LCC Members

this forum seems to have around 16,000 (just checked members list) that's more than the LCC.

As Bill says, it's not just the LCC that gets discounts. At various shops, I can get discounts for membership of CTC, LCC, Clarion, Singletrack, Sutton CC, C&CC and . A lot of these overlap.

I am a member of LCC, partly because it's a way of finding out about infrastructure developments, making our voice heard and, sometimes, making a difference to what happens on the ground. Yes, TfL are completely ignoring LCC over the CS project, and it's turning out a pile of crap, but at least we've had warning of what's coming.

In my area, LCC & CTC work together, which is pretty successful.

There's no reason why lfgss shouldn't negotiate discounts at various stores/websites.

Seems that between the combined memembeship of LCC and LFGSS (and CTC?) there is a huge lobby of cycling advocates whom all agree that cycling has a valuable role to play in improving the quality of life for londoners.

I wonder to what extend collaberation between these groups is possible to improve the enjoyment of cycling to londoners

We might all be the same people. It's not 17k here, 10k there... it's probably 17k here of which 5k are also there.

^Which is still more than than each organisations membership. Seems worth brainstorming collaberative ideas all the same

Collaboration can only be a good idea. There are a lot of folk in LCC who wouldn't even conside riding on t'cog, and many here who might not want to ally themselves to LCC, but there is a lot of shared interest, and I would guess a large crossover in membership.

The hard thing seems to be agreement about what to do with stuff. I can cite the truck thing as an example, there's real will on here to do something, but what that is remains unclear. Decision by committee doesn't work, and people don't really put their weight behind things that they don't think is the thing to do, so it ends up being heavily fragmented and internally political. I truly think it's a real loss to the whole cycling community that we're so unable to speak as one voice to make lobbying or other action really work, yet at the same time it's the character of the community that this never happens and it's part of what is so awesome about cyclists (that it really is a collective of so many individuals each of whom have their own views and agendas).

Decision by commitee should work though.

In circumstances like this the remit of a committee should be to resolve a lowest common denominator of action and pursue it. Effectively it should come to a point that an acceptable majority agree on and then say "if we do nothing else then we will at least we will do this" because doing something is better than nothing. What it would require is contributors coming to the table expecting to work out some kind way forward rather than coming to the table expecting everyone to agree to their vision and implement it.

To lead a committee like this you need a strong, diplomatic leader. I've attended committee meetings and they very rarely run smoothly with everyone of one accord. There will always be dissent and accrimony (as there has often been at LCC borough group meetings). I think this forum has demonstrated very clearly that it can cope with that and I think an operational committee of it's members should also be able to do this as well.

The real issue is whether there is one individual, with enough of a support structure, who is willing to lead such a committee and are there enough potential contributors that it can be viewed that such a committee reasonably represents the simple will of this forum.

As you may know CTUK is run collaboratively as a worker's cooperative. We decide collaberatively who makes what decisions within the collective and give those people the power to make such decisions on all our behalf. So elected directors make strategic decisions (in line with collectively agreeed principles) Operational staff make decisions about the day to day running of the company. And we all meet a few times a year to discuss asects of how things are going.

A commitee with a mandate from members could probable present a united voice if we could agree some broad principles such as
-Cycling is good and should be encouraged
-cyclists should have an equal right to use the roads as other road users
-Anyone who wishes should be able to access cycling
-Society should prioritise road danger reduction / cycling promotion when planning inrastructure

consensus would need to be agreed over some divisive issues such as segregation vs integration, LCC has moved a long way on this issue thouhgh there are still some strong segregationalist voices with that organisation.

Time to resurrect an old discussion thread.

For the 2013 AGM of the London Cycling Campaign, I have along with Alex Crawford (missmouse) submitted the following motion on the need to expand LCC's membership base...

"LCC exists to represent and further the interests of cyclists in London, and our organisation is an integral part of the wider cycling community in the capital. Over the years we have achieved much, and have an impressive media profile given our small membership base. But therein lies a problem. With only 12,000-odd members we are severely limited in what we can do, and as a campaigning and advocacy body LCC is nowhere near as representative as it could be of London cyclists as a whole.

"We call on the LCC secretariat, board of trustees and borough groups to launch a massive membership drive throughout all sectors of the London cycling community, capitalising on recent British triumphs in the Tour de France and on the Olympic velodrome track. In addition to enhancing our political clout, an increased income from membership dues will allow LCC to fund more projects, and devote more human resources at both London-wide and local levels."

LCC is the only cycling organisation in London that engages in advocacy and political lobbying for the benefit of cyclists in London. We work closely with borough councils and TfL on road layout, junction design and modification, and provide input to high-level transport policy discussions.

Membership of LCC is valuable in material terms, what with the third-party liability insurance and bike shop discounts included in the benefits package, but most of all LCC is a channel through which London cyclists can engage with state agencies and other corporate bodies, and have a major cultural impact through the media.

My own focus as an LCC member is on social ride leading. I organise and lead rides for experienced road warriors and novices alike, and when it comes to the latter I get people on bikes for the first time, help build their confidence, and ensure that they continue cycling. This is an important part of LCC's work.

We have our faults, and I have personally been critical of the organisation and its leadership, but there is nothing else in London quite like LCC. On a UK-wide scale CTC does the same kind of work, but there is in my view and that of many others a need for a London-focused cycling lobby. That is LCC.

If you are not already a member of LCC, please consider joining. If you are a member, or plan to become one before October, make sure that you use your vote in the election for the board of trustees. The ballot will open in mid-September.

Other AGM motions that I have submitted, or to which I have contributed, concern corporate sponsorship ethics and the London Cycling Awards.

I was just thinking the other night that, given this is the biggest cycling forum in London, and one of the biggest in the world, the LCC really has no presence here and shows no interest in us. There are a handful of individual members who speak for themselves but that is it.
On the other hand when I asked why the candidates for election to the LCC board were so unrepresentative of the ethnic mix in London, which might just be a barrier to mass membership, the response from Charlie LCC was so defensive and dismissive that it hardly seemed worth the trouble to try and have a discussion.

@ wiganwill

The LCC board election last year saw a marked demographic shift toward youth(ish) and women. From what I can see LCC has relatively few black and Asian members, and this is reflected in the balance of the leadership. The poor ethnic and social class balance within the LCC membership is something I wish to address, and this is part of the motivation for my call for a mass membership drive. LCC may be dominated by the white petite-bourgeoisie, but I'm afraid that applies to much of organised civil society.

I haven't seen Charlie Lloyd's response to you, but in my experience defensiveness is not one of his normal character traits. Charlie is a genial and open-minded chap. He is always willing to engage, and when you speak he shuts up and listens. Charlie Lloyd is a huge asset to LCC.

As for LCC officers not contributing here, you may have a point. I know for a fact that chief executive Ashok Sinha keeps a close eye on these forums, but Ashok and his staff are busy people, and contributing to web forums can be a black hole for time.

I hold no official position in LCC, and so speak only for myself. Five of the nine members of the current LCC board are women, and of these four are under 40 years of age. One board member is Asian, and there are three men over 50. Nominations for the four board vacancies to be decided in the 2013 election closed this morning, and I imagine that the list will be published in the next few days.

I am among the LCC board nominees for 2013, having been sponsored by missmouse. Being 49, white and sporting a grey beard may count against me, but I come with a desire to shake up LCC, and have the organisation provide better leadership and coordination within the London cycling community.

@ wiganwill

LCC may be dominated by the white petite-bourgeoisie, but I'm afraid that applies to much of organised civil society.

Wow. Thanks for tarring me with that brush. I really want you representing me now.

Let me see if you make it so I can cancel my membership.

The poor ethnic and social class balance within the LCC membership is something I wish to address...

Paging the Ohana fixed crew...and Max Crowe

Cycling in London is largely a hobby of the white affluent middle class male.
In fact cycling anywhere in Britain is.

This is more a result of the unending promotion of it as a sport, a hazardous thrill, requiring special clothes, and not a normal means of transport for normal people doing normal things.

I'd hazard a guess that the ethnic and social make-up of the LCC board has had little or no influence on that fact, and merely reflects it. Attempting to change it won't effect any change in the wider demographic because the vast majority of cyclists couldn't give a fuck about the LCC (or the CTC)

12,000 members are not enough yet your starting point is that the current members are all a bunch of tight ass white people?

You've not really done PR training yet have you?

12,000 members are not enough yet your starting point is that the current members are all a bunch of tight ass white people?

You've not really done PR training yet have you?

It's called irony. LCC members in private often bemoan the fact that we are white and middle class. As for PR, I'm a journalist by trade, and so have a healthy disrespect for that black art, even if it means lost votes.

@Francis: The discussion I referred to starts here http://www.lfgss.com/post3203174-579.html

It includes me forgetting a joke I had made, a joke taken seriously by some people. Viva Thatcher!

Perhaps I am being harsh on Charlie but your response here is much more convincing. If the LCC thinks getting involved in London's main cycling forum is a waste of time then it is failing to understand how people get, and discuss, information these days.

Seriously. This irritates the fuck out of me.

As an organisation you should be making sure that cyclists of all backgrounds are able to get on a bike in London and go from A to B safely. That's it. You should be berating the politicians about the deaths and injuries, pushing harder for changes to the law, fighting to change the mindset of the road designers - the work the the LCC forum members here do.

You come asking for votes and support whilst taking pot shots at the current group of people that make up the membership.

Fuck you and your fucking irony.

and so have a healthy disrespect for that black art.

I think lcc has lost the plot - all this stuff about segregation is a waste of time, money and energy. I don't want cycle lanes, I want SOME GOOD PR for cycling that means drivers give us more room, don't speed, understand that we pay 'road tax' too ...

If the LCC managed to be a 'broad church' like , say, the ctc, I'd be more willing to join.

If the LCC has only 12k members, yet a quarter of peak London journies are by bicycle, maybe it needs to look at what it's doing ... protests might be worth dropping for a start. I think BQ made some very good points.

But Skully! The DUTCH!!!!!!! The DUUUUUUTTCCCHHHHHH!!!!

*gags

I think lcc has lost the plot - all this stuff about segregation is a waste of time, money and energy. I don't want cycle lanes, I want SOME GOOD PR for cycling that means drivers give us more room, don't speed, understand that we pay 'road tax' too ...

Segregated cycle paths help make inner city streets with high traffic densities safer for cyclists, and encourage people to ride bikes. Having lived for several years in Copenhagen, and many years ago in Amsterdam, I fully support LCC's Go Dutch campaign. LCC wouldn't be running this campaign if our research did not support the arguments in favour of segregated cycle paths on busy urban roads, or the idea command support from those who would benefit most from such paths. From the less experienced cyclists who come on my Dog & Bell Crew rides – those who are not yet LCC members, or have only recently joined – I often get comments about the need for physical barriers between cyclists and motor traffic on the busier London roads.

I am among the LCC board nominees for 2013, having been sponsored by missmouse. Being 49, white and sporting a grey beard may count against me, but I come with a desire to shake up LCC, and have the organisation provide better leadership and coordination within the London cycling community.

Good on you, Francis. I'm standing, too (again), after I didn't get re-elected last year.

Good on you, Francis. I'm standing, too (again), after I didn't get re-elected last year.

Glad to hear it, Oliver. You will certainly get my vote, as you did last year.