by Philip Thomas
The AGM will not only go through the normal whitewash and Chairman inspired nonsense, with pleas of ignorance over what "they" (i.e. Cardiff RFC Ltd.) get up to as this year we have two rather special rule amendments to vote for. These both involve the distribution of funds from the sale of assets (ooh, I wonder what £100m valued asset could be sold in the near future?).
The amendments are that no distribution of surplus funds should be made to individual members (so nobody can get rich on the sale of said £100m asset, unless you're a shareholder in Cardiff City, for example) and that should CAC be dissolved then the Management Committee will (alone) decide how any proceeds should be distributed.
Therefore, sell CAP, dissolve CAC and the Committee decides how the proceeds are divvied up. The bowls section of CAC has 43 members. If CAC is dissolved those 43 members could set up a new club with a starting bank balance of £25m or however much the Management Committee decides to give. It might give them the entire pot.
What happens then? Well, that bowls section (sorry to pick on them alone but it could be them, the hockey section, the cricket section or the tennis section) then dissolves and distributes the proceeds of the sale of CAP between them. Tempting, eh?
The "theory" behind this amendment is so that VAT and rates relief can be received on the property of other sections. Quite why they are worrying about that when CAC has £3m sitting in the bank is another matter.
The EGM has been called to increase the rugby section representation on the Management Committee so that the views of the majority of CAC members (there are over 1500 rugby section members yet rugby has an equal vote with bowls). This is seen as the first step to better utilisation of CAC's major shareholding and three board seats with regards to Cardiff RFC Ltd, the company that runs and owns both Cardiff Blues and Cardiff RFC. The lack of information with regards to the move to Leckwith and the general muddlement of who is who internally have sparked off this EGM.
Therefore, it's vital that all CAC members attend because postal or proxy voting is not allowed.
Q: So, a rule change to allow tax relief now but which could be simply repealed in the future as required?
A: The Surplus of Funds issue means that even if CAC were to stay in place then the Management Committee could distribute the £100m from CAP to other sections as it sees fit. So instead of £75m or so going to the rugby section - who if CAC continued and the M&AA of the Ltd Company were not changed would have to run the Rags - it would be spent on the world's most expensive cricket covers or hockey sticks.
CAC is also looking for the tax relief as it is an amateur club. At the same time, it is trying to regain control of the Rags, who aren't amateur. So if it achieves its aims of regaining control of the Rags then it won't be able to receive tax relief anyway.
Let's not forget that the vaste majority of the funds available to CAC have been raised but he rugby section - either by members fees or by your money spent in the club house. It's time that that money is used for the benefit of the vast majority of members - not by an undemocratic few.