Ballot Paper Arrives

[Luv Shack]

RichT,

Some very good stuff there, almost to well balanced! Plainly it's time you got over the injury & got back on the fells!!!

Particularly liked the fringe reference, all of which you will know I agree with...

and today saw, (yesterday now!) a good number of wonderful ("Fell") events taking place, across these tiny congested Isles (& beyond), which I suspect would take place regardless of the bureaucracy.....

but, maybe I'm just being too simplistic as usual....


and none of this is to demean the brilliant efforts of those who serve selflessly & give their precious time freely on/in committee & sub-committees, in pursuit of sustaining our "sport", and enabling us & the “young” people to find the special places we have come to love.

and I hope those who punch, so strongly here, will put back the same effort, of those who do now, when change comes....

... ballot papers??? always take a long time to reach this neck of the woods..

[Baldy]

Following RichT's example I now feel I must now out myself as John Chippendale - of course my disguise may not have been good enough anyway!

I feel we should very much bear in mind the very tangible problems caused by UKA's disregard of fell running operational requirements in late 2004 ("Celtic" race organisers left without insurance without warning) 2005 and 2007 (disruption to FRA Calendar production) all of which have been well covered by Dave Jones' Spring 2007 Fellrunner article and sundry postings on this website all of which provided compelling reasons for disaffilliation. Despite this an anonymous FRA sub-committee has felt compelled to issue a "ballot summary note" comprising only reasons why they think the FRA should stay affilliated to UKA - in my opinion many of these reasons do not stand scrutiny and my comments are as follows:-

1.Understanding of issues - despite the claim that the sub-committee best understand the issues I feel that such an understanding is not restricted to them alone eg Dave Jones for one with 19 years service on the committee in major roles interacting with UKA and its predecessors has a very comprehensive overview of the situation which should not be dismissed lightly even by those who may not share his views on disaffilliation. In addition Ross Powell and Sheila Lloyd, both members of the FRA committee, have experience of confronting the same issues in Wales and decided to leave the UKA fold and establish an independant Welsh FRA (WFRA).

2.Costs - it is accepted that for the FRA to take out its own insurance would cost approx £7Kpa. The balance of £8K is probably not unreasonable to cover income lost due to disaffilliation. However, in my view, a £3 per member increase in FRA subscriptions would be an acceptable price to pay for freedom to manage our own affairs!

3.Communications - there is no tangible evidence as yet that UKA/FRA "communication problems" are a thing of the past. Two of the original personnel are still operating at this interface. In my opinion we can only hope that matters improve.

4.Unknowns - in my opinion the list of "unknowns" possibly arising from disaffilliation is unduly alarmist and my comments on this are as follows:-

-Governing Body status is not required to coordinate/insure English events as evidenced by the independent WFRA. Moreover an independent FRA could offer insurance for races anywhere in the UK organised by FRA members (at present UKA prevent the FRA from doing this for races outside England).

-as far as international competition is concerned the sub-committee state in the full report "international considerations should not carry any weight in the arguments about disaffilliation". http://fellrunner.org.uk/pdf/committ...finaldraft.pdf

-UKA Competition Management Group (CMG) is currently responsible for the British Champoinships. They have a Championship Coordinator (Jon Broxap) and a Statistician (Mark Hobson). For the 2007 Championship they have shown a willingness to work with the non-UKA affilliated WFRA by including two Welsh races in the Championship which are not UKA permitted/insured (they are covered by the WFRA insurance). Presumably they would be willing to interact with an independent FRA in the same way.

-it is accepted that insurance costs may not remain stable.

-presumably the majority of the extra work load to be taken over from "other athletic bodies" relates to the interface with clubs and their members re their eligibility for Championship events.

-------------------------------------------

In view of the above I consider two decisions need to be made:-

1.Do the membership wish the FRA to operate independently from UKA interference which has led to a series of problems in the recent past?

2.If the answer to 1 above is "yes" then are they willing to pay a modest increase in subscription to fund this?

If the answer to 1 and 2 are both "yes" then vote to disaffilliate

I know how I will vote.....please use your vote whichever way you think best for the future of fell running.

[dominion]

All well and good, but a significant number of members have paid up for life membership, so in effect, it will not be possible to get additional fees from those individuals unless either, the FRA revokes their life membership, or the individuals agree voluntarily to pay an additional fee to cover the costs of an independant FRA.

[Rudolph Hooker]

Great to see a good debate going on about this, and it's good to see all the different opinions.

I'm personally not too keen on either the SHR or the WFRA model. They seem to have split the sport in those countries - albeit in a friendly sort of way. If we did get the FRA to disaffiliate, I would hope it could be done in a way such that things like internationals, juniors etc could still be handled by the same body.

Got my ballot yesterday.

[Stagger]

Voted and posted, both Mrs Stagger and Myself

[Graham Breeze]

I consider two decisions need to be made:-

1.Do the membership wish the FRA to operate independently from UKA interference which has led to a series of problems in the recent past?

(2.If the answer to 1 above is "yes" then are they willing to pay a modest increase in subscription to fund this?)

John,

My emboldening but why do you harp on about the past when the FRA Committee has endorsed the Summary Note which refers to "vastly improved liaison and communication" and states that "the problems of the past are now in the past"?

World War 2 is over and I now drive a German car.

GB

[Fellhound]

Right. Cards on the table.

&c...

An excellent posting pointing out something that's made me uneasy all along - the fact that the comittee have never given us a balanced view of this and have actually made no secret of the fact that they are, and have been throughout, seriously biased against disaffiliation.

To present the options the way they have AND to print the members name on the form is scandalous and, to me, seriously undermines the credibility of this as a proper democratic vote.

[AndyJ]

I have shown the ballot paper to a number of people this morning. All of them are not fell runners, are not members of the FRA, and have no knowledge of the FRA or UKA.
The reactions were interesting. Some laughed, but all found it a strange way to carry out a democratic process. 'Unacceptable' said by some.

[swat]

I'm an orienteer as well as a fell runner; the report mentioned that British Orienteering members are "... committed to contributing such amount as may be required, in the event that the Federation goes broke". It didn't mention that this amount can not exceed 50p, something that I'd consider relevant. We're not quite Lloyd's Names

I'd also take issue with the presentation of event officials requirements as being massively onerous because of the non-affiliated status of BOF. The roles of Planner, Controller and Map Advisor exist due to the very technical nature of course planning and marking in orienteering and so have no direct relevance to fell running. The only requirement to be an Organiser of a National orienteering event (equivalent to a Championship fell race) is to have organised a few lower level events (plus attendance at a training course is advised but not mandatory) - not too severe or suprising really.

[Wheeze]

Dom, I'm a life member of the FRA but I now willingly pay my annual sub to the WFRA and I've not heard any squeaks from other celtic life members. I suspect english lifers may also be amenable to understanding that sometimes, you have to pay a little extra to keep what you love pure and simple.

Graham, communication between UKA and FRA should become and stay excellent, disaffilliated or not. In fact, by taking our stand for independence, we may get better communication because they cannot 'forget' about us as some hidden bit of their own empire.