Ballot Paper Arrives

[RichT]

Wheeze, the dictionary definition of coerce is:-

EITHER to restrain or dominate by force
OR to compel to an act or choice
OR to achieve by force or threat.

None of these apply to the summary on my ballot form.

There are obviously shades of meaning with words like compel and coerce but in a democratic organisation, the Summary Note should not have been sent out, attached to the Ballot Form, with no further information. It was completely biased towards obtaining a vote in favour of the committee. This compromises the whole purpose of a ballot.

"The FRA committee....cannot recommend a leap in the dark to revert to being a poor relation fringe sport.....and it urges all FRA members to vote and support its recommendation for the FRA to remain affiliated with UKA..." I think that under the circumstances that counts as "compel to an act or choice".

I think that most members that were undecided, me included, wanted an objective and factual summary. A simple statement that based on the evidence gathered, the committee had voted 11 against 5 in favour of staying affiliated would have been useful. To completely ignore the arguments for disaffiliation was a mistake.

Anyway, that's enough from me, I'm off to Jura to spectate .

[Butane Bob]

I am a relatively new and casual fellrunner, with little knowledge of FRA politics (I suspect like the majority of FRA members).

However I was very surprised at how the ballot paper was presented. I can honestly say that I have no strong feelings for or against affiliation with the UKA. It made me feel uneasy however that those of us with an open mind might be swayed simply as a result of the wording of the ballot paper to vote a certain way.

I am sure there will be those that have done this, as well as others who have voted the opposite way out of 'spite' (or insert a more appropriate word here), rather than either

a) abstaining or
b) attempting to reach their own views by reading through the relevant reports etc

In my case I will not disclose how I have voted, that's between me and my waste paper bin

[Yorkshire Thug]

I personally think that we should free ourselves from UKA.
I believe that we should do this in a way in which we can still encourage junior participation at least to the extent that we currently do.

I believe that we should be able to still “do business” with UKA for the purposes of international and UK-level competition – although I believe that this would mean that UKA would have to either create a structure to replace the FRA, or they would have to carry on making use of the FRA’s services.

This is what I believe, and I am open to debate on the subject.

I don’t for one minute believe that the summary which came with the ballot was any attempt to bully me or coerce me in any way.

I believe that others have made these accusations in lieu of reasoned argument.

I think that this is a great pity because I firmly believe that our committee (yes, RichT, OUR!! – It’s not coercive, it’s just bloody TRUE!) has done us proud. They listened to the members, and have done a great deal of work on our behalf.

Thank you, Committee.

[Welsh Harrier]

The Summary Note .......................was then modified and finally approved by the full FRA Committee.

Of course 16 + people with a range of backgrounds, experience, individual perspectives, views of UKA & etc could all be wrong...or it may be you just don't like the facts presented.


Graham

Was this a unanimous opinion of all 16 or was it passed on a vote?

Also it's interesting that a great many people have criticised the ballot paper as coming across as being biased, etc - all the comittee needed to do was to include a phrase along the lines of - 'for the alternative view please read David Jones' excellent review on page 12 on February's Fellrunner magazine'.

After all it was Dave who called for the vote in the first place wasn't it?

[Tuffer]

There is alot of debate about the summary document and the ballot paper. Though the documents are out so are our post fruitless in that regard?

The sub-committee were tasked on behalf of the membership with investigating whether the FRA should stay affiliated to UKA. Their opinion is that the FRA should stay with the UKA. The summary document should to my mind, set out the pro's and con's of UKA affiliation, then included a statement from the SC of their view.

Unfortunately the nature of the ballot paper (unusual when compared to other ballot papers) where the SC have reinforced their view in a certain way, has upset a fair number of members and so i feel undermines to a degree the good work the SC have undertaken. And i feel it has the potential to skew the vote. It is important that the SC's view is represented as that is what they are there to do.

The vote should be on the issues, at the end of the day we want an organisation that is representative of it members and acts in their best interests.

[FellMonster]

All very interesting. Perhaps Yorkshire thug thinks voters should pack full race kit and body cover when voting. Jockey!

[wkb21]

I believe that we should be able to still “do business” with UKA for the purposes of international and UK-level competition – although I believe that this would mean that UKA would have to either create a structure to replace the FRA, or they would have to carry on making use of the FRA’s services.

I agree with the bashful YT's views here. Again, the models exist in Wales and Scotland. The relationship between a constitutionally independent FRA and any governing body would, ideally, be complementary and constructive. That's the situation that has evolved in Scotland. Independence means that we can help where we approve and resist with power where we don't. The former is ideal, the latter is a very powerful incentive for a governing body to listen.

I would argue that no committee member of an independent FRA should be allowed to be an official of UKA or its daughter national governing bodies (WA, SAL etc.) Divided loyalties can be dangerous.

Keith Burns

[Martin H]

The many comments that have gone before remind me of the time my parents got divorced and how it is possible to have completely different observations, interpretations & opinions from the same facts & events.

I voted to stay affiliated to support the committee because I judge them to be individuals we are generally doing what they think is best for the sport. I also think that the vote of 11 to 5 on the committee is quite a good balance because it is a good clear majority with the 5 bringing balance to the debate.

I also feel, in a perverse way, that staying affiliated to UKA is the best way for the FRA to concentrate on what it does best supporting races, producing the calendar and magazine etc. Let UKA officials do the other jobs which can be done by administrators not enthusiasts.

[Clive]

I've voted to leave and wasn't comfortable with my name on the ballot paper (it also looked more like a party political flyer).

[lamana]

The many comments that have gone before remind me of the time my parents got divorced and how it is possible to have completely different observations, interpretations & opinions from the same facts & events.

I voted to stay affiliated to support the committee because I judge them to be individuals we are generally doing what they think is best for the sport. I also think that the vote of 11 to 5 on the committee is quite a good balance because it is a good clear majority with the 5 bringing balance to the debate.

I also feel, in a perverse way, that staying affiliated to UKA is the best way for the FRA to concentrate on what it does best supporting races, producing the calendar and magazine etc. Let UKA officials do the other jobs which can be done by administrators not enthusiasts.

What a good post this is!