First things first, how you vote, is entirely your decision, and I encourage you to read the documents attached on each item at the top of the voting card. If you disagree with me on how to vote, then that's fine! However, if, like me, you...
On Friday last week, 2nd March, we handed over to the BMC, our work on the independent Organisational Review Group. The final report was an amended recommendations report, following a 3 month consultation on our initial report in November. As of last Friday, the ORG as a body, was disbanded, and its members, now well versed in the complexities of the BMC, are back to their respective roles, or are simply just back to being BMC members.
Since April the BMC Organisational Review Group has worked collectively for thousands of hours, sent thousands of emails, written a 40k word report with 51 recommendations, gathered the views of over 4500 BMC members, spoken to c. 25 partner organisations and stakeholders, launched a further consultation, and done a tour of England and Wales presenting the report at local area meetings, to over 400 BMC members.
Back in March, just before the AGM I wrote about the motion of no confidence raised against the British Mountaineering Council (BMC). Of course, the motion was defeated, but the BMC was, and is, under a period of potential reform.
In the last year the BMC has faced a torrid time; the Climb Britain u-turn, and now a potential 40% Sport England funding cut, a proposed Alpine Club Special General Meeting and a guerilla 'vote of no confidence'. Is this a storm in a teacup, is the board "betraying" the members, or are these all just red herrings?