quite regularly. The IVCA have been trying to move a little further afield and as the roads get busier we may see increasing pressure to have more consideration of other traffic (as well as safety issues resulting from busier roads)

Same here, but so far we are lucky and getting good engagement from locals and gardai. Moving routes away from busier roads, as well as moving further out (which means shorter races due to light at the beginning of the season).

morana wrote: »

the idea of a separate sporting agm on the same day is a good one but alas i cant see this board going for anything like that. The board itself is bogged down in detail rather than operating at the strategic level.......

It would seem to be the only sensible solution, maybe something to suggest this year for next year, if the very good volunteers in the road commission have no objection.

Michelin wrote: »

Sorry not been sarcastic just a genuine question . As I have not seen anything either of any real significance. I do remember a lot of promises also and criticism of the CI office with relation to lack of phone answering at the time. I remember thinking that was very harsh. Political power is very motivating for some. Maybe someone else can come up with something of significance to justify his tenure.

The phone call thing was stupid.

Beasty wrote: »

Well that 's what was said 2 years ago. I think the prior President did move a number of things forward, alas not to the satisfaction of the roadies. From what I've seen I'm not convinced the current challenger will be any better. Having said that at least there is going to be an election which itself forces the candidates to put forward their respective manifestos.

The benefit to the new challenger is like all Irish politicians, he can say what he wants, the current head of the table has the weight of what he has done to either lean on or get crushed under.

I would like to see someone who isn't pandering to small issues like parish pump politics.

Beasty

buffalo wrote: »

Was he the man who resigned from a position or a nomination before the AGM had properly started about two (maybe three) years ago?

Made a little bit of a scene as he was basically saying he could not work with the Board as it was then. Obviously now on the Board, but I'm not sure of his responsibilities. Looking here only the President's has been confirmed, and that seems to be he must be "Presidential":pac:

Inquitus

CramCycle wrote: »

True but it might be a way around the impasse of novice/A5 races and entry into A4. I think I said it before but a novice league with promotion into A4 once you have been signed off as competent by someone with experience, much like the track pink slip system would be reasonable. Might not even need a league, just an observer at the likes of Mondello and the various club leagues. Even something from a club sec saying Cyclist A has been out on several club/group rides and is competent in a group. Not saying they won't cause issues, just that, in theory, they know the bare minimum. Whether they bring that knowledge onto the road is another thing but that is the same in every cat.

Each province could organize some supervised A5 Starter races, very early in the year, in Leinster at say Corkagh Park. Give people some instruction for an hour and then have 4 or 5 30min +3 lap races, depending on numbers. After attending 2 successful sessions you get your pink slip similar to the track which allows you then to race open A4 races or whatever.

Lusk_Doyle

CramCycle wrote: »

I would like to see someone who isn't pandering to small issues like parish pump politics.

With the size and type of cycling society that we have here how would one attract meaningful support in any manner other than by making "parish pump" type promises? What larger or "global" cycling issues that the CI pres can influence are there that trump "small" issues?

buffalo

Lusk_Doyle wrote: »

With the size and type of cycling society that we have here how would one attract meaningful support in any manner other than by making "parish pump" type promises? What larger or "global" cycling issues that the CI pres can influence are there that trump "small" issues?

I can no longer read that word in any context without a small bit of bile hitting the back of my throat.

morana

Lusk_Doyle wrote: »

With the size and type of cycling society that we have here how would one attract meaningful support in any manner other than by making "parish pump" type promises? What larger or "global" cycling issues that the CI pres can influence are there that trump "small" issues?

i think and i will admit i am a bit out of touch, i just get the gossip, but surely to bring on the leisure side of the sport should be a major ambition of any president. Retention of those leisure members and i know they try to do that but lay out a strategy for your presidency , review it with the board and ceo after you are elected and re publish for the membership. And then i believe the key is to constantly update the membership about progress.

CramCycle

Lusk_Doyle wrote: »

With the size and type of cycling society that we have here how would one attract meaningful support in any manner other than by making "parish pump" type promises? What larger or "global" cycling issues that the CI pres can influence are there that trump "small" issues?

But this is mainly why the road crowd get so much attention, because they are wrongly over represented at the AGM, because the other interests in cycling hold their own commission AGM and send a rep or two to pipe up if needs be. This is how the Road community should be represented as well. Have the Road AGM in the morning. Any issues that may be related to the company AGM can then be brought in under AOB. I understand what your saying but if there is a reasonable will to do away with it or if the board hand over such issues to the commission, it should be fine.

The board should be concerned with running the business, attracting new sponsors/investors, helping out the separate commisions (all of them), for money and organisation.

morana wrote: »

i think and i will admit i am a bit out of touch, i just get the gossip, but surely to bring on the leisure side of the sport should be a major ambition of any president. Retention of those leisure members and i know they try to do that but lay out a strategy for your presidency , review it with the board and ceo after you are elected and re publish for the membership. And then i believe the key is to constantly update the membership about progress.

Very good, a newsletter from the presidency every 3 months with updates would be a nice touch. Alot of big companies (and small) do that regularly enough.

The GMan

I really can't believe this proposal from CI

CI AGM 2017 Motion 6

To fix membership fees for 2018, Mr. Michael Mannix, Honorary Treasurer, will present
these. The following changes to the fees are proposed for 2018
- Youth U8, U10 from €5 / £4 to €10 / £10
- Youth U12, U14 from €10 / £10 to €20 / £20
- Limited Competition License changes from €70 / £60 to €80 / £70
- Family Membership from €75 / £64 to €85 / £74
- Leisure Membership in regions (10% reduction for perpetual 5 year recurring Direct Debit)
- Connacht, Leinster & Munster changes from €40 to €50 (includes €5 provincial levy)
- Ulster from €45 / £38 to €55 / €48 (includes €10/£8 provincial levy)
- Full Competition License changes from €125 / £106 to €135 / £116

RobFowl

The GMan wrote: »

I really can't believe this proposal from CI

CI AGM 2017 Motion 6

To fix membership fees for 2018, Mr. Michael Mannix, Honorary Treasurer, will present
these. The following changes to the fees are proposed for 2018
- Youth U8, U10 from €5 / £4 to €10 / £10
- Youth U12, U14 from €10 / £10 to €20 / £20
- Limited Competition License changes from €70 / £60 to €80 / £70
- Family Membership from €75 / £64 to €85 / £74
- Leisure Membership in regions (10% reduction for perpetual 5 year recurring Direct Debit)
- Connacht, Leinster & Munster changes from €40 to €50 (includes €5 provincial levy)
- Ulster from €45 / £38 to €55 / €48 (includes €10/£8 provincial levy)
- Full Competition License changes from €125 / £106 to €135 / £116

Whats the issue? They kept the prices down for a long time but costs including insurance are going up all the time

The GMan

The insurance cost as stated at last years AGM was €13 per head.
If this is passed leisure membership will have gone up 100% in four years from €25 in 2014 to €50 in 2018.
As far as I can see the services provided by Cycling Ireland have not changed dramatically and neither can the increase be justified by inflation.

RobFowl

The GMan wrote: »

The insurance cost as stated at last years AGM was €13 per head.
If this is passed leisure membership will have gone up 100% in four years from €25 in 2014 to €50 in 2018.
As far as I can see the services provided by Cycling Ireland have not changed dramatically and neither can the increase be justified by inflation.

The initial 25 was heavily subsidised.
CI provides a range of services, both insurance to members and event organisers. Discounts, advice. A network of clubs.
I race, tour, train, commutue and generally ponce about on bikes and am happy with the cost.
Compares very well to my wife's Tennis Ireland membership and far cheape than my 11yr olds football subs...

eeeee

RobFowl wrote: »

The initial 25 was heavily subsidised.
CI provides a range of services, both insurance to members and event organisers. Discounts, advice. A network of clubs.
I race, tour, train, commutue and generally ponce about on bikes and am happy with the cost.
Compares very well to my wife's Tennis Ireland membership and far cheape than my 11yr olds football subs...

I train, race and commute, and the cost of the full license is prohibitive for me if this goes through. I have yet to have it before March, it takes me that long to afford it.

It's a significant barrier to participation in the sport - I couldn't afford the cost of a full license during my first 3 years in the sport - I was lucky to avail of a very generous old student card expiry date, and even then took me a good while to afford.

They need a low income rate yesterday.

As a female racing cyclist, I have experienced first hand the apathy the current president of CI has for women's racing at an AGM this year.
Value for money it ain't for me.

cornet

Not a hope the increases will be passed at the AGM

wav1

cornet wrote: »

Not a hope the increases will be passed at the AGM

They will probably have to be or the [very much increased]insurance premium cant be paid..If its not then I'm sure there will have to be spending cuts.
At the end of the day its the delegates choice.

cornet

wav1 wrote: »

They will probably have to be or the [very much increased]insurance premium cant be paid..If its not then I'm sure there will have to be spending cuts.
At the end of the day its the delegates choice.

One of the main selling points of CI for leisure members is the insurance. If it’s not economically viable then don’t bother with it. Let everyone assume their own risk and take out their own insurance if they want it.

Beasty

The insurance only applies to sanctioned training. I suspect many leisure members don't appreciate that. The much larger insurance risks are likely to be 3rd party and from racing.

TBH although I have availed of the insurance pretty much up to the cap for medical expenses my PHI gives me better cover. I also get wider medical cover via the IVCA.

It will be interesting to see what happens at the AGM on these fee proposals. Racers need membership but leisure members are going to be a little more reticent.

I'll be at the track World Cup in Manchester so can't make it this year. Typically it's the racers that do turn up and I think these proposals will pass. If members do wish to protest they need to get their club to nominate them as a delegate.

wav1

cornet wrote: »

One of the main selling points of CI for leisure members is the insurance. If it’s not economically viable then don’t bother with it. Let everyone assume their own risk and take out their own insurance if they want it.

Whether you agree or disagree re licence costs that's a totally irresponsible suggestion..So let a National body take in someone as a member,and then let them off to cycle with no insurance if that's what they want.

cornet

wav1 wrote: »

Whether you agree or disagree re licence costs that's a totally irresponsible suggestion..So let a National body take in someone as a member,and then let them off to cycle with no insurance if that's what they want.

The insurance protects the rider not the federation. Clubs and the federation have separate insurance cover. What’s the problem with the riders taking out their own cover? If cost is a problem then remove the medical cover (riders can get VHI etc) and just leave the 3rd party liability cover.