BMFA National Flying Centre

[MattyB]

Posted by Peter Jenkins on 07/05/2015 15:43:47:

Matty, it's the Treasurer's job to look at getting best value out of the BMFA's funds and making recommendations to both the Exec and Full Council. I am quite sure that he will provide his views on whether this is a prudent use of funds. I am quite sure that he and the rest of Council is more than a little interested in the long term health of the Organisation. I would imagine that many of the areas in which more information is needed will have already been identified by Council members, some of whom have quite useful business backgrounds, and will be brought up at the meeting.

Yes it's the Treasurer's job to get best value for the organisation, but in a Corporate setting there would also be a phalanx of risk and compliance specialsits looking at the implications of any huge scale (relative to the size of the org) investment or transaction such as this. Do the BMFA have these skills in their team and have they considered the risks? They might, but since we have not seen the proposal or a rundown of who was involved there is no way of telling.

Posted by Peter Jenkins on 07/05/2015 15:43:47:

If from your comments you have no faith in Council members to have any business background, knowledge or common sense in how to assess business risks then, in effect, you are saying you don't trust any of them. If that's the case, who is going to stand up and be counted and kick out these so called incompetents so that you, and other members, will feel confident that you have a Council you can trust and believe in? BTW, I'm not being sarcastic but just taking things to their logical conclusion. I think we are suffering the same in the big election going on i.e. a matter of trust in those running the show.

Fair question. Up until this point I have had no reason not to trust them - they seem to have done a reasonable job of directing and governing the association in the years I have been a member - but in that time they have never needed to take a decision of this magnitude and importance. Had they been transparent and said "We need to move quickly, here is the costed proposal, please feed back to your area councils by x date and then Full Council will vote based on the feedback they've heard" I would be quite happy. It's the fact they haven't done this that has caused this "trust gap".

What would I be prepared to do about it? Well I don't think there is anything any of us can do within the timescale of June 5th, but if I thought it would help I suppose I would try and put forward a motion of no confidence - mind you, to do that I'd have to be able to find a copy of that strangely elusive constitution...

Edited By MattyB on 07/05/2015 17:05:28

[Dizz]

Posted by MattyB on 07/05/2015 12:47:04:

................... Either way I don't think there is much more any of us can do now, other than making your representation to your area committee member - hopefully if enough people do this there will be enough votes to put the brakes on thsi proposal until financial modelling can be shared and questioned by rank and file members and a revised proposal put forward.

Of course Area Committees make take the view to endorse this proposal.

[Colin Bernard]

I think we have two issues here and they should be considered separately rather than being discussed as a common issue as above..

Firstly the NFC. Here I think the BMFA is working correctly where it has been documented here and on the BMFA site that the feasibility study will be presented to the council later this month and if the council decides there is justification for it, then the BMFA membership will be canvassed in some way to agree to move ahead.

This to my mind this the correct way to proceed.

The second issue is the purchase of the farm and I think this should be considered a separate issue from the NFC. True, it may have been the NFC discussions that triggered someone to consider investing in this way but as I read it, it is not as a result of a decision on the NFC having been made behind our backs.

Someone, somewhere, has decided to take a gamble on buying some land that looked as if it could be suitable should the NFC project go ahead on the basis that it could be sold at a profit if necessary.

The issue is has all the necessary due diligence been carried out to ensure that the purchase can be made with the necessary approvals from the right people, the necessary funding, minimal risk to the organisation etc.?

This is my concern at at the moment and that a very small percentage of the 30,000 membership has made a decision relating to major assets of the BMFA. If it had been discussed at full council I would be happier.

So long is it will be debated properly and objectively at the next full council meeting, and that we will be in a position to pull out without any financial comittment if necessary, then my concerns are reduced.

Edited By Colin Bernard on 07/05/2015 18:05:39

[Dickw]

Posted by MattyB on 07/05/2015 16:38:57:

..........- mind you, to do that I'd have to be able to find a copy of that strangely elusive constitution...

Edited By MattyB on 07/05/2015 17:05:28

Try phoning the Leicester office and asking fpor a copy.

Dick

[MattyB]

Posted by Dickw on 07/05/2015 23:17:24:

Posted by MattyB on 07/05/2015 16:38:57:

..........- mind you, to do that I'd have to be able to find a copy of that strangely elusive constitution...

Edited By MattyB on 07/05/2015 17:05:28

Try phoning the Leicester office and asking for a copy.

Dick

Good idea, have just sent them an email...

[Andy Symons - BMFA]

Its in the downloads section on the web site. Look in the BMFA & SMAE Documents folder.

Edited By Andy Symons - BMFA on 08/05/2015 12:51:30

[MattyB]

OK, I can find the template for Area Constitutions, but not one titled BMFA constitution... could it be the "ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION OF THE SOCIETY OF MODEL AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERS LIMITED"?

EDIT - Manny just sent me an email, it is the document I have linked above.

Edited By MattyB on 08/05/2015 13:12:06

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Legalise takes some reading for me I had a read though, looks like we are liable for a £1 each if we ever get wound up ( keep calm folks )

John

[MattyB]

Posted by john stones 1 on 08/05/2015 15:32:31:

Legalise takes some reading for me I had a read though, looks like we are liable for a £1 each if we ever get wound up ( keep calm folks )

John

Yep, this looks like one of those docs insomniacs read as a treatment of last resort...

[cymaz]

Posted by john stones 1 on 08/05/2015 15:32:31:

Legalise takes some reading for me I had a read though, looks like we are liable for a £1 each if we ever get wound up ( keep calm folks )

John

A £1 !!! I will need to consult the domestic committee who will need to report to the national executive. The recommendation needs to be ratified by the full family council at Cymaz Towers. Only when this happens can it be approved by the Chairwoman of fiscal remuneration.

Only then may I get a £1 off the wife to pay the bmfa....if I feel like it.

[Andy Meade]

Were the 2014 accounts available anywhere? I guess they may have only just closed that fiscal year though?

Edited By Andy Meade on 08/05/2015 19:24:53

[Erfolg]

Andy

From reading the said document, you are not automatically entitled to see the accounts, just by being a member. That is my interpretation. There is almost certainly a requirement to make the accounts available via companies house, although there is often some delay, apparently.

It does seem that all power resides with the directors in respect to all aspects of the company. There is in most if not all aspects a specific set of conditions for most, if not all aspects of the companies working, other than a general catch all, unless the directors decide other wise.

My interest was essentially centred on the purpose of the BMFA. Again this is generally far ranging, incorporating anything you can think of, related to modelling.

I must admit I am not particularly shocked, or excited by the document. That is other than members in reality have very little or no rights, other than what the directors decide, if they so choose.

The reporting structure is pretty much inferred by written general relationships, rather than explicit statements on the structure.

I am left with impression that the directors if they so wish can just ignore area committees if they so choose, as long as they follow their own procedures, although they retain the power to vary the procedures, if they so decide.

I am not suggesting that they do, would or should, other than the articles seem to indicate they can.

 

Edited By Erfolg on 08/05/2015 20:39:22

[Frank Skilbeck]

And who selects these dictators sorry directors?

[Andy Meade]

Thanks for the clarification Erf

[Erfolg]

Being completely candid, what ever i may think about the Articles of association, is of less immediate importance than the subject of a NFC and the land purchase.

At present I am hoping that the sponcers of both the land purchase and the idea of the NFC will come out of the woods and provide sufficient information that both reassures me on both counts that it all makes sense.

It should be important to the BMFA that all members are supportive of their proposed and actual actions.

As a member of the BMFA, it may surprise many that my concerns reflect my desire that the BMFA continues as an organisation, remains relevant to its present members.

I can appreciate that the pressure on all flying sites is generally increasing, and for some that a location for the Nationals is of paramount importance. On that account I am not necessarily against the current actions, just prove that they make sense to the members.

In the same vain, these pressures are affecting all parts of the UK (although Scotland should be excluded from this debate). What can the BMFA do for all the regions, is it interested?

I have been shocked and saddened by the reluctance of the BMFA to engage with ordinary members, rather than hiding behind procedures and structures, thus keeping the majority in the dark.

I have been on the phone most of the day , talking with club members,very few (just one) are aware of any of the developments beyond what I am telling them. There is a real communication problem in this area, There needs to be the provision of information with substance, rather sound bite type short paragraphs and a power point presentation with no real substance, that are posted at present.

We could wait for the information being made available in the fullness of time, except for the haste to purchase land, Yet we who wish to engage with the process are criticised and almost vilified in wanting to engage with this process.

[Colin Leighfield]

I just think we need to be careful in effectively condemning a group of people wholesale with the implication that they are all incompetent or have ulterior motives. I've seen this sort of thing before and when you look deep you rarely find it is true. The faults generally lie with communications structures and frequently in organisations that are social in nature a sometimes relaxed approach to business matters from the members side, because at the end of the day they just want to get on with their chosen activity. I have been in that category, no doubt at all. That means that even when the organisation structure is reasonable, the opportunity to keep informed isn't always taken or even thought about very much. That's not a fault, it's just being human.

That doesn't mean to say that everything is perfect at all, but there might be some people getting a slagging here who don't wholly deserve it. I have respect for all of the points of view being expressed in this thread because they are sincere and come from people who care. I personally believe that there is a great opportunity here but also believe that this needs to be handled professionally and while it is impossible to get everyone to agree, at least everyone has the right to be sure that the procedures used were constitutional and that all opinions were given a proper hearing in the process of making the decision. Once that decision is made though, hopefully we can all get behind it and put differences of opinion behind us.

[Gary Manuel]

Well said Colin.

[Frank Skilbeck]

Posted by Gary Manuel on 08/05/2015 22:38:32:

Well said Colin.

+1

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Posted by Frank Skilbeck on 08/05/2015 20:46:09:

And who selects these dictators sorry directors?

I think it's us, the ordinary members, through postal ballots (when enough candidates put themselves forward) and elected representatives from areas, which all club members potentially have a voice in through their club representatives. There may be reduced opportunities for country members which would need them to pursue changes if they felt seriously disenfranchised. Perhaps they could form a virtual club or clubs?

...which brings me to another point. Various people have suggested that the membership should allow the council free range to make financial and policy decisions but isn't the structure that (even if very few bother) we, the members, instruct our club representatives, who attend area councils and ultimately the area council representatives on the national council (who are directors of the SMAE, I believe) to put forward a consensus of our views. Surely, in a matter of this magnitude, it is only reasonable that the full facts should be available to the membership in order that they can have the opportunity to feed informed views up the chain of representation?

[Dizz]

Posted by Andy Meade on 08/05/2015 19:24:38:

Were the 2014 accounts available anywhere? I guess they may have only just closed that fiscal year though?

Edited By Andy Meade on 08/05/2015 19:24:53

Yes, only just closed off for the year. Accounts and budget for the next year are presented to the Full Council meeting in September and when approved go forward to the AGM in November. All clubs get a hard copy with the calling notice for the AGM.

Pete

[Dizz]

Posted by Frank Skilbeck on 08/05/2015 20:46:09:

And who selects these dictators sorry directors?

You do, well the membership actually.

Pete

[cymaz]

Any member could/ should attend their area meetings and join in the discussion.

I went to mine last night...just turned up. Very lively debate about the NFC. In my area it's one club one vote but that doesn't stop any member putting his or her view and opinion or objection. Your voice may influence or sway the vote at said meeting.

I think that is the way the ordinary flier/ bmfa member should go to get their voice heard.

Edited By cymaz on 09/05/2015 07:11:19

[John F]

Posted by Erfolg on 08/05/2015 21:51:43:

Being completely candid, what ever i may think about the Articles of association, is of less immediate importance than the subject of a NFC and the land purchase.

At present I am hoping that the sponcers of both the land purchase and the idea of the NFC will come out of the woods and provide sufficient information that both reassures me on both counts that it all makes sense.

It should be important to the BMFA that all members are supportive of their proposed and actual actions.

As a member of the BMFA, it may surprise many that my concerns reflect my desire that the BMFA continues as an organisation, remains relevant to its present members.

I can appreciate that the pressure on all flying sites is generally increasing, and for some that a location for the Nationals is of paramount importance. On that account I am not necessarily against the current actions, just prove that they make sense to the members.

In the same vain, these pressures are affecting all parts of the UK (although Scotland should be excluded from this debate). What can the BMFA do for all the regions, is it interested?

I have been shocked and saddened by the reluctance of the BMFA to engage with ordinary members, rather than hiding behind procedures and structures, thus keeping the majority in the dark.

I have been on the phone most of the day , talking with club members,very few (just one) are aware of any of the developments beyond what I am telling them. There is a real communication problem in this area, There needs to be the provision of information with substance, rather sound bite type short paragraphs and a power point presentation with no real substance, that are posted at present.

We could wait for the information being made available in the fullness of time, except for the haste to purchase land, Yet we who wish to engage with the process are criticised and almost vilified in wanting to engage with this process.

Is this just not a case of not knowing where to look for the info?

There is plenty of documentation available for the National Flying Centre. Lots of it. **LINK**, **LINK** , to enter the discussion you can go here: https://bmfa.org/News/National-Centre-Update/National-Centre-Discussions/ArticleID/2217 , which also includes full and frank discussions and reasoning behind the recent purchase of land.

There is no evidence of anyone being criticized nor vilified, just plenty of proper, open discussions with full reasoning behind the land purchase which, I believe, is a forward, efficient, way of thinking - the opportunity came up and it would have been tragic to miss it, so they jumped at the chance. They can always sell it on should the site prove to be less than satisfactory.

Whilst you may well have spent a lot of time on the phone to members, should members have not been looking at the BMFA to get answers? The BMFA keeps members abreast of developments by using the news pages on the BMFA website - a place specifically designed to share information. They even have a live forum where everybody can ask questions and get answers direct from the BMFA.

Is this not enough?

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

No it isn't, John.

The slide presentation only gives a glossy and vague idea of the vision without any substance, the question and answer page is useful but is not able or willing to go into the sort of detail that people want and the survey - well it's a wonderful example of why some of us have some serious worries over the project.

It has been used to justify support from a high percentage of members. Well of course samples give an indication but this was a poorly responded to one so less likely to be wholly representative. In effect, it was a survey of how members wished to fund the centre but it has been quoted as a survey into general support. The worst aspect was its structure. There was no option to say that you liked the idea in principle but wanted some more details in order to consider it. The very first question threw you out of the process unless you indicated support and how many people simply went along with tacit support in order to have an opportunity to contribute to the debate?

As for selling it on, well if we had several million lying in low interest accounts, diversifying into land ownership could make sense as a long term investment but the BMFA does not have anywhere near the money to even sink all its assets into this single purchase - so it would need to borrow.  Selling in the short to medium term would most likely result in a loss once fees, loss of interest on capital used, compensation to a tenant and other expenditure had been taken into account.

Edited By Martin Harris on 09/05/2015 11:17:08

[Erfolg]

Cymaz

I urge members to attend their area meeting, particularly when important issues are being discussed. But then again I would argue that all the BMFA issues are of interest and have varying degrees of importance.

John

The BMFA is just not reaching significant numbers of the membership.

I do Email minutes and events to all members and from time to time ask for a response. I am not blaming any one, other than perhaps I am not writing anything that interests people.