One Cycling body to rule them all

Calvin27

Eats Squid
Haven't seen this posted on RB but lots of noise elsewhere about this potential merger.

http://auscycling.com.au/

I can't see any more value for a MTBA member and the BMX folks seem unhappy about it. As with all things the usual CA conversations crop up. What say you MTBRs? Yay or nay?
 

Stredda

Likes Dirt
Well I’m not sure about the benefits from AusCycling but if you are only an MTBA member, it’s going to cost you more.
I haven’t looked into it, but you “may” save if you hold more than one membership in different disciplines but it’s a significant increase for mountain biking.
 

Attachments

Last edited:

discofrank

Likes Dirt
from what i heard it is a good thing, all of the board members are resigning too! so that new blood will come in

here is an post from Westcycle about their views, which had info i was unaware of until i read this
Many of you will be familiar with the "One Cycling" project that is being driven by Sport Australia. The National entities have sent out limited detail publicly on the project, however, we have been engaged in a detailed and long conversation on the project for many months now. Over recent weeks there have been numerous meetings, emails and calls regarding the proposal from BMX Australia; Mountain Bike Australia and Cycling Australia. We are finally starting to get a greater understanding of what the National Organisations are proposing under the One Cycling project.

Given the conversations are now progressing at a very rapid pace I wanted to provide you with a brief overview of WestCycle's current position on the proposal.

In summary, the current proposed One Cycling model is:​
  • Creation of a new National entity that wraps in MTBA; BMXA; CA
  • A 'partial' one license model
  • Removal of all State organisations
  • State Organisations to hand over all held assets and capital upon the wind-up
  • Membership fee's to all go to the National entity
  • Head Office to run cycling likely to be based in Melbourne (or Sydney)
It is important to assess the proposal in light of the structure we have in place in Western Australia, which is unique to any other state. WestCycle has spent significant time in assessing the pro's and con's of the model and has engaged widely on this process. I'd like to thank all of those that have provided guidance and consultation. We have a constitutional responsibility to ensure we make decisions that benefit the WA bike riding community. At this point in time, there is a significant threat that the current level of funding from the WA State Government will be impacted which will have direct implications to the entire riding community of Western Australia.

There are aspects of the proposal that we are strongly supportive of, however, shutting down WestCycle and our Members assets and capital being handed over to a new National entity for them to decide on how it will be used is certainly not supported and rest assured it will NOT happen.

WestCycle remains open to discuss the best possible structure that will benefit riders in Western Australia. We are working towards a model that contains all of the good bits of the proposal without the negatives.

To avoid any misinformation, WestCycle's position on One Cycling is very clear and we are firm in our stance. Below is an extract from a letter from our Chairman Neil Hackett distributed today. This position is echoed by many of the other State organisations. Should you have any further questions or wish to clarify our position please don't hesitate to get in contact. In the coming weeks, I endeavor to meet or speak with all Clubs to provide a more detailed briefing.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

WestCycle’s Board, management and representatives of the Western Australian State Government have discussed the “One Cycling” concept at considerable length in recent months.

WestCycle supports the unification of cycling at a National level with the joining of Road, Track, MTB and BMX to create a new financially sustainable future.

However, based on the current “One Cycling” concept, WestCycle does not support the proposed de-federation of cycling within Australia and we are not currently prepared to relinquish our State sovereignty and autonomy.

Further, we do not support Cycling Australia’s proposed repatriation of WestCycle’s retained earnings and existing funds into the “One Cycling” concept.

WestCycle is constitutionally bound to conduct business in the interests of the cycling community of Western Australia. This includes our 30 Member Organisations, 32 directly Affiliated Clubs, 10,000 Members and the wider WA cycling community not currently engaged through membership. Our support for national unification of cycling remains conditional upon quarantining WestCycle’s existing assets for the benefit of Western Australia’s recreational and sport cycling community.

We also believe any change to the existing Federated model needs to clearly articulate the benefits it will realise for the Western Australian cycling community including retention of State-based decision making, ongoing presence in WA and, funding and resource commitments.

As previously advised, neither Matt Fulton nor myself are available for the August Workshop in Melbourne. If there are any votes required for or against we confirm WestCycle votes AGAINST the current “One Cycling” Concept.

WestCycle remains open to alternative models that address the concerns above
 

Boom King

Wheel size expert
Well I’m not sure about the benefits from AusCycling but if you are only an MTBA member, it’s going to cost you more.
I haven’t looked into it, but you “may” save if you hold more than one membership in different disciplines but it’s a significant increase for mountain biking.
Not really. My current MTBA race licence costs me $140, the new model is $150.
 

Stredda

Likes Dirt
Not really. My current MTBA race licence costs me $140, the new model is $150.
That’s what I was saying. If you see the image I shared it shows that most of the licenses will be more expensive under AusCycling.
You may save if you have a BMX and/or Road license as well but it will cost you more if you just want a mountain bike license
 

Calvin27

Eats Squid
Not really. My current MTBA race licence costs me $140, the new model is $150.
Will easily increase within a year methinks. There is no way you can charge different rates for different disciplines under the one umbrella.

On a side note the MTBA model is a thing of beauty!

355664
 

cokeonspecialtwodollars

Likes Bikes and Dirt
I don't get the representation of the outgoing structure, all MTBA members must nominate a local club so why aren't any clubs shown? There is so much that is confusion on that image.
 

ozzybmx

Likes Bikes and Dirt
This was looked at several years back and from what I heard there were too many 'cooks' unwilling to give up power, share power or water down their power.

Cyclocross takes both MTBA and CA but track and road will not.

I currently pay 3 x MTBA memberships a year, 2 race junior and 1 race adult, plus 3 club memberships. Would be good if we had the choice to ride other cycle events without paying for day membership when MTBA already has their oar in to me for $400 a year.

MTBA have been tossing up doing a family membership for years... I now see they have started it with a massive 10% discount.
 

Daniel Hale

Likes Dirt
On a side note the MTBA model is a thing of beauty!
problem is they're so small an organization they don't appear to do very much,

keep in mind MTBA collect only 20 or less, most of the membership cost goes straight to an insurer; that's why no discount

I still want to see how much of the 400 CA license foes to insurer, how much cycling vic/Aust are keeping & what are they doing with it
 

caad9

Likes Dirt
I am very skeptical of where the MTB money will go.
The current model is no good, but I don't see how one body will do anything except add more cash to the track/road team
 

hellmansam

Likes Dirt
I am very skeptical of where the MTB money will go.
The current model is no good, but I don't see how one body will do anything except add more cash to the track/road team
For WA in general, one national body for something means WA will probably get short changed along the way.
 

Stredda

Likes Dirt
For myself and the club I am president of, MTBA doesn't do a whole lot for us in Tassie other than insurance for events, a platform to use for race entries and offer the odd 0 level skills instructor course but we are not asking for much more either. I'd be interested to hear if AusCycling will offer any more than that. The cost of a license is a big stumbling block for people just getting into racing and the free trial system works quite well. If the prices go up at least $10 to $20 I can see a lot of people who would just want to do the odd small club event not bother at all.
It's not all about national and international racing, the majority of entrants would be club level racers.
 

c3024446

Likes Bikes and Dirt
Cycling NSW are the ones with all the money and they definitely do not like the current proposal.......

Senator the Hon Richard Colbeck
Minister for Youth and Sport
PO Box 6100
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600
by email only: senator.colbeck@aph.gov.au

27 August 2019

Dear Minister,

As you are no doubt aware, Sport Australia has recently proposed that 16 State-based cycling entities (the State Sporting Organisations that represent cycling, mountain biking and BMX) and the corresponding three National Sporting Organisations are combined to form a new National Sporting Organisation.

Cycling NSW is strongly opposed to this proposal for a range of reasons.

The One Cycling proposal by Sport Australia is designed to assist the existing national organisation, Cycling Australia, overcome its poor financial standing and performance. In 2014 Sport Australia gave Cycling Australia a $1.5 million loan, while the States provided a further loan of $500,000 to Cycling Australia. Cycling NSW provided more than half of that tranche of funds and is still awaiting repayment of 50 percent of that loan. It is with considerable consternation that Sport Australia now requires Cycling NSW to ‘voluntarily’ forego the outstanding repayments still owed by Cycling Australia.

Under the proposal the new body would obtain legal agency over, among other assets, $1.2 million in cash currently held by Cycling New South Wales. This has been built up through the efforts of thousands of volunteer officials and amateur competitors in club-based cycling events. I understand that some State administrations, which have few resources or are running deficits, are in favour of the proposal, but others are not.

States have been told this proposal is predicated on not just continued support from Sport Australia but increased support in the short, medium and longer term. The level or detail of that support, however, have not been confirmed.

This transfer of assets, authorities and responsibilities to a financially weak and administratively inept centralised organisation, from solvent volunteer-based State organisations, is unprecedented.

The current Cycling Australia Chairman indicated in December 2018 that there were “many things broken at Cycling Australia” and that as a federated system we “lack the financial and human capital to fix them in the normal, commercial way”. Cycling NSW is aghast at the preparedness to forego a “normal, commercial way” of addressing issues in favour of annexing resources accumulated through the efforts of volunteers and community-based clubs.

Of even more concern is that this program is occurring without any strategic plan or assessment. Cycling Australia’s strategic plan “Vision 2020” has not been renewed, reviewed or assessed despite failing in most of its objectives. The One Cycling plan, devised off the back of the December 2018 Ernst & Young report, that was paid for by Sport Australia, was such a poor piece of work that it still has not been released to the clubs, volunteers, members and riders that make up the Australian competitive cycling community.

There is a lack of documentation outlining the impact of the One Cycling proposal. Sport Australia has previously identified federated systems such as Swimming Australia, Netball Australia and Tennis Australia as examples of sports successfully delivering their desired aligned commercial, financial and digital behaviours. In comparison, golf and sailing as hybrid unitary and federated structures, were cited by Sport Australia as delivering desired behaviours in regard to staff.

However, the One Cycling proposal does not explain why a unitary structure in cycling would work better than the current structure. Our assessment indicates that key management expenses in a unitary structure would increase. This is supported by a Sport Australia and Cycling Australia presentation which showed additional resources are to be placed in some States and current management is to be replaced but kept on as consultants for a period of six months.

Cycling New South Wales is eager to explore ways to improve the sport’s administration and effectiveness. We are supportive of the three cycling disciplines coming together. We believe the cyclists of NSW could be best served by amalgamating three State-based cycling organisations into one organisation that would be specifically focused on serving and developing the New South Wales cycling community. However, the egregious plan proposed by Sport Australia would stifle the development of cycling in New South Wales for the foreseeable future.

Whilst this is not currently on the table, we see it as a logical next step towards a more effective arrangement.

I would appreciate your commitment to not proceed with the current proposal but to work with Sport Australia and the cycling bodies to find a better solution.

I would welcome a chance to discuss this matter with you, should you have any questions.

Yours sincerely

Glenn J. Vigar
Chairman Board of Directors
Cycling New South Wales
 

Calvin27

Eats Squid
I don't mind MTBA to be fair. Event still happen but some better coordination would be welcome. However as MTBr that is probably representative of most recreational riders (weekend shredder) MTBA membership is pitched about right and new trails are still being built and events are about the right frequency (I do want a 24 enduro back in Vic though). I have been a CA member a few moons ago and it was a completely different vibe - all about moving up the next grade.
 
Top