AGM 2023

That’s as maybe but the question was asked at the AGM so that gave rise to the answer. Perhaps the questioner should have asked it elsewhere, like the identical question posted on CT, but it is what it is. 🤷🏻‍♂️

Only three of the questions in the list were answered at the AGM and the question you refer too was not one of them. If you re-read the questions, those answered at the meeting have that noted by the submitters name.

Also there were no questions raised from the floor.

Just out of curiosity, l’m not sure about the protocols here, but are questions submitted before hand and selected for inclusion in any way?

Yes, you would be correct. All members had the opportunity to submitt questions in advance of the AGM or ask in person on the day.

In my ‘working days’ at our ‘AGM’ and quarterly meetings I often had to answer  demanding, frequently challenging and on the very odd occasion hostile but valid questioning. Never knew what could crop up under AOB. Pleased I’m away from this now but it always help galvanise thought and future action mind and certainly kept me on my toes and hopefully on the front foot.

So, out of a membership of thousands these 23 questions represented the most pressing and significant issues considered to be in need of addressing?

I would think these questions were selected by the club for a purpose, for an intended audience and/orto clear up any misunderstandings and present the club's view clearly.

But having said that, as I have posted before, I don't think many that use club sites, or even of the 385,000 member households know and/or care about the AGM, they just use the club to gain access to the services it provides.

I found this part interesting:

we believe that choice is a very important part of the Club today and in the future. 'Non-facility' campsites have always been part of the UK campsite portfolio and will continue to be so in the future. We do however have to ensure we support the wider membership through sensible and reasonable financial management and as such, all of our campsites need a sufficient level of member visits in relation to the costs to operate in order to ensure they continue to be viable.

Just my reading but that appears to say yes we'll have no facility sites for the moment but to be fair to the wider membership (who aren't using them and prefer more facilities?) these sites had better pull their weight or they will go.

Just my view.

Just my reading but that appears to say yes we'll have no facility sites for the moment but to be fair to the wider membership (who aren't using them and prefer more facilities?) these sites had better pull their weight or they will go.

Perhaps, if they are leased but, I would hope the Club would first consider alternatives and the use of ANPR. I used the ANPR system at Bourton on the Water non facility site this year and thought it efficient and very good. No need for full time site managers at such sites.

peedee

Not convinced by ANPR, they certainly don’t eliminate access and egress of determined non desirables. I’d be saddened to see those staff members who incidentally are fellow members (I think that’s still the case) not being available for arrivals and for much of the day. I recall decades ago being told that the likes of Dockray Meadow, an unprofitable site then, was viewed as a gem by members and a ‘loss leader’ to the club and was thus supported by the income from the bigger sites. Think Englethwaite was similar. However, I recognise that this was a very different era with a different club ethos. Maybe some possible questions for next year are emerging!

I know I should have been paying attention but in the past the submitted questions were published before the actual meeting. Did that happen this year? 

David