In reply to Ian W:
A telling response to reasonable questions about accountability.
I don't recall spouting off. Just a civilised questions about representation from a by stander with doubts after some the recent fiasco.
I thought in this new era of freedom of information you might be only too pleased to put my enquiry to rest with reasonable answers.
You might easy quote from terms of reference or some other instrument, but instead you play the person rather than the ball. Not very sporting, but sadly ofthen the case when sport attracts money and funding.
I don't really see a problem if you say that the reps support athletes, no problem, they are, AFAIK, mostly funded by none BMC money anyway and I'd be happy to know that some sort of BMC committee or functionary at least had at least some oversight over that role.
If you told me the IFSC wasn't very accountable and stuffed up the recent broadcast decisions, but our BMC reps are using their influence towards working towards greater accountability(whether membership or athlete driven) at the IFSC council or whatever it is called. Great, progress, that would be a good answer.
Assurances of accountability and representation in some form is what I was seeking, not a personal argument, not least because I don't have time for arguments.
I have no interest in the competition climbing, nor any axe to grind. But I would like the various functions of the BMC to be transparent and accountable to the membership. It isn't too much to ask. I do currently have my doubts given the recent fiasco's involving the IFSC, which is why I enquire.
If IFSC website lists the terms of reference of reference of reps , please provide the link.
Like wise for a reps report of meetings, from the BMC website.
I haven't looked to hard, as I thought you would be only to happy to put my doubts to rest.