MINUTES OF THE CENTRE CHAIRMEN/SECRETARIES MEETING
HELD AT ACU HOUSE, RUGBY ON SATURDAY 24thFEBRUARY 2007 AT 10.30 AM
Present: Jim Parker Chairman
Ted Bartlett President
Chris Berisford Chairman - Cheshire & N Wales Centre
Elizabeth Jones Secretary - Cheshire & N Wales Centre
Chris Tyrell Chairman - Cornwall Centre
Mr P George Cornwall Centre
Mrs L George Cornwall Centre
Dave Smith Chairman - Eastern Centre
Barbara Douglas Secretary - Eastern Centre
Mark Jessup Chairman - East Midland Centre
Dave Chapman East Midland Centre
John Cadogan Secretary - East South Wales Centre
Sue Payne National Council Delegate - East South Wales Centre
Pauline Wood Secretary - East Yorks Centre
Ian Murphy National Council Delegate - Isle of Man Centre
Brian Webster Secretary - Midland Centre
Eddie Jones National Council Delegate – Midland Centre
Elwyn Williams Chairman - Mid-Wales Centre
Pam James Secretary - Mid-Wales Centre
Annie Bates National Council Delegate - Mid-Wales Centre
Robert Wilson National Council Delegate - Northern Centre
Bob Livesey Chairman - North West Centre
Jamie Clarke South Eastern Centre
Roy Collins Chairman - Southern Centre
Chris Fletcher Secretary - Southern Centre
Barry New National Council Delegate – Southern Centre
Val Webb Chairman - South Midland Centre
Judith Ayres Secretary - South Midland Centre
Brian Edwards National Council Delegate – South Western Centre
Greta Edwards Secretary - South Western Centre
Frank Sweeting National Council Delegate – Wessex Centre
Paul Hearn Wessex Centre
Bryan Puckett Secretary - West South Wales Centre
Margaret Mellish Secretary - Non-Territorial Board
Phil Tomlin National Council Delegate – Non-Territorial Board
Brian Bonny Financial Director
Peter Beardmore Director
Eddie Bellars Director
Roger Brown Director
John Collins Director
Tony Noel Director
Dave Luscombe Business Development Officer
Eddie Herd Motocross Committee
Colin Armes Honorary Member
John Bussell Honorary Member
Gary Thompson MBE BEM General Secretary
Item 1: Apologies for Absence
Apologies were received from: John Blower, Colin Boniface, Peter Burrell, Frank Carter, Alan Clarke, John Cullum, Alan Foskew, Tim Fairbrother, Peter Gregory, Peter Hillaby, Roy Hanks, Roy Humphrey, Eric Jones, Alan King, Dr Paul King, Dave Loney, Colin Moram, Fred Nicholson, Steve Macauley, Archie Sheddon, Mel Simpson, Ken Sprayson, R W Smith, Sue Smith, Phyl Stephenson, and John Willis.
Item 2: Confirmation of Minutes of the Meeting held on 15th July 2006
The minutes of the meeting held on 15th July 2006 were accepted and confirmed as read.
Item 3: Matters Arising
Amalgamation of Youth and Adult Committees
The Chairman stated the amalgamation of the youth and adult Motocross Committees had been completed and was working very well. The four members appointed to the Adult Committee to concentrate on Youth activity and organise the British Youth Motocross Championships, was thus far proving to be successful.
Legal Matters
Mr Thompson briefly outlined the course of events regarding the legal action taken against RHL Activities Ltd. The Company ceased trading at the end of October and the appointment of a Liquidator is pending. The solicitor representing RHL Activities Ltd recently stated that his client would like to make a deal to settle the dispute. The ACU declined this offer (as it was a broken deal that lead to the action in the first place) and so the legal action continues.
The Chairman went on to explain that the ACU are currently having discussions with a local firm of solicitors with a view to retaining them for all our new business.
Mr Berisford raised his concerns that the On Road – Off Road Regulations paper only covers England and does not recognise or take into consideration regulations in Wales. Mr Luscombe replied that the ACU are regularly seeking input from the Welsh Authorities on a number of issues and in many cases because the English political system is much bigger than Wales, this causes a delay in some decisions being made. The Chairman finished by saying that in some matters, we have no control and can only respond when asked to do so and let the wheels of government take its course.
Mr Thompson explained that correspondence would continue to be distributed from ACU Head Office by both electronic and hard copy. The Chairman stated that in time he wanted to move in the same direction as the FIM in that all correspondence from ACU Head Office would be sent out electronically.
The Chairman conveyed the Board’s appreciation to the ACU Staff in respect of the recently published ACU Handbook. This publication has now achieved a very high standard in terms of its accuracy, presentation and content. He also complimented the ACU Licence Department as Competitors licence application forms have been continuously dealt with and processed on the day of arrival.
The meeting was brought up to date on the enhancements made to improve the security of ACU House.
The Chairman explained the intention to recruit a Motocross Manager at ACU Head Office to compliment the existing two staff in the department. Motocross is becoming more and more professional and the Board have accepted the requirement for a Motocross Manager to deal with Motocross issues affecting organising Clubs.
The remit of the appointment is to be wide-ranging to deal with a whole number of issues on a more professional footing. The Board believed it was time to react now and not to see Motocross move in the same direction as Road Racing did a number of years ago. The Motocross manager would liaise directly with Promoters and Clubs and give advice as necessary. An advertisement for the post is currently being prepared.
The Chairman noted that the fuel regulations contained in the ACU Handbook did not include Bio-Ethanol Fuel. This matter was being addressed.
Track Racing
Mr Noel informed the meeting of a recent article in the Speedway Star that featured Adam Wrathall – Youth Intermediate Grass Track Champion. The Track Racing Committee introduced last year, a scheme that the school attended by a Youth Champion will receive a donation of money to put towards the school sports fund. In this case, the Speedway Star featured a presentation of £100 to Adam’s school with Adam in his racing leathers and bike etc. Likewise, Mr R W Smith attended a local school in Derby at which a similar presentation took place.
It was noted that Mr Hellam, a Canadian Promoter, who through the ACU ran a successful indoor Supercross event at Sheffield last Autumn would like to run more events with the ACU. These would be Permitted through ACU Sporting Events Ltd and organised in conjunction with the Motocross Committee. Discussions are ongoing.
Both Mr Puckett and Mr Webster raised concerns regarding the affiliation of Recognised Promoters. Mr Puckett was concerned that Promoters wanted to affiliate in some cases to run ‘one off’ events and Mr Webster was concerned that Promoters wanted to affiliate either as Promoters or as an ACU Club.
However, the Centre was not being kept informed of discussions during the negotiations and this raised concerns when they were requested to endorse the Clubs application to affiliate to the Centre and the ACU. The Chairman agreed to address the matter with the Motocross Committee.
The Chairman described a recent meeting he had attended at the Cambridge Junior Club, currently a Club affiliated to ORPA, who had expressed an interest in joining the ACU. They had ultimately decided to remain with ORPA and the main reasons for this was the bureaucracy involved in running an ACU event through a Centre and the cost of insurance. It is evident that unless we can streamline our traditional practices and procedures to make them acceptable more of our Clubs will consider leaving us. We therefore have to tackle this situation head on as our Clubs are the lifeblood of the ACU and the reason for our existence. We must also appreciate that the situation is urgent as other organisations are growing in strength and may challenge our position as the recognised National Governing Body of the Sport.
The ACU has to keep pace with modern trends and make every effort to attract back those Clubs and riders who have gone to other organisations. We must also encourage and attract new Clubs and Riders to organise and run their events with the ACU. The Sport is being made available cheaply and conveniently through ORPA and other organisations and we must compete with this even if the solutions may be painful and some long accepted practices do not survive.
He highlighted a classic example of ACU bureaucracy when recently a Centre were reluctant to authorise a permit for a round of the ACU’s Maxxis British Motocross Championship to run as it clashed with a local Centre/Club trial. This was exactly the type of issue we were trying to avoid.
Mr Puckett was concerned that we were licensing Officials who then officiated with other organisations and his fear was this might put those Officials and the ACU at risk. The Chairman explained that the documentation and licences held by individuals were only valid for ACU events and for the period covered by the ACU Permit for an event. Should an individual wish to officiate at an ORPA event or an event held under another organisation he did so under the rules of that organisation.
Mr R Collins raised an issue regarding a recommendation by the Motocross Committee to allow Keith Newman to operate at Matchams Motox Park. In essence, the Committee had recommended that Mr Newman affiliate through the Centre in the normal manner, should he wish to do so. Mr Herd stated that Mr Higgins had carried out a comprehensive track inspection of the facility to hold a round of the British MMX Championships and the matters highlighted in his report would have to be addressed and rectified before a Temporary Track Certificate and Permit was issued for a National Event to be held at the venue. The Chairman stated that he wanted to find out more about what had happened regarding Matchams Motox World Ltd after which the Board would take a view.
Mr Puckett raised the point that a Club affiliated under another Organisation was not allowed to join the ACU. The Chairman stated that currently this was the case, however, if the organisation concerned was run properly, he did not see why they should not be allowed to join the ACU as long as they ran any ACU permitted event in accordance with the ACU National Sporting Code and the relevant Standing Regulations. Although this goes against traditional ACU rules, the Club or Organiser would run anyway, whether they were with the ACU or not.
Mr J Collins stated that the Recognised Promoters were set up so that Promoters could operate under the ACU banner without going through the Centre system. He also said that there were people who generally want nothing to do with the ACU but would like to run a British Championship event. The Chairman stated this would have to be looked at and, if necessary, adjustments may have to be made to accommodate this situation.
Although featured later in the agenda, the Chairman explained the Board’s current review of the Insurance cover provided. He spoke about a meeting that took place in the Lockton offices (our Insurance Broker, previously known as Alexander Forbes) on Wednesday 21st February at which discussions took place regarding a possible tiered system – featuring a Gold, Silver and Bronze type cover for our Clubs and Organisers.
The Gold cover would be as is currently provided and Silver and Bronze cover would be made available taking out some aspects of the existing cover in order to be able to offer lower premiums. It was always stated that the ORPA cover was inappropriate and not enough – however it is evident that their Clubs and Riders are happy to operate with the lower cover.
If we were to introduce a Bronze cover there would be no Personal Accident benefits for riders although there would be the facility for them to purchase this as an extra on-line through the ACU and Locktons website. There were a number of other areas where the cover could be reduced and economies made in order to make the ACU more competitive.
As part of this process it had been identified that premiums could be reduced if the payment of premiums could be streamlined. The current system of payments through Centres is unwieldy (and there are still some payments outstanding from events which took place last year). The whole payment scheme needs to be reviewed to secure economies and this will inevitably mean that the current “commissions” that the Centres/Clubs and the ACU receive will be lost in favour of a solution where it will be a condition of the issue of a Permit that the Insurance is paid direct within 14 days.
Mr Webster mentioned the unacceptable length of time that the Insurance Company had taken to deal with an Abandonment of Event claim from one of his Trials Clubs. The Chairman stated that we are in the final year of a three year deal with Locktons and as part of any re-negotiation, he wanted certain assurances that a better service would be forthcoming should the ACU decide to renew with the Company for the next three years.
Mr Sweeting asked for confirmation that should a tiered system come into effect, would Gold cover be the same as the current cover available. The Chairman confirmed that the current insurance cover would be classed as Gold and then with various items taken off, reduced to Silver and Bronze.
Item 4: Review of the current practise regarding the Elections/Appointments of Individuals to the Board of Directors and Sport Committees via the National Council
The Chairman stated that the Finance Director is currently appointed by the Board and ratified by the National Council. He suggested that whilst it is important to elect members to the Board it is also important that, given the opportunity, we should look at strengthening the Board and perhaps appoint two Directors in particular areas of expertise, for example have an appointed Director with a financial background and appoint a Director who has a business or legal background.
The Chairman then spoke of his long term objective to bring back the whole of Road Racing under one umbrella and that would be extremely difficult unless changes are made to the present Centre based system for that discipline.
The Road Race Committee currently have three members elected by the National Council and although the Committee originally wanted to appoint those members in future – the Board had felt that this would be a step too far and had suggested that a revised proposal for election by the Road Race Clubs would be accepted. The Road Race Committee had agreed to this and would propose to National Council that these three members be elected by the active Road Race Clubs. The term active – defined as a Road Race Club that had applied for a permit to organise an event in the current or previous year.
He also suggested that this is the same route that the Motocross Committee should take in the longer term so that the best possible people would be appointed to serve the Committee and the Sport.
Mr R Collins suggested that Road Race could be modelled on the current set up of the Speedway Control Bureau, although part of the Company, but its’ activity and finances ring-fenced from the bureaucracy of the ACU. The Chairman stated that this had been looked at and once all of Road Racing was under the same hat, this system might work.
Mrs Ayres commented that concern had been raised in the South Midland Centre that if we did not have elections then some people were never going to be appointed if their faces did not fit. The Chairman felt that this criticism also applied to the current electoral system but accepted that appointments although appropriate were not a perfect solution. The objective is simply to put the very best available people for the job in place. If there are people of known ability who are available and willing to contribute, the ACU cannot possibly turn them away - subject to the proviso that they are acceptable as part of the team.
The Chairman then spoke of the Road Race Committee’s ‘Open Door’ policy where Clubs may send along Observers who are invited to fully contribute to all the discussions but do not take part in any formal voting process.
Mr Jones stated that currently two members are elected each year to the Motocross Committee, how many did the Chairman see being appointed in the future? The Chairman replied by saying that he saw no problem with one individual being appointed and one being elected by National Council.
The Chairman stated that Clubs would be invited to the Road Race Committee in November each year to vote on the candidates for appointment at that meeting. Mr Cadogan asked if this would include Clubs who organised Hill Climbs and Sprints and the Chairman replied that he did not see this as being the case as these Clubs were not involved in the mainstream business and were already fully represented on the Drag Race, Hill Climb and Sprints sub-committee. The Road Race Committee deals predominantly with Road Race matters and so it was these Clubs he suggested that were best able to decide how this branch of our sport should be managed.
Mrs Wood from East Yorks Centre suggested that a Road Race Club should be given an amount of votes according to the number of members it had within its’ organisation. Mr Jessup of the East Midland Centre replied by saying that if the club was active, it should simply be one vote per Club. The Chairman agreed in principle with Mr Jessup and believed that his suggestion should be adopted initially but felt that the question would ultimately be decided by experience. In any case, if changes to the voting strength are to be considered at any point in the future, it should perhaps be based on the number of Permits issued, which is a matter of fact rather than on numbers of members – which often isn’t.
Mr Murphy stated that if a Club did not meet how would they obtain their mandate? The Chairman and General Secretary replied this was a Club issue and not one for the ACU to determine.
Mr Jones stated that the Midland Centre currently take advice from Mr Hanks whom to vote for on the Road Race Committee. If the system changed that only Road Race Clubs voted for the Road Race Committee, surely Road Race Clubs would not be involved in voting for Off-Road Committee members. The Chairman agreed with this wholeheartedly and stated this was the right step we should take.
Mr Cadogan asked how many people present in the room were actively involved in Road Racing – the count was very few.
Mr Murphy from the Isle of Man agreed with the principle put forward, however, due to the circumstances involved in the difficulty of some Road Racing Clubs being represented he said that Postal Voting must be considered. The Chairman stated that there was always someone from the Isle of Man at a Road Race Committee meeting however, if this became an issue it is something the Committee would address.
Mr Livesey asked if the Road Race Manager automatically had a seat on the Committee – if this was not the case was the Road Race Manager blocking the path of someone else being appointed? The Chairman accepted the point but felt that the current situation had advantages in practice. In the event of suitably qualified candidates coming forward under any new system then this is a further point that may need to be addressed.
Item 5: To consider and discuss the possible centralisation of Issue of Permits for all Grass Track and Motocross events from ACU Head Office
There was, as expected some strong feelings and a lot of debate regarding this issue. The Chairman started by saying that in respect of Grass Track, there is a National Committee of six persons, one full time Secretary in ACU Head Office and 129 permits issued most of them from the Centres, which means that the National Committee and Secretary haven’t a great deal of direct control on what happens within their sport. He questioned whether this was appropriate. In his opinion, Grass Track should be managed from ACU Head Office, very much in the same way as Road Racing.
Mr Noel stated that the Centres and Clubs had been sent the dates for this year’s fixture list and unfortunately only three replies had been received in total. His emphasis was that the Committee were trying, but getting very little response.
During the course of discussions the two main themes the Centres saw as being the main problems were; a. the perceived loss of control/power and b. the loss of revenue currently received from Permits.
Mr Livesey asked what would be put in place to compensate for the loss of revenue? The Chairman replied that, as he saw it, nothing would be put in place. He believed that it was time for this discipline to be managed through the main committee and from Rugby. He recognised that finance was an important issue and felt there might be a case for a general review of financing the Centres. In the meantime if any Centre or a Club had a specific project or event for which they needed financial support then an application should be made to ACU Head Office which the Board, through the Track Racing Committee, could consider.
Mr Wilson stated that should this be put in place, this would be the first step towards the demise of the Centre structure. The Chairman accepted the point but questioned whether we are indeed one body or a collection of 21 independent ones.
The Chairman believed that as the Centres are our Members and a vital part of our organisation there can be no possible threat to their continued existence. In particular he could certainly not see the Trials and Enduro discipline ever being managed other than through the Centre system.
After more discussion, Mr Berisford stated that the main problem his Centre faced would be the loss of income from issuing Centre Permits. The Chairman replied that the current financial set up of Centres needed reviewing as a global exercise.
Concluding the debate, the Chairman stated that the Board would need to look at this matter further regarding the loss of finances to the Centres and the loss of sovereignty but that he hoped the matter had provided fuel for much more debate.
Mr Bellars spoke about the meeting with Locktons outlined by the Chairman earlier in the meeting. He asked those present to take away the following points for consideration; a. does the Competitor appreciate that part of his entry fee provides the cover for the Marshals/Officials? b. Is a rider aware that if he was to ride in an ORPA event, and he hit a spectator or a Marshal, then he is personally liable whereas this is not the case with the ACU under the current Insurance provided?
c. Do we continue to provide Personal Accident cover for our Competitors? d. do we want a tiered insurance service – gold, silver and bronze? And finally e. do we want the Board to actively take on other organisations and be competitive or stay as we are?
Mr Smith (Eastern Centre) asked if there was any merit in splitting the money paid for Insurance away from the Licence fee? The Chairman said this would be taken into consideration and the Board would take a view on this.
Mr Bellars outlined the article ‘Risky Business’ written by our Insurance Brokers to be featured in the next issue of the Sportmoto magazine that highlights some of the Insurance benefits available to our competitors and officials.
Mr Sweeting asked if a Club maintained Gold cover would that also mean PA cover for competitors was removed? The Chairman stated that should a Club wish to take Gold cover, the cover would be as it is at the moment. However, should a Club want to take either the Silver or Bronze cover, these are the two options where economies were being made to reduce the premium. PA for competitors would then become an option for the rider who would be responsible for organising their own cover should they require it. Once finalised, details would be published of how to obtain the cover on-line either through the Locktons or the ACU website.
Mr J Collins stated that doing nothing is not an option. Something had to be done to keep Clubs and competitors within the ACU, and to attract back those who have left to ride under another organisation. He said that Insurance was only part of the problem, however, one solution might be for a competitor to take out insurance for the whole year at the beginning of the year. He also stated and asked those present not to forget that there was an added expenditure purely and simply as we were the Governing Body, this incurred responsibilities to the FIM, the UEM and other matters such as Training.
Mrs Payne finished this item by stating that competitors simply wanted to ride their bikes, and was not interested who provided what. She said there was too much in-fighting within the ACU, people were more intent on giving each other ‘grief’ than improving standards. She finished by saying that we should be looking at our finances and ourselves – stop arguing and be more flexible.
Item 7: Amendments to the 2007 Competition Licence Application Form
On the 2007 licence application form, it stated on page 8 that a Road Race competitor was required to have his licence endorsed by a Road Race Club before being submitted to ACU Head Office. The Chairman stated that the Board of Directors had recently ‘dragged him over the coals’ on this matter and as this didn’t happen too often, they had made the most of it!
He explained his reasoning for the additional line added to the Licence form, and this was to focus attention on Road Race issues. The affect was minimal, only two issues had arisen to date. Following on from this, MCRCB had asked if they could have dispensation to sign BSB licences and this matter will be discussed at the next MCRCB Board meeting.
However, suffice to say the line stating that a Road Race competitor needs to have his licence signed by a Road Race club will be deleted from page 8 of the competition licence form for 2008.
Item 8: Any Other Business
Stewards Qualification
Mr R Collins stated that he had been told that to be a Steward, he had to attend a seminar in each discipline to qualify for that particular Sport, however, this was not the case in the past. The Chairman agreed with this and in his opinion, a Steward’s role did not change a great deal from discipline to discipline. However, the Directors will discuss this issue and Mr Thompson was asked to ensure this was put on the agenda for the next Board meeting.
Action: Mr Thompson
Officials Support
Mr Murphy explained that in September the Isle of Man are hosting three days of competitions including the Trials Des Nations. This will be a huge undertaking in terms of what Officials are available. He therefore asked that if anyone wished to support the events as an Official/Observer to contact Mr Tony Temple, the Isle of Man Centre secretary.
Recent Article in TMX
Miss Bates spoke about a recent article in TMX written by Mr Luscombe regarding full planning consent being required for events. Mr Luscombe explained that he was talking about Off-Road Sport in the wider context rather than each event. He was simply relaying the view of the Government and making everyone aware of the threats that face Off-Road Motorcycle Sport in the future.
Mr J Collins spoke of the requirement for Environmental Mats at Enduro events. He said this will be enforced as best as we can at British Championship events and he asked Centres to do likewise and enforce this as best they can at Centre level events, but not to go over the top.
Mr Thompson notified everyone that the CD version of the Handbook was now being distributed to those who had asked for a CD on their Licence form and that some CD’s were available should they wish to take one away with them.
He also told them that the next edition of Sportmoto magazine would be distributed early in the week following this meeting and that the Board had agreed to the magazine being increased from four to six issues. Complimentary copies would be sent to all Club secretaries as well as being sent to the Centre Secretaries and National Council delegates.
Item 9: Date of Next Meeting
The Chairman thanked everyone for their attendance. This had been an extremely useful meeting, difficult matters had been considered and the views put forward will be put before the Board. He wished everyone a safe journey home. The date of the next meeting will be Saturday 14th July 2007.
The meeting closed at 4.05pm.