The Way Forward?

Having now read the write up in the November Radcom at least three times and looked at the RSGB ‘NO’ Yahoo! Group ( I am still not convinced about saying NO.

The RSGB ‘NO’ group seems to have the same few callsigns talking about why it should not happen. I am not sure, BUT I note that nobody has yet come up with a different plan. We seem to have only two alternatives at the moment, the new management plan or the status quo.

The status quo has obviously not worked, so what’s left? There is no PLAN B and I understand that the RSGB will go bust in two years if nothing is done.

Regarding membership, the only real way of increasing numbers is for members and clubs to recruit aspiring amateurs and SWLs. Leaflets etc are generally regarded as just more junk mail.  Clubs should be the kingpins of the national society and be the ones to promote it. The management of the RSGB, who ever that is going to be, must involve clubs and societies more in the running of the society if it is to survive and prosper.

After all WE are the RSGB.

73 John G0VEH   (Email:

This entry was posted in RSGB. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to The Way Forward?

  1. G1DJI says:

    John you are not quite correct in saying there is no plan B, just the Board has put forward no plan B. There have been other plans put forward by other parties including Les G0CIB. However the Board (or apparently most of them) have decided that its their plan only or stay with the current system. They appear unwilling to trust the membership to make the right choice.

    The President has responded to accusations that the process sugested is not democratic by saying that we have a crisis which demands exceptional actions. Exceptional actions should not include giving the membership only one plan of action and just a preselected list of Board members to vote for. That smacks a bit like the old Soviet system.

    I would like to know why we should trust those members of the suggested Board who were on the Board during the past five years when there were, in the Presidents own words, “significant errors of governance”. If they couldn’t get it right then, can they get it right in the next 15 months?

    I am not saying that some of the business suggestions put forward by the Advisory Group are necessarily wrong but when it comes to the Board selections this should be completely open and above board (excuse pun). Membership of the Board should be open to all contenders and representative of the membership as a whole. It is up to the membership to decide who should govern them. That is democracy.

    There is no reason why the current system of electing Board members can’t be retained and they take on those suggestions which will improve the running of the Society on a more financially prudent basis.

Comments are closed.