Quote:
| Originally Posted by Ian Ruth, - I do not doubt your staunchness.
Lynn it would actually be more illegal to change the terms that members have signed up to, although questioning the legality of a private members club is quite strange, - a private members club can be whatever it wants to be as long as it does not operate outside of the law, - although even then it can, - golf clubs with men only areas (???). The club constitution could have insisted on ownership of Red Ducati’s only!!! - people have a choice when they join, - read the rules, agree with them, join; so the MT has a duty to stick to those rules for the term of their membership. The MT cannot change the constitution at the drop of a hat as members have signed to join the club under that constitution; - notice has to be given to all members that their terms of membership are going to change, thereby giving all members the opportunity to say that they do not agree with them so they will not renew. In truth a new constitution should be voted in at the next AGM, and then it come into being at the following AGM; members have a right to operate under the rules that they signed for (sorry repeating myself). However the MT are going to put out a recommendation to the entire membership via post that the new constitution is accepted and carried forward from the next AGM.
JPM, - my take on the change of constitution was that times have changed, so we needed different rules inline with website use, and different positions within the MT etc.. As I have said above a private members constitution cannot really be illegal as members have a choice to abide by the rules and join, - nobody is forced. If potential members were not shown the rules then there would be a case, - or if we changed those rules part way through their membership.
The truth is that the MT did not have to listen to the request for change, - we could have thrown it out using the existing rules, - a member could have proposed it to be heard at the next AGM, a year taken for deliberation and then it come into being at the 2008 AGM. The MT has a massive image issue right now (something that I said in Saturday’s MTM), in my opinion it needs somebody like Lily who works in this field to work with us to get us back on line, - the very sad thing with all of this is that pre the last AGM I think a lot of people had some very good ideas about change for the club, but since that AGM, the personal campaign against certain members of the MT has continued (even an attempted vote at the Cadwell meeting) as has the campaign to take away a member asset from the members. It was clear to me at Brands SBK that members have had enough of the continued politics, - it has got to a point of the MT now having to do something, before the club implodes. |
I'd suggest you read the current club rules Ian......
The new constitution can be proposed by MT NOW - under the terms of the current rules a majority of members must disagree for it not to go ahead ( no procedures are outlined, another example of the poor wording and lack of accountability). this would mean the new rules are in place prior to AGM and members can then get the democratic changes they requested at last AGM. Delaying it will only cause further problems and could be perceived as some as another attempt to maintain a status quo.
Under the current rules MT can do almost whatever they like and without consultation, this is not a satisfactory situation for any "members club" and needs addressing quickly, the consequences of not doing so are plain to see.