The comprehensive analysis by Roger Stollery would be a useful and helpful document if only it had stuck to facts rather than conjecture and partial quotes. For example, under the heading of "Objects" Roger correctly quotes the existing constitution " To encourage and promote model yachting in all its branches" but then simply says that the new proposal "has now been dumbed down to just promote sailing". This is totally incorrect. The new proposal states " to promote the sport of radio and free sailing in the UK" Our sport is much more than just sailing, design/building/restoration etc are all parts of our sport. The Objects of the MYA have not changed .
Roger makes much about the selection of Vice Presidents saying that it is currently made by nomination from 5 different clubs. No it is not! The present constitution states "Nominations for Officers, Trustees, and new Vice Presidents may be made by an affiliated club, an affiliated class association or a District committee" there is nothing about 5 clubs and there is no fundamental change here in the new proposal.
Apparently the EGM is only supposed to be for minor changes ? Really? an EGM is exactly the place for constitutional change to take place rather than at an AGM which already has a busy agenda. Major constitutional change should always be undertaken in a stand alone meeting. Unfortunately the wording of the present constitution prevents discussion and amendments at an EGM this is corrected in the new proposals where the procedures for an EGM correctly permit the same opportunities for discussion and amendment as at an AGM
It is unfortunate that at least one club secretary has already repeated these untruths to his club members in a bid to "inform " them of changes without checking his facts first.
By all means do your analysis, make your criticisms, or better still, your suggestions for improvement, but do try and stick to the facts.