Below is the IMC reaction to the "Value For Money!" article in the Scottish Mountaineer (Issue 22 - Newsletter 59 - March 2004 - Page 3). This letter will (hopefully) be placed in Autumn, issue 24 of the Scottish Mountaineer.
---------------------------------------
Dear Editor
We agree with the vast majority of comments in your Editorial (Issue 59) but are very concerned by the suggestion of charging Clubs a “more equitable rate”. Has this been fully thought through?
We are a small affiliated club, without a hut, and our income relies solely on our subscriptions. Almost half of this goes to the MC of S, and for unemployed and retired members it is the whole of theirs. Any increases in our subscriptions over the last 6 years or so have merely covered the increase in MC of S subs and we have only been able to sustain this by increased efficiency in our running costs. Although our members appreciate, and have directly benefited from, the work of your organisation, there are many others out there who belong to no club and are making no financial contribution whatsoever. Target them and encourage them to join instead of clobbering the Clubs who, in effect, have no choice in the matter. If we were forced to increase our subs to £25 – 30 it would have a devastating effect on our membership as people would vote with their feet and leave due to the cost. Any knock-on effect across the country could actually reduce your total club income and put an ever-increasing burden on existing members.
The issue of multiple club membership must also be addressed. We have many members who are already paying £17 a year to you, not much different to the MC of S Individual rate, as they are also members of other affiliated clubs. Who will bother to join their local clubs if they are being charged twice by the MC of S? Why not encourage club members to “upgrade” and join individually and discount their club fees?
We need more information and an assurance that club views will be canvassed on such important matters, along with facts, projected figures and justifications. At the appropriate time detailed proposals should be voted upon at an AGM. Our members who attended the AGM in 2003 felt the motion on fees was not discussed at all. It ended up being a repetition of insurance issues and there was no opportunity given to question and discuss the actual increase in affiliation fees.
We appreciate the work you all do, but please don’t take the Clubs for granted.
Yours truly
Jo Kinghorn
(President Inverness Mountaineering Club)
Comments are welcome!!
|