How
is the MG Car Club run and what say do members have? This
NEWS item provides a report on a question raised by Jerry Birkbeck of the Y Type
Register at the recent six monthly meeting of the Club Council, who suggested
changes to the Club's governance, particularly to the voting system and arrangements
for the Club's AGM. The note then sets out the current Club voting arrangements
and highlights real concerns raised by several Council members at that meeting
with the suggested changes. Whilst no vote was taken, it was clear that most members
attending that Council meeting felt unconvinced by the suggested changes. Many
felt they saw few signs that Jerry Birkbeck accepted the reasoning or logic behind
those concerns and the sensible need for the present voting system. As it is likely
this topic may arise again, this note aims to set out details of the current system
and the reasoning behind the real concerns over the changes suggested by Jerry
Birkbeck. If you have any views on MG Car Club governance or the Club's
voting arrangements, do let the V8 Secretary, Debbie Brading, know so we are aware
of what you feel or suggest. Email For
further information on the Club structure and governance, see our webpage. More
Posted: 121121 Back to homepage
|

| A
question was raised by Jerry Birkbeck (Y Type Register) for discussion at the
Club Council meeting held on Saturday 10th November 2012. He proposed "one
member, one vote" rather than the present arrangement where one representative
of each CRB (Centre, Register and Branch) with a vote at Council and at general
meetings of the MG Car Club. He suggested that to encourage greater participation
by members, holding the Club's AGM as a stand alone event with a guest speaker
would be an added attraction. |
Several members responded
explaining the reasons for the present Club voting arrangement and expressing
concerns over the unintended risks that could arise from the changed voting system
suggested by Jerry Birkbeck. What is the present voting system?
There is a prudent provision in the Club's Articles of Association that those
entitled to vote at the Club's Council meetings and at general meetings of the
MG Car Club Limited are the Voting Members, each a representative of their individual
CRB. Two representatives from each CRB are entitled to attend those meetings,
one of whom is the Voting Member. Their role is to represent the views of the
members of their CRB so far as they are able. The views of their CRB members may
be gathered from either correspondence or direct contact with their members or
from matters raised and discussed at general meetings of their CRB. Voting Members
are however representatives rather than delegates, an important distinction.
The Club's voting system
was last examined in 2006 when an Articles Committee was set up by Council to
review the Memorandum and Articles of Association. That committee, chaired by
Dick Morbey (MMM Register chairman), continued the present voting system in their
redraft of the Club's Articles of Association which was adopted at a Club AGM
in 2006. What
scope is there for Club members' involvement in CRB affairs and voting opportunities?
Club members are able to vote
for the election of the committee members of a CRB at the annual general meetings
of the CRB and indeed can be members of more than one CRB - for example of a Centre
and of a Register or several Registers. So the views of Club members can be made
through the CRB or CRBs of which they are a member and they can vote for the election
of their CRB committee members too. What outcome do we want from good
Club governance? Our aim is to ensure the Club is well run in terms of
the quality of the support and scope of services it provides for Club members
and that its finances are run in a prudent and professional manner. It's important
that the present system of Club governance encourages those aims and also encourages
members to volunteer for key roles on their CRB committees and the Executive Committee
who have real ability and skills in managing the business and organisation of
a true members' motor club.
A practical aspect is the geographical spread of the members of the Club in the
UK is wide so the likelihood of many members being able to attend a general meeting
of the Club, even if attached to an event providing additional attractions, is
relatively low because the distances many members would need to travel would be
considerable. The likely outcome is Club general meetings would not be very well
attended and consequently might not be representative of the views of Club members
as a whole. The single issue group or "takeover" risk
A real concern with a members' club with a countywide membership is that if an
alternative system were to be adopted where each Club member had a vote at general
meetings of the Club, a single issue group or a group of members intent on taking
over the Club could very easily arrange for a large number of their supporters
to attend the meeting and by strength of numbers win key votes on both the usual
agenda items and on any special motions the group had tabled to give effect to
their single issue concerns or intent. So in that case a reasonable view would
be that disproportionate representation by a single issue group could lead a situation
that could very easily misrepresent the views or wishes of the majority, many
of whom are happy to play a passive role in their Club's affairs. Would that be
a desirable outcome and would it represent the wishes of the majority? Many members
feel that is unlikely but a greater concern would be a real risk the Club could
be taken over by that small group attending a general meeting. Protection
of minority interests The present voting system gives equal votes to each
CRB regardless of how many members it has, thus protecting CRBs which have a small
number of members, an important concern as CRBs differ greatly in membership numbers.
Without this protection the two largest CRBs would effectively control the Club
and could push through measures against the interests of the smaller CRBs.
Effectiveness of the present CRB representatives system with Voting Member
rights This system has been seen to work during difficult periods for
the Club over the last decade, for example when overambitious Club office development
plans were promoted by the Club's Executive Committee (the Board). In cases like
that the Council, as a representative body with the general role of monitoring
the Board and the ability to vote on motions at Council meetings together with
their voting rights at general meetings of the Club, has been able to exercise
good governance over the Board and the Club's affairs. The proposal to move to
a system of one member-one vote at general meetings of the Club is seen by many
with experience of the Club's affairs as misguided as it does not seem to recognise
the success of the present Club governance arrangement and the realities or the
dangers from an unrepresentative single issue group applying a disproportionate
influence on the Club's affairs and prospects. Many
Club members feel our current voting system protects the interests of Club members
far more effectively We
heard at the Council meeting that the proposal put forward for discussion by Jerry
Birkbeck had not had full discussion with his Y Type Register committee or at
their AGM which many felt was not an encouraging feature for a proposal seeking
to make a major reform of Club governance. "One member one vote" has
a superficial appeal as a democratic slogan, but "one CRB one vote"
- our current system - actually protects the interests of Club members far more
effectively. If you have any views on Club governance or the Club's voting
arrangements, do let the V8 Secretary, Debbie Brading, know so we know what you
feel or suggest. Email
For further information on the Club structure and governance, see our webpage.
More | |
|