6.1 ACM Voting

[stevepearson]

Sounds positive CP.

Although i fear that with 2/3 of the vote required its never going to get passed - perhaps that the thing with democracy ....... its not actually democratic at all which i feel is the whole point of this change

[Dee]

I just don't feel that the suggested replacement rule is even remotely democratic!
Like Nick, I just can't see how it is democratic to give a club of 3 the same number of votes as a club of 100.

I don't know what the answer is; I don't know how to make it fairer; but I don't think this proposal helps achieve fairness.

[JimW]

Number of votes per club can be worked out from ranking lists and the slalom calenda. I will be doing this and will ask the meeting if they are happy for me to publish this.

Can it?

That was my first thought but I remembered that:
a) a club with no slalom paddlers ran a race this year (possibly several did)
b) some paddlers are members of several clubs and only one of them appears in the ranking list, so there may be clubs that appear not to have 3 members because they just happen not to be the 1st claim club for any of their members. (Or there may not).

I think it is possible to get a pretty good idea from the calendar and ranking lists, but not sure it would be 100% accurate?

Having not previously attended BC slalom ACM I simply cannot visualise how various proxy votes, multiple votes per club, and clubs having more delegates present than votes, get resolved at a show of hands?

[Mark H]

So now we don't know if the allocation of votes is sound or not.
As no one takes down who is voting for what at the ACM clubs can have multiple votes?
This is going off what Jim W wrote.
This makes a very strong case for one club one vote doesn't it?

No lynch mob Dee, just trying to get transparency.

How many clubs have 3 paddlers and how many have over 100?

If the club with 3 paddlers put on 10 races div2/div3 on the same day, does this give that club 21 votes?

While another club with 40 paddlers run 2 race days one Prem and one dive 1 gets 3 votes.

I am sure we don't need permission from the committee to publish information that is already published on this site?
I am sure someone is working it out already.

[James Hastings]

It's actually a reason for moving to 1 paddler 1 vote. The problem with the current system is it open to abuse due to its lack of transparency. No one knows if those attending the ACM have in fact consulted their membership and are voting according to their wishes. While one hopes that they do there is no guarantee of that and I know of more than one canoe club that has been 'captured' by a small clique in the past who have then run it as their personal fief.

The issue is not whether that is currently happening in the slalom world, it's that the current system lays itself open to that type of abuse.

Ultimately the only truly democratic system is one member one vote (and yes I realise that this has its limitations too). One way of mitigating the possibility of a small clique trying to influence the overall vote is to make the franchise as wide as possible. Thus I would go for 1 paddler 1 vote + a vote for all non-paddling volunteers and officials during the season (they have given of their time to the sport thus they should have a say in its running). It should be easy enough to keep a register of volunteers.

[Canadian Paddler]

Show of hands is holding up sheets with the number of votes a club has. These are then added to get votes for, against and abstaining. Then adding to check the arithmetic and voting.
Sometimes I think that those counting are going to take of shoes and socks to help adding but that has not happened yet.
So we know that people have voted correctly. Just not recording which way each club has voted.

Proxies are registered with the Secretary and I try to monitor these as well during the meeting.

One person one vote is equally fraught. Look at this years BC ACM. Where one person had enough proxy votes to block any motion. Not quite enough to push through any motion. Thank goodness they were aware of this and exercised this carefully.

At the end of the day the ACM is an open meeting anyone can come and see how it is run.

One person one vote also needs definition. Di you get a vote because you did one hour of judging at division 4? Is that equitable to count the same as someone that trains every day and competes most weekends? Or gives up weeks.of their own time to organise events?
Then we are part of British Canoeing (uk level) so the board will have problems with votes to those who are not National Federation members not popular with everyone but a fact of life.

If it was easy it would have been done.

Any system is capable of being manipulated , look at Westminster. One person one vote to elect an MP who votes as their party tells them not as you want.

But it is important to debate the possible options and their drawbacks so that when the final.motion comes through we can get some kind of majority and then BC Board can approve it. Eventually. . .

[Niciss]

Can I just throw another cat amongst the pigeons ! Is there any element of age in this process ? I come from a non slalom club where AGM voting is limited to adult members, but the active paddlers are predominantly under 18. My opinion on this is irrelevant, but just wondering if there is any differentiation in slalom or is it just ranked paddlers.
One way round the voting issue may be to agree a consultation process set out by the slalom committee which clubs have to commit to in order to have voting rights. It doesnt have to be complicated an email to members with the motions, how the club intends to vote -agreed by their own committee, with rationale and an opportunity to oppose.

[Canadian Paddler]

In answer to the age question. A ranked paddler I a ranked paddler regardless of age. So if you have three juniors ranked you are entitled to a vote.

[JimW]

Show of hands is holding up sheets with the number of votes a club has.

Ah, now I can visualise it - thanks!

[CeeBee]

The sport needs to cater for the full spectrum of paddlers from the very committed racing at British level and Prem down to Div 4. Clubs typically do this and so are best placed to hold the votes rather than individuals. As part of the democratic process, you need those voting to vote in the best interests of the sport and not the best interests of themselves. I do think that size of slalom clubs should be partly taken into account and by giving votes to the clubs that run slaloms, this is already done to some extent.

I would be curious to know how many slalom clubs actually attend the ACM and how many give proxy votes to others? If the ACM was within 2 hours of my house, then I'm sure I would be at the ACM most years. The ACM is always in Nottingham and so I suspect that the majority of clubs that attend are those that are within easy travelling distance.

This is always going to happen no matter where you hold it but it would be good if we could use modern technology to hold the ACM across more than 1 site by video conferencing and microphones to encourage involvement in the ACM as it is healthy for the sport for as many clubs/paddlers to participate in the debates around the motions.

Motions and ideas can always be submitted in advance for discussion at committee meetings through out the year. Many ideas are now discussed on chatter which I think has been helpful in canvassing peoples views. It is also good that the motions for the ACM have all been posted on chatter to enabling people to comment.

[Nick Penfold]

Re "one paddler, one vote", about 65% of our paddlers are under 18 and don't get a vote in elections. Do we give the vote to J18s? J16s? ...J10s?

Whether you think what we have is appropriate or not, a rush to change could be a disaster. This is one of those things where should ask someone to research the options and their pros and cons, consult the clubs and the paddlers and then bring a considered proposal to the ACM next year.

[Dee]

.....

I would be curious to know how many slalom clubs actually attend the ACM and how many give proxy votes to others? If the ACM was within 2 hours of my house, then I'm sure I would be at the ACM most years. The ACM is always in Nottingham and so I suspect that the majority of clubs that attend are those that are within easy travelling distance. .....

I suspect this would be impossible to measure....

The official representative of the club is the person who appears in the year book. In Sheppy's case this is the chairman. However, he will not be going to the ACM and I will, so I go down as a proxy even though I am a club member and have run competitions for the club. There does not appear to be any difference between a club member representing the club as a proxy and someone from a totally different club acting as proxy.

[djberriman]

Clubs get vote for events run (I don't really believe it encourages anyone to do so). So why doesn't a double get 2 votes?

Is a Div 4 classed as a ranking event?

[Canadian Paddler]

p181

6.2 Each such club shall have an additional vote for each Ranking Slalom it has organised in the last full competition year, for which anny applicable Administration fees have been paid

A double slalom is considered a single Ranking Slalom, just as a Double division slalom is considered a single Ranking Slalom (you do not get six votes for running a double 2/3/4 Competition).

If you notice the last motion, and the note at the top of page 178 the regulations are past time to update them. BC seem to have other things on their minds, so we may need a working group to produce a new set for consultation / picking to pieces thsi year - any volunteers?

[Dee]

When a delegate arrives at registration, he/she is given an "official" card for voting that has a number written on it.
When said delegate votes he/she holds up the card.
The number on the card is taken as the number of votes from that delegate.

1.. How do you know who's hand is worth 1 vote vs 2 or 3 etc.

Because the hand is holding the card with a number on it

2. Is all voting by the qty votes per club ie HPP has 2 botes so when the HPP chap puts his hand up is that counted as a hand or as 2 votes?

Yes, voting is by qty votes per club, ie 2 Votes for HPP