ERC wrote:Correct, but the real crux is how can we change the voting system if the current system votes against change! Catch 22 I think.
Yes, if we can solve this then settling the issues in the Middle East should be easy.
ERC wrote:Correct, but the real crux is how can we change the voting system if the current system votes against change! Catch 22 I think.
Carlo wrote:Yes, if we can solve this then settling the issues in the Middle East should be easy.
Carlo wrote:While the subject is about the organisational review of Motorsport NZ we do have to factor in the various user groups, club membership and activities conducted as until we identify the base platform to work from all models will fail.
If we look at club activity as opposed to club size, this year 43 permits have been issued to the 3 car clubs in "my area" which is between the Rakaia and Waitaki Rivers and which has a population of around 60,000 people. These events range from International to clubsport and are conducted by the Ashburton, South Canterbury and Waimate 50 Motorsport car clubs. Then add to this the 3 permits for CMRC for their historic & classic meetings on Timaru International Motor Raceway and this brings it up to 46 permited activities.
There has been a decline in activity this year, normally the total is around 50+ events with many of these being on the circuit
One thing that can be established is that population figures do not directly relate to participation in or the following of the sport
Racer Rog wrote: for those that think that leaving the umbrella of MSNZ, I think are misguided, there is a structure of rules and procedures, apart from the governance issues, which is very robust in the most part, how do you replace all of that with out graet cost and other legal issues that would certainally come about by leaving.
Roger
Really Crunch?crunch wrote: ... a pact of secrecy so secret I didnt know the pact existed!
Bruce Sollitt wrote:Really Crunch?
In Aussie I believe, both the Commissions and the Boards minutes are published on the CAMS website. Doing this would go some way to enabling us to assess a candidate's suitability when they come up for re-election.
Bruce Sollitt wrote:Really Crunch?
How many times over the years, during private conversations around rally matters determined at Executive meetings, have you told me that you are not at liberty to divulge who said what or who voted for or against? That is a pact of secrecy.
During my time on the Commission, I have served under 4 chairmen. Despite many recommendations not finding favour at Executive level, none have been willing to divulge where, or more specifically who, was the stumbling block. That is a pact of secrecy.
In respect of a particularly contentious issue recently I canvassed each Executive member personally, who all gave assurance that they'd vote in accordance with the Commission's position. When the vote went 4 to 2 against, no one would own up to their treachery or dob their colleagues in. A pact of secrecy.
There is a wall of silence around the Executive committee meetings and no method to measure the performance of individual members who are able to act with impunity.
This wall of silence places them beyond reproach, and they both know it and use it accordingly.
In Aussie I believe, both the Commissions and the Boards minutes are published on the CAMS website. Doing this would go some way to enabling us to assess a candidate's suitability when they come up for re-election.
are yours. They reflect a culture that has been bred by successive Executive panels, probably at it's worst under Kennedy but certainly not limited to him. You know it, I know it, and everyone reading here knows it.... not at liberty to divulge who said what or who voted for or against
Bruce Sollitt wrote:Crunch, whatever 'spin' you like to put on it, these words are yours. They reflect a culture that has been bred by successive Executive panels, probably at it's worst under Kennedy but certainly not limited to him. You know it, I know it, and everyone reading here knows it.
Until such time as it is corrected, we will not learn the lessons of the past.
crunch wrote:
I send an informal email to all my Commission (and advisors) after each Exec meeting informing them of the business discussed regarding H&C, and other stuff at times.
Minutes from all meetings Commission and Exec have always been available, just ask. Once the new website is completed they will be up on that as well.
Trevor Sheffield wrote:As could be expected, the above prediction concerning publication within the MSNZ website has never come to pass.
A revised constitution was presented at the last MSNZ AGM and this failed to be accepted. This document must surely have been published somewhere .
Please -- could someone post this proposed revised constitution here, so that the objectives of the executive become disclosed to individual members involved in the sport.
Trevor Sheffield
crunch wrote:Hello Trevor
Actually I do keep my Commission members informed.
Are you after a copy of the draft constitution that was presented at the 2014 AGCM in Dunedin? This was not accepted by the meeting.
What is your email address?
Raymond Bennett