BE members - what would get you to vote?

[kerilli]

I went to the BE AGM and EGM yesterday, and it was mentioned that it is very difficult to get members to vote.
I suggested to the Chairwoman that it might be a good idea to have a voting place set up at Burghley, say in the BE stand, as so many of us go to it. (thousands of BE members go, I would guess).
Would that work? Would you bother to vote if you were at Burghley?
Or would you rather have online voting? (which can't be implemented next year because the vote against the new Articles did not carry, so the voting system can't be changed at the moment, if i understood correctly.)
If you don't vote, why not? Because you don't understand what you are voting for? Because you don't think your vote will make any difference? Because you didn't see the voting forms when they came with the BE magazine? Another reason?
Just wondering really, but maybe the BE Powers that be will read this thread, if it gets enough answers! Ta!

 

[Tangaroo]

I didnt see the voting forms and have to admit i would prob have put them to one side in favour of reading the magazine! Maybe they could send them out separately so we give them full attention.
Was there anything else useful said at the AGM?

 

[kerilli]

mm, yes, it was interesting.
name change for the lower classes next year, Training will become "BE 80 (T)" (with the T to denote that a Trainer will be there. Intro will be, iirc, "BE 100" (is that the size of Intro? I don't even know!) maybe it was "BE 90".
Not sure I agree with this, won't it confuse it with the Dr test numbers?!

Umm, 15 "BE 80 (T)" classes next year.
New Grassroots championship to be held at Badminton and sponsored by Mitsubishi, from 2010 onwards.
Admin costs were £113 per member last year, which surprised me.
Over 65% of the membership ride at Novice level and below only.
There will be a new 1* and 2** event next year, venues not settled as yet.
New memb category - Supporters and Enthusiasts, £25 per year.
lots of other stuff. Tilly is doing a full report on it for EventingWorldWide.

 

[lucretia]

as i have pointed out in other threads in the past, as you can see it is all you lot on this forum struggling to do the lower level classes that subsides the higher levels. you all should vote, you have more power than you realise. and i think the numbers in the new classifications relate to the height if the jumps maybe?

 

[TableDancer]

I think on-line voting def, and stuff needs to be spelt out to people as being relevant to them and why, and this needs to be done in English not legalese... I appreciate the need for the legal documentation, but this needs to be translated somewhere so it is easy to see what is being proposed and why. My feeling is that the resolution didn't pass yesterday in large part because people didn't quite understand what was being proposed and were left with a suspicion (fed by the fact that Richard Clapham and people like him who without question are passionate about the sport were lobbying against it) that they were being bounced into something undesirable, even if they weren't really. BE has to take responsibility for this to the extent that they failed to adequately communicate to members what they were trying to achieve.

 

[lucretia]

well said girl dear.

 

[kerilli]

[ QUOTE ]
as i have pointed out in other threads in the past, as you can see it is all you lot on this forum struggling to do the lower level classes that subsides the higher levels. you all should vote, you have more power than you realise. and i think the numbers in the new classifications relate to the height if the jumps maybe?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll try not to be really really insulted by that first part. I hope everyone else on here will too!

We don't all struggle with the lower levels, thanks very much...

Yes, I know the number denotes heights, I think it's a bit unimaginative though! As is using Intro and Intermediate at the moment though, with same first few letters, which makes abbreviations confusing!

 

[LEC]

It would be good if they could get voting online. On the whole I am not going to take a day off work (always mid week) to go and vote at AGM/EGM. If they had ballot boxes set up in the Secretarys at places like Aldon and other events round the country then I would do that. I also agree that they do not explain how the changes in articles will effect us in plain english. I would like to see a rep from grassroots on the board. Someone who works full time and events for fun.

 

[Pollywoods]

We can't vote on line because that is what the articles were meant to allow and they were defeated - that was said by the lawyer yesterday

The real buzz for me is the chance to ride at Badminton!!!!!

 

[TableDancer]

Welcome to the forum Pollyw!

You are right about the articles, but I think the concern was what else was wrapped up in the resolution along with the voting changes

I have a feeling BE were slightly badly advised by the lawyers about wrapping it all up into one resolution - I suspect everyone assumed it would go through on the nod and were a little bit lazy/complacent. I realise, from the debate yesterday, that was the advice the lawyer gave them, but they didn't have to take it

 

[lucretia]

you know what i mean kerilli!!

how many posts on here are there about shall we affilate or my first point or intro/PN or the cost of going or day tickets and balloting at lower levels compared to ones pertaining to advanced or even intermediate. its not about peoples capabilities but the reality of affiliated competition. all the major discplines are realising that they cant be snobby and elite anymore, it is the lower levels who enabe the others to carry on. and those of you that do have one horse a full time job or whatever and move heaven and earth to pay for it all should be credited a little for their effort which keeps the rest going. why do you think Nigel taylor has always made a big effort to run intro's. because he knows they are the best supported and pay for the advanced course.
dont be insulted, my comments are anything but.

 

[TableDancer]

Lu is right, after all that 65% figure shows where the balance of pwer OUGHT to be... Anyone think of a smart, articulate, grass roots level rider who would be an ideal candidate for the BE board - oh, and slightly, er, spotted and feline in character

 

[kerilli]

Okay Lu, i know what you mean!
It's a pyramid, the lower levels feed the top. the base is much broader than it used to be (3 more levels now). I can't remember the exact statistics, but the %ages of Nov horses that go Int, and Int horses that go A, used to be woefully small. I wonder if those have improved or not since PN, Intro and Training levels were introduced?
However, it does go both ways - it was made clear yesterday that it was only the success and generosity of Badminton and Burghley which made it possible for BE to honour all the refunds for cancelled events (insurance didn't cover them all) and to finish the year in the black, iirc.
I think when SC gets back from the U.S., we should all propose her, kicking and screaming if necessary!

 

[MissDeMeena]

To answer the origional question.. i didn't vote because a) i didn't know how/where and b) and more importantly, i didn't have a clue what i would have ben voting for!!

I'm an event rider for a reason, i don't have a brain to do anything else

 

[kerilli]

MdM, i think your first two reasons are spot on, and that's the trouble. they don't explain it well enough, or make it clear that our votes can actually make a difference, imho.

 

[SpottedCat]

It was an eye-opener for me - I would go again though, riders need to be prepared to represent themselves because the demographic there did not really reflect the demographic I see out eventing.....

I feel really strongly about the sport, it was my dream to event from a pony-less child and I finally achieved it at the grand old age of 26 - but the voice of grassroots riders is woefully under-represented and really isn't being heard, when, along with the big 3 events (badminton, burghley and blenheim) we are the people who keep the sport going.

 

[lucretia]

SC for presdent absolutely! and thats a funny thing to say, the success and gernerosity etc enables BE to honour refunds and stay in the black. one presumes they are un as a business to make a profit so there isnt anything genorous about it. and they are still in the black then despite the wicked weather and the even more wicked insurers who wont cover acts of god? Hmmmm/

 

[kerilli]

umm, it is generous, because i believe (might have misunderstood though) that Badders and/or Burghley gave more to the BE coffers than they were contractually obliged to. (i guess they could have kept more back for their own needs for next year, etc etc? that was my understanding of it anyway.)
the insurance cover presumably had a limit, for higher premiums they could have had a higher limit... again, i'm guessing here. it was an unprecedented year, very very wet summer. Abandonment claims of £700k for 2008.
Badders, Burghley and Blenheim gave £644k.
very high overheads of £1.44million in "admin and marketing", due especially to high IT costs setting up the database, redoing the website (will happen next year) etc, iirc.

 

[lucretia]

well you make a good case Kerilli but i am feeling the spin here! they have only recently redone the web site for example x

 

[kerilli]

i thought it was a LOT of money tbh! the database is very good though, wish other sports had it, but it still has big gaps etc, hopefully the new one will be better. breeding info x reference, etc etc, maybe?
the website, imho, is not good enough at the moment, not dynamic enough.

 

[LEC]

I went to the regional meetings they had and they were fascinating but again woefully undersupported by riders and yet it was there for everyone. There were a lot of volunteers and officials and all the big guns from BE had attended. I certainly will go to them again if they have them. The one I attended was at Bath & West would be better IMO if it was somewhere like Bristol in the SW as then easier for Wiltshire/Glos/Somerset people to attend where there are a lot of eventers. These could be a wonderful forum for riders to voice views without the pressure of an agenda like at AGMs.

 

[lucretia]

i agree and it is not that easy to navigte if you dont know what to look for but seems silly they are doing it again so soon

 

[_Acolyte_]

I'm not a BE member this year, but have been for the past 5 years or so. As a very, very grass roots rider I have never voted because:

(a) BE (as with most other organisations) do not clearly explain what you are voting about

(b) I don't feel that my opinion is particularly valid regarding the future of BE - if you see my BE results you will understand why, I am the sort of rider Lucretia was referring to

 

[lucretia]

as a member acolyte, one of the sort who are in the great majority dont sell yourself short. you joined for a reason and your participation and that of those like you is what keeps the big events going. note they are not considering a Super Advanced class are they for all the 'pros'!!

 

[keysoe]

I think the problem is that riders take the sport as Acolyte has, you either buy in on the whole package, or you do not & you go elsewhere.

The sport (as all disciplines) need the grass roots members, as that is where any growth will come from (the top riders HAVE to join BE, if you just do intro, you can do riding club / unaffiliated instead)

John Lawrence raised a good point that the Proxy forms were not user friendly, and i did not really agree that you cannot get over this in the current articles; simply putting an "idiots guide" with the form would give people the confidence to fill them in.

It is unfortunate that the new articles were all or nothing. I am personally not in favour of 3 elected members co-opting in 6 more members, particularly without an automatic nomination form organisers, owners and riders - the reasons for EHOA, ERA and BEOA not being given the right to nominate in directly were at best vague.

Members of BD and BSJA are capable of voting in good board members, it is a shame that BE (as a members organisation) cannot make that leap of faith

 

[gracemacrae]

I have nearly always voted and on this occasion voted against the resolution. I have recently got involved in a committee which organises one of the best horse trials in Scotland( A bit biased perhaps

) and the general consensus I have is that the powers that be at Stoneleigh don't listen. Hence I think it is vitally important that we the members take responsibility and ensure that our board members are elected not appointed. Hence if they do a bad job we can get rid of them. IMHO Scotland spoke when Les Smith was voted onto the board. It was vital he was elected for Scotland as if not there would have been no voice for Scotland north of Birmingham! And we do get forgotten! I think there was quite a shock when some of the others were not re-elected but that's democracy for you and Les had a big campaign up here to ensure he was elected. I don't think BE do enough to higlight proposed changes and to ensure everybody knows how important their vote is.

I am also of the opinion that if you vote you have a right to complain about how the organisation is run. I personally am very worried about where our sport is headed and it is vital the right people and the right decisions are made. As a members organisation we only have ourselves to blame if we don't elect the right people! Get voting

 

[bennsboy]

another one for the 'I was unsure what I was voting for' so didnt brigade!
will try much harder next year as I didn't realise that grassroots riders could have so much influence.
a yes for on line voting, after being able to read and undesatnd what I am voting for, and prehaps voting papers sent out separtely, and collection points available at events in September?

 

[_Acolyte_]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the problem is that riders take the sport as Acolyte has, you either buy in on the whole package, or you do not & you go elsewhere.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry to be a bit dim Keysoe

, but are you saying that as a BE member I SHOULD be prepared to vote? If so I agree

, my main reason that I did not was really (a) in my answer above.

I have spent a long time studying paperwork which BE have sent through in the past, including those regarding the election of board members who, quite frankly, I have never heard of? How can I give an opinion on who should be a BE board member, when I dont have sufficient information about each candidate?

Or SHOULD I know who these people are if I participate in BE?

 

[PaddyMonty]

Bored at work so had a look at the accounts.
If BE is run as a company then how can the board justify an increase in staff costs of 18.27% against an increase in income of just 7.2%?

Did anyone ask that at the AGM? Just curious.

 

[ColouredFan]

I am another one who didnt vote for the same reasons as everyone else. I didnt understand exactly what I was voting for. It needs to be written in plain English for everyone to understand clearly. I think online voting will encourage more people to vote if/when that is possible.

It would have been nice for more info to be on the website for us all to read through and help us decide what to vote for. Maybe this will be incorporated into the new website? I hope you will be able to cross referance the breeding, this will be a very useful tool IMO.