/ Sport England Lacrosse, Golf, the BMC and us.

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
DingBat - on 28 Oct 2013
Guess what ?
Sport England have put £10.2 million to badminton, £9.3 million into sailing, £13 million into golf and lacrosse got £3.4 million, while mountaineering, which includes rock climbing inside and outside got £3 million.
These figures are over 3 years and granted to the national governing bodies who bid for funds. Ours is the BMC

Are we being sold short by the sports council ? Has the BMC worked hard enough on our behalf?



Bergvagabunden - on 28 Oct 2013
In reply to DingBat: Surely mountaineering and rock climbing are pastimes , not sports ? I'm surprised they gave anything at all...the whole point of mountaineering and rock climbing is team work , though of course they can be done solo , there's no competition as such .
ice.solo - on 28 Oct 2013
In reply to DingBat:

Im surprised badminton did so well.
And 9.3 on sailing wont go far.
The New NickB - on 28 Oct 2013
In reply to Bergvagabunden:

It's more of a sport than golf. Lacrosse is a strange one, not being an Olympic sport.
999thAndy on 28 Oct 2013
In reply to The New NickB:
Golf at least has a clear scoring method. So I'd consider it more of a sport than anything where points are awarded by judges. Having said that it's not really an Olympic sport - higher further faster?
JIMBO on 28 Oct 2013
In reply to Bergvagabunden:
> (In reply to DingBat) Surely mountaineering and rock climbing are pastimes , not sports ? ...the whole point of mountaineering and rock climbing is team work , though of course they can be done solo , there's no competition as such ...

Really? There might be in mountaineering but in rock climbing no team gets you to the top it's down to you and your preparation... there's always been competition even in just getting to the top first...

The New NickB - on 28 Oct 2013
In reply to 999thAndy:
> (In reply to The New NickB)
> Golf at least has a clear scoring method. So I'd consider it more of a sport than anything where points are awarded by judges. Having said that it's not really an Olympic sport - higher further faster?

It is a walk in a patterned jumper, usually with added fascism.

Climbing has a clear scoring method, at least in its competition version and clearly it fulfills one of those Olympic ideals, not that I think either should be in the Olympics.
DingBat - on 28 Oct 2013
In reply to The New NickB:
Yes I agree but..... The sport England web site talks about climbing as a ' fast growing' sport with 100,000 regular participants, while sailing has just 64,400 active participants. Are we being swindled by Sport England and under represented by the BMC to get a fair share of lottery money?
999thAndy on 28 Oct 2013
In reply to The New NickB:
What I meant was that Golf is closer to being a sport than Gymnastics or Diving or Ballroom Dancing, not that it is a sport.
martinph78 on 28 Oct 2013
In reply to DingBat: Can you give us a list of all the other sports that got no funding, or less than £3m please. Just so we can get an overall picture.

Or if not, a link to the report that you are referring to?

DingBat - on 28 Oct 2013
robatkinson - on 28 Oct 2013
In reply to Bergvagabunden:
> (In reply to DingBat) Surely mountaineering and rock climbing are pastimes , not sports ? I'm surprised they gave anything at all...the whole point of mountaineering and rock climbing is team work , though of course they can be done solo , there's no competition as such .

'Sport' Climbing, im pretty sure there's plenty of climbing/bouldering competitions around, regional,national and international, just because its not in the Olympics doesn't make it any less of a sport.

granted most climbers don't take part in the competition aspect but then i imagine that a large quantity of sailors don't take part in competitions.
williemiller - on 28 Oct 2013
In reply to DingBat:
> (In reply to The New NickB)
> Yes I agree but..... The sport England web site talks about climbing as a ' fast growing' sport with 100,000 regular participants, while sailing has just 64,400 active participants. Are we being swindled by Sport England and under represented by the BMC to get a fair share of lottery money?

I don't think it is done on participation numbers as angling which is always cited as the most popular sport by participation standards only gets £1.9m
The New NickB - on 28 Oct 2013
In reply to DingBat:
> (In reply to The New NickB)
> Yes I agree but..... The sport England web site talks about climbing as a ' fast growing' sport with 100,000 regular participants, while sailing has just 64,400 active participants. Are we being swindled by Sport England and under represented by the BMC to get a fair share of lottery money?

Sailing also averaged about 5 medals at each of the last 5 Olympic regattas, that is what matters when these decisions are made.
williemiller - on 28 Oct 2013
In reply to robatkinson:
> (In reply to Bergvagabunden)
> [...]
>
>
>
> granted most climbers don't take part in the competition aspect but then i imagine that a large quantity of sailors don't take part in competitions.

I think the number of sailors, golfers, anglers etc participating in competitive events will be much higher than in climbing. This is probably due to the breadth and class of competition available in these sports. Every sailing, golf and angling club will have it,s own annual competition for members. Are there any climbing clubs that organise in house competitions?

As far as I'm aware the only real climbing competitions are held on an open entry basis with the only streaming being into age categories. There is no ability tiering or league system that you find in other sports which allows all abilities to indulge in their sport competitively.

All of the above is based on supposition and guesswork so may well be total balls.
Ramblin dave - on 28 Oct 2013
In reply to Bergvagabunden:
> (In reply to DingBat) Surely mountaineering and rock climbing are pastimes , not sports ?

So as I understand it, Sport England has two basic goals: firstly, to make people healthier and happier by increasing general participation in sport, and secondly to demonstrate to the world the innate superiority of the British Way Of Life while simultaneously making us all Proud To Be British, by achieving high-profile sporting successes on the world stage.

"Mountaineering", in the broadest sense, is clearly a fairly decent way to achieve the first of these. It gets people out doing exercise, and it also tends to be popular with people who aren't interested in a lot of other sports.

Arguably it'd be a good way to achieve the second, too, albeit probably more through high altitude mountaineering than competition climbing - I think that stuff like Hillary and Tenzing summitting Everest on coronation day or a plumber from Manchester conquering Kangchenjunga or the big expeditions of the 70's genuinely capture people's imagination in a way that an Olympic bronze in badminton doesn't. But I think in that area, Sport England have a slightly narrowed remit and are basically interested in running factories to churn out Olympic medallists as efficiently as possible.

Hence of the £3m that mountaineering does get, £2.7m goes on "participation" and only £0.3m on "talent".
Graeme Alderson on 28 Oct 2013
In reply to williemiller:
> (In reply to robatkinson)
Every sailing, golf and angling club will have it,s own annual competition for members. Are there any climbing clubs that organise in house competitions?
>

The biggest club in the country has an in house competition. The Army Mountaineering Association.
williemiller - on 28 Oct 2013
In reply to Graeme Alderson:
So 1 then, as far as we know, and that is not open to the general public.

My point was there is very little scope for climbing in competitively unless you are operating above, possibly well above, the average standard. Therefore most people don't participate on a sporting level and that is why the funding seems to some to be meager in comparison to participation levels.
GrahamD - on 28 Oct 2013
In reply to williemiller:


> My point was there is very little scope for climbing in competitively unless you are operating above, possibly well above, the average standard. Therefore most people don't participate on a sporting level and that is why the funding seems to some to be meager in comparison to participation levels.

Don't you think most climbers don't compete because they simply don't want to ?
williemiller - on 28 Oct 2013
In reply to GrahamD:
I'm not commenting on that either way. I'm just trying to point out that there are fewer opportunities to participate in climbing competitively, should you want to, compared to most other sports. This probably has some bearing on how "sporty" Sport England consider climbing to be and thus the level of funds they have allocated to it.
Graeme Alderson on 28 Oct 2013
In reply to williemiller: Well you are forgetting the stacks of inter school comps that happen all over the place, so the lower level comp structure is starting to appear - remember that it is a remarkably young sport, 1st comps Excluding speed comps in Russia) took place less than 30 years ago. I think it has come a long way since then.
Offwidth - on 28 Oct 2013
In reply to Graeme Alderson:

Russia is a long way I guess.
Graeme Alderson on 28 Oct 2013
In reply to Offwidth: :-)

Should have been "1st comps (excluding speed comps in Russia) took place less than 30 years ago."
stuartholmes - on 29 Oct 2013
In reply to DingBat: The BMC has worked realy hard for this funding and it means lots of opportunities. We may not of got as much as some sports but we have hot some. Its a start atleast hope fully more to come.
DingBat - on 29 Oct 2013
In reply to stuartholmes:
Agreed.

"Following the announcement of an almost 100% increase in Sport England funding the BMC's Dave Turnbull has revealed how the money, which will be split with MTE, MTUK, Plas y Brenin, the OIA and ABCTT, will be spent over the 4 year award period. Turnbull, the BMC's CEO, revealed that "mountaineering" has had the biggest budget increase of the 46 sports funded by Sport England and that he believes the application was the only one to receive 100% of the funds applied for."

So there's plenty of money in the pot for things the BMC is committed to.
DingBat - on 31 Oct 2013
In reply to DingBat:
Bump
Dogwatch - on 01 Nov 2013
In reply to ice.solo:

> And 9.3 on sailing wont go far.

Why do you think that? The cost of an Olympic class dinghy is considerably less than that of a family car.


Dogwatch - on 01 Nov 2013
In reply to DingBat:
> (In reply to The New NickB)
> Yes I agree but..... The sport England web site talks about climbing as a ' fast growing' sport with 100,000 regular participants, while sailing has just 64,400 active participants.

That figure is clearly incorrect. The RYA (BMC equivalent) has 102,000 members. Large numbers of sailors don't belong to the RYA, same as many climbers don't belong to the BMC. The RYA issued 165,000 training certificates in 2012. Since most sailors won't be awarded certificates in any gives year, the number of sailors will be significantly higher than that.
DingBat - on 01 Nov 2013
In reply to Dogwatch:
Figures taken from Sport England's own web site-
The issue remains the BMC has done a fantastic job getting long term commitment from Sport England, so what about securing Harrison's rocks toilet block and the Julie Tullis camp site with the lose change?
This amenity has been supported by the BMC using Sport England funding for umpteen years- so why are the BMC not stepping up to the plate with increased funding in the interest of London and the South East climbers- their biggest constituent group?
bill briggs1 - on 01 Nov 2013
In reply to DingBat:

I think Ernest Hemingway said there were only three sports, motor racing , bull fighting and mountaineering , all the others were pass times .
ads.ukclimbing.com
MJ - on 01 Nov 2013
In reply to bill briggs1:

Barnaby Conrad: "Only bullfighting, mountain climbing and auto racing are sports, the rest are merely games".
John Roberts (JR) - on 01 Nov 2013
In reply to Graeme Alderson+ Dingbat:

You're being too modest Graeme! I competed in schools comps, scouts, Navy and Army comps up-to 15 years ago. They've been happening for years in the UK. To say we have no competition structure is fallacy, I wish I'd started climbing with the facilities we have now, and the support we have, it's not perfect, funding could be improved, but it's come a long way and the BMC (and Graeme who was a big part of it) should be congratulated for their efforts. We wouldn't have some of the best climbing athletes in the world in the UK without them.

The Harrison's toilet block is a different issue and let's not conflate one issue with sweeping statements about all the work the BMC does or the difficult decisions it needs to make prioritising the money it bids for in a challenging economic climate. The BMC are, in general, doing an excellent job as a representative body in a rapidly growing sport, far better than a lot of other representative bodies across sports, professions and trades. Withdrawing membership is probably the least effective thing to do.

However, good luck with your campaign, let's see what Monday brings.
bill briggs1 - on 01 Nov 2013
In reply to MJ:

thanks for the correction ,
bill.
DingBat - on 02 Nov 2013
In reply to bill briggs1:
Does anyone out there know how difficult it is to bid for Sports Council funding as a community project which supports mass participation in sport?
Graeme Alderson on 02 Nov 2013
In reply to DingBat: Well if you call them the Sports Council it will be impossible ;-)
DingBat - on 04 Nov 2013
In reply to Graeme Alderson:
Well thanks for that Graeme.

I'm hoping the BMC can support London and the South East- the biggest constituent group of members by far in the BMC, to put in a bid to take over the lease of Harrison's amenities in November 2014. As I understand it Sport England have unlabelled grant funding. The forestry commission who own the land are more than willing not to bulldoze the facility IF a non - profit organisation, such as the BMC could take on the responsibility.
DingBat - on 12 Nov 2013
In reply to DingBat:
So, I pay my subs to the BMC and have done so for more than 30 years, I know that the BMC read these threads and I have written requests to the BMC on this subject on the BMC website but I can't seem to get any answers. Why is that ? Is the BMC so arrogant that it can't answer questions from concerned members?
Bulls Crack - on 12 Nov 2013
In reply to DingBat:

How much do you think 'we' should get?
DingBat - on 12 Nov 2013
In reply to Bulls Crack:
I think the BMC should honour things it has been committed to for decades and if it thinks a change in direction is needed it should consult / canvass
DingBat - on 15 Nov 2013
In reply to DingBat:
> (In reply to Bulls Crack)
> I think the BMC should honour things it has been committed to for decades and if it thinks a change in direction is needed it should consult / canvass

Well that went down like a lead ballon. Shouldn't the BMC be accountable to its members? How do you as a member get canvassed for your opinions? I suppose if your glossy summit mag gets returned to sender they send a letter out asking a) have you moved house ? b) have you given up climbing? ( but I guess neither thing happens.)
We're always invited to a regional meeting to air our views, but don't ask what the agenda is in advance and don't guess what the % of participation is from members because 'mother knows best'. Members of the executive committee even post to UkC forums but then are not allowed to respond to members concerns and comments, so much for accountability . I'm personally very impressed with the ' grip' Dave has on his officers' contributions to forum debate but it would be better if there were real dialogue (both ways!) with debate rather than just baiting going on.
But then everything comes from above doesn't it? I wonder if lacrosse is any different.
Calder - on 16 Nov 2013
In reply to DingBat:

> Shouldn't the BMC be accountable to its members?

It is, everyone on the committee and area reps are elected, no?

> How do you as a member get canvassed for your opinions?

No politician-like door to door, truth is that's a waste of time. But send an email/letter like you would to your MP. I'm sure if enough others do likewise it'll make it into an agenda. Or, go to a meeting and raise it under 'any other business'. Or go to the AGM and do likewise.

Otherwise, give it a rest. Because the truth is that £3m is a pretty good (and reasonable) chunk.

How much do you think the BMC need?
Offwidth - on 17 Nov 2013
In reply to DingBat: Simple question...when you emailed the BMC did you use your real name and address?
DingBat - on 17 Nov 2013
In reply to Calder:
I'm sure if enough others do likewise it'll make it into an agenda. Or, go to a meeting and raise it under 'any other business'. Or go to the AGM and do likewise.
Please see the thread http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=567081 and note that an agenda has not been forthcoming yet. Please see the BMC web page http://community.thebmc.co.uk/Event.aspx?id=2891 that doesn't show the agenda, EVEN THOUGH climbers in London and the South East are clearly asking for a number of questions to be answered
>
> Otherwise, give it a rest. Because the truth is that £3m is a pretty good (and reasonable) chunk.
I think that this comment is plain rude. If people aren't interested in BMC funding deals and how money is spent then they wont click on this thread. I don't intend 'to give it a rest' anytime soon and I think the more people who genuinely contribute to this debate about spending and accountability the better.
>
> How much do you think the BMC need?
I think this is the wrong question. I think the question you should ask is are taxpayers who paid up for the Olympic Legacy happy with the way funding is being used by the National Representative Bodies- (Ours is the BMC) and whether funds are being used wisely by the recipients?


Graeme Alderson on 17 Nov 2013
In reply to DingBat:
> I think the more people who genuinely contribute to this debate about spending and accountability the better.

So only those that agree with your campaign (or more importantly the way you are going about it) are genuinely contributing. Well that is how I read it. Democracy etc has dissenters as well.

BTW you still haven't answered the question about whether the business plan for the BMC underwriting the public interest company actually involves the BMC underwriting the plan. Because this is what it ultimately boils down to.
DingBat - on 17 Nov 2013
In reply to Graeme Alderson:
> (In reply to DingBat)
> [...]
>
Democracy etc has dissenters as well.
>
Couldn't agree more, and I don't think they should be told to shuffle off into the corner.

> BTW you still haven't answered the question about whether the business plan for the BMC underwriting the public interest company actually involves the BMC underwriting the plan. Because this is what it ultimately boils down to.

Graeme, I don't think anyone expects the BMC to underwrite anything, nor should it. The BMC has a facilitating role and is capable of managing projects using public money to advance and promote climbing.
Offwidth - on 18 Nov 2013
In reply to DingBat: You still haven't answered my question about how you contacted the BMC. Alongside, trying to get Dave to come home from his holiday and silly accusations of Mafia's in Manchester and effectively claimbing all those who signed the petition support your views, you also accused the BMC of ignoring you when you contacted them; I'm very surprised at this, so I ask again did you contact them with your real name and address?
DingBat - on 18 Nov 2013
In reply to Offwidth:
In reply to Offwidth:
> (In reply to DingBat) You still haven't answered my question about how you contacted the BMC. Alongside, trying to get Dave to come home from his holiday and silly accusations of Mafia's in Manchester and effectively claimbing all those who signed the petition support your views, you also accused the BMC of ignoring you when you contacted them; I'm very surprised at this, so I ask again did you contact them with your real name and address?

I have not told 'Dave to come home' from his holiday or made any such claim about the 1200 people who have signed the petition to reinstate the amenities at Harrisons.

In terms of my use of the term mafia let me give you a quotation from common English usage:
"A group of people of similar interests or backgrounds prominent in a particular field or enterprise : clique"

If I chose, or anyone else choses not to respond to your posts it's ok isnt it? After all, you have not elected me nor paid for my employment. If you turn that on its head you your self might pose some questions on representation and accountability- which is exactly what this thread is about...
Offwidth - on 18 Nov 2013
In reply to DingBat:

"you your self might pose some questions on representation and accountability- which is exactly what this thread is about... "

Which is exactly why I'm putting the counter view. I think you represent yourself and the BMC has many members with views on priorities that will be very different to yours.

You still haven't answered my question on if you used your real name and address to contact the BMC: the key reason is that if you didnt you have no right of complaint here (and I hope the BMC will continue to ignore those who don't do this as they have much better things to be doing with their time than deal with semi-annonymous complaints).
DingBat - on 18 Nov 2013
In reply to Offwidth:
I have had written communication with two BMC officers and raised issues publically with my own BMC group.
I am unsure if you feel that this gives me ample 'right' to raise ongoing concerns on this thread. I will go away and read the posting legislation in detail.
SuperstarDJ - on 18 Nov 2013
In reply to 999thAndy:
> (In reply to The New NickB)
> What I meant was that Golf is closer to being a sport than Gymnastics or Diving or Ballroom Dancing, not that it is a sport.

How can golf be less of a sport than running? It demands fitness, skill tactical awareness and the ability to hold your nerve under pressure.

Running around a track's something you could train a dog to do. Golf's a proper sport, not just about being the best at exercising.
Offwidth - on 18 Nov 2013
In reply to DingBat: Firstly, some had sent stuff to the BMC on this subject where they were not clearly identifiable as a member. Secondly if you have written communication why did you say they didnt respond: "I have written requests to the BMC on this subject on the BMC website but I can't seem to get any answers."
Bwox - on 19 Nov 2013
In reply to SuperstarDJ:

> Golf's a proper sport, not just about being the best at exercising.

It's not a sport, it's a game. Or a pass-time.

DingBat - on 20 Nov 2013
In reply to DingBat:
> (In reply to DingBat)
> We're always invited to a regional meeting to air our views, but don't ask what the agenda is in advance...

If (Hypothetically) the BMC does not have an agenda for a meeting could an ordinary member provide one? Calder, Offwidth your opinions please?
Offwidth - on 20 Nov 2013
In reply to DingBat: I gave the link to the SE meeting at the BMC communities section of the website on the other thread where minutes and the agenda are kept. For a regular attender you should know this. No ordinary members can't set an agenda but they can raise items on the agenda, preferably by emailing the local area secretary in advance but worst case as AOB on the night (the problem with AOB is its hard to organise a valid discussion on the night as interested parties wont know and might not be there/ apologise but have a chance to email their views).
DingBat - on 20 Nov 2013
In reply to Offwidth:
Well I'm sorry but I cant find an agenda and niether can anyone else by following your links. Could you follow your link and confirm that an agenda is available please.
It seems pretty obvious that if there is no agenda published members 'ordinary members' (rather than extra ordinary members;) should be able to contribute to topicsw they want to raise. After all us members shouldn't control debate least we be described a clique!
Offwidth - on 21 Nov 2013
In reply to DingBat:

I'm just back from our Peak AGM and annual quiz.... sadly we have many pressing issues that are almost as serious as your toilets, including the uncertain future of the management of some crag called Stanage.

You're right that the BMC is 'us' members but you seem unwilling to accept that within that 'us' views and priorities may differ. If something is missing in your local area pages (content provided by hard working volunteers who have a real life as well) why not quietly contact them and offer your help rather than moaning here? It mystifies me that you are a regular attender at an area meeting that recently seems to be averaging under a score yet you seem ignorant of the basic realities and process around such meetings and how they can strongly influence the larger organistaion. You have communications with the BMC that involve no answers. It's all very odd indeed.
DingBat - on 21 Nov 2013
In reply to Offwidth:
Well I hope you got some quiz answers correct, because you're not getting much on this thread right.
I think the difference between me and you (both grumpy opinionated sods willing to slander people we've never met) is that I would never pretend that I understand and are expert in opinion on a crag and issue 200 miles away from where I live, using information supplied by people of a similar disposition to form an opinion which then embarrassingly you broadcast .
The fact that you latch onto the word 'toilet' illustrates the mono-browed approach to what is an issue of participation and access,(as discussed at the BMC regional meeting I was at last night).

Some of your assertions in the above post are plain rude: The BMC had been asked directly for the agenda several times; many people contributing to the threads supporting the importance of Harrison's as a resource do several days per year volunteer work for the BMC myself included (no this doesn’t make ME self-righteous !).
Because you are not local to the issues you would not understand how people contributing to meetings and discussions at the 'BMC sandstone open meetings' would expect these discussions to be read and acknowledged by BMC officers. Very odd indeed? I'd say so.
Offwidth - on 21 Nov 2013
In reply to DingBat:

I signed the petition and I support the issue which IS actually about a toilet (one of many important issues the BMC is facing at the moment). I simply don't support your browbeating of the BMC over this or understand how you managed to get no replies. The agenda is the responsibility of the local elected reps in your area (secretary, chair etc, supported by BMC staff if they need help) and sometimes they are just too busy to get it out on time (as opposed to not posting it on purpose, presumably in your mind trying to hide something); as a regular you should know this stuff. I'm not local but I do like the crag that goes with the toilet and I do care and as such I spoke to the BMC president, access officer and CEO and various others working for or with the BMC (Kendal is good for things like that) and I'm pretty convinced they are doing what they should with this situation right now.
Bjartur i Sumarhus on 21 Nov 2013
In reply to SuperstarDJ: Of course golf is a proper sport.It involves an incredible amount of skill physically and mentally to be able to play well.

A lot of inverse snobbery around it on here though
DingBat - on 21 Nov 2013
In reply to Offwidth:
agreed.
Our locally devolved 'BMC sandstone open meeting' regularly attracts 30 odd members in lively discussion about crags, access conservation and the such like, however the 'mother ship' BMC london and South East seems to have a slight disconnect with what's going on 1 hr away. This isnt to lay blame, its just to say its happening.

While 'the Petition' was about getting the toilet reopened (and therefore the campsite) the real issue is about (the BMC helping us by) encouraging and securing access and mass participation for generations of climbers, some not yet born from London and the South east. This then is the challenge.
Offwidth - on 21 Nov 2013
In reply to DingBat: Maybe as a group of local volunteers in L&SE they need additional volunteer help more than they need flack. Sandstone open meetings are all well and good but some process needs to go through the area meets and if people who care about SS issues don't help with that, by attending or engaging in other ways, some disapointment and communication problems are almost inevitable. I am still confused though as I thought your issues were with the Manchester head office.

On help to secure access that's seems to me from speaking to key staff exactly what the BMC is doing in this case. Encouragement and mass participation are in the BMC purview but they are controversial issues amongst the membership.
DingBat - on 22 Nov 2013
In reply
That's interesting because I have written to chair at London and South East today saying just that.
My issue with Didsbury is 30 professionals paid through subs and Sport England funding but no one rolling their sleeves up to (really) help. I take your's and Scott Titts point regarding the ' 'BMC IS US' completely but surely this is demonstrated important enough for BMC to deploy the professional support we pay for?
Offwidth - on 23 Nov 2013
In reply to DingBat:

So now you can work out how many of those 30 BMC employees might possibly have anything to do with this issue and then you can think about all the other priorities they have. I think they made a slow start but they seem to me to be doing exactly what they should now. How much of the slow start was down to your acknowledged lack of SS volunteer input feeding into the L&SE meetings? It is certainly not sensible to be expecting the chair and secretary to have to chase people who have urgent and important issues to raise, so given how much people care I would have expected a rammed LS&E meet and additional voluntary support where local officers are struggling to cope in any way. Also the BMC are not Thunderbirds, swooping in to right wrongs: support for local mobilised activists is their normal way of working; hence, in that, the BMC are `US`.

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.