If the CMCA were taking over existing caravan parks and converting them to member only parks, then there'd be something to whinge about.. in fact I'd join the raiding party to burn them to the ground. But since they are creating new parks, they have every right to make them for members only, and it's no one else's business.
Look at it this way... if they have their own parks, that just makes more room in the existing ones for the rest of us.
Too true
Aussie Paul
Bruce and Bev said
03:59 PM Sep 24, 2015
Steve. I agree with you entirely. If the cmca want to have their own parks - good for them - but up 1000's of them and then as you say, the majority of RV users who own a caravan without a grey water tank can get on with free camping.
But don't start convincing towns to become their version of RV Friendly Towns which means only those with grey tanks can now free camp. Not only are they being totally selfish, but all the caravans that don't stop will just pass through and the local businesses miss out on the trade.
Funny that State National Parks don't get on their high horses about grey water......these dept's employ scientists etc who know the benefits that grey water bring to our patched scrub and trees. Its only when grey water is stored too long that it becomes toxic - as JC says, its common to see m/homes in front of you with their waste water tank taps turned on and spilling the contents on the road, in the rest areas, servos, town streets - wherever they go before they have the tanks emptied (and I appreciate that many of you do the right thing and dump it in dump points)
rockylizard said
04:37 PM Sep 24, 2015
Bruce and Bev wrote:
Steve. I agree with you entirely. If the cmca want to have their own parks - good for them - but up 1000's of them and then as you say, the majority of RV users who own a caravan without a grey water tank can get on with free camping.
But don't start convincing towns to become their version of RV Friendly Towns which means only those with grey tanks can now free camp. Not only are they being totally selfish, but all the caravans that don't stop will just pass through and the local businesses miss out on the trade.
Funny that State National Parks don't get on their high horses about grey water......these dept's employ scientists etc who know the benefits that grey water bring to our patched scrub and trees. Its only when grey water is stored too long that it becomes toxic - as JC says, its common to see m/homes in front of you with their waste water tank taps turned on and spilling the contents on the road, in the rest areas, servos, town streets - wherever they go before they have the tanks emptied (and I appreciate that many of you do the right thing and dump it in dump points)
Gday...
Quite right Bruce ... and many inland towns and van parks welcome (some insist) grey water be put on their trees and lawns.
However, it needs to be realised that the "camps" that CMCA are developing are mainly to be 'hard stand' and cannot absorb greywater. Add to that the amount of water that goes on the ground when RVs with showers are used it becomes just a (technical term) yukky mess. Hence, the 'strict rules' about "self-contained".
Thankfully, I travel and camp in areas where very few of these style of "camps" are - hopefully those of us who stay "bush" will not suffer as those who stay close to the coast and want to 'freeby" within towns will suffer.
Honestly, I find if completely abhorrent to park ("camp"?) in a town, packed in, with everyone in everyone else's pocket, and not be able to swing a cat should the urge take me. If I have to suffer that life, then I would prefer to be in a van park which usually, although well patronised, quite often have trees, gardens separating most sites and some sort of atmosphere - and I am happy pay for the privilege.
As already stated, hopefully all those who want/need/expect to be provided with those CMCA developed "camps" will be kept away from where I camp and I can continue to enjoy my lifestyle.
Cheers - John
dazren said
09:25 PM Sep 24, 2015
The Phantom wrote:
Perhaps this thread typifies the "Age of Entitlement" that our soon to be retired former Treasurer Joe Hockey was banging on about.
Old Mate buys a caravan and heads out for a drive and thinks the world needs to be at his beck and call. Sorry, the age of entitlement is over. You just can't park where you like for as long as you like because the other entitlements have stuffed the place and ruined the deal.
No discrimination at all is observed. Since when is the Renmark Council beholding to people passing through and leaving nothing but more mess?
The Phantom
Justcruisin01, wrote
Who said any thing about leaving a mess apart from you??maybe you are the problem! I am talking about the right to park;be it for lunch or what ever.from what I see of CMCA members they are the biggest problem they claim to leave no trace. Many times we see them leave a camp a once they hit the road they partly open the tap of grey water a spread it for the next 25kl down the road.
Only just recently i saw a bus camped near us over night only to drop a tank of water right where he was camped on a blue metal surface; stunk the rest of the camp out then left like a dog shot in the arse.
Needless to say there were three dump points within 100mtrs of him.
Gidday, JC, when do you arrive at Greens !! and how long are you there for, ?? [ Dougwe said i can go off topic ]
Don't pay any attention to Phantom, he always posts in the 'negative' ?
Once heard of a guy that Talked so much Sh-t, that when he went in for a Colonoscopy, they inserted the Camera Orally
chris & terry said
11:21 PM Sep 24, 2015
Just a thought. If the management of the CMCA have sufficient accumulated funds to invest in camping sites for members, then maybe a reduced membership fee could be expected.
terry
SS Mirada said
09:16 AM Sep 25, 2015
what started out as a rant against a council has quickly turned into a rant against CMCA and Motorhome Owners?
rockylizard said
10:46 AM Sep 25, 2015
SS Mirada wrote:
what started out as a rant against a council has quickly turned into a rant against CMCA and Motorhome Owners?
Gday...
Firstly, welcome SS Mirada.
I can see your point. However, I think the reason it has 'drifted' toward CMCA is that CMCA, in their ongoing promotion of the RV Friendly town campaign, are actively and aggressively canvassing all shires and town councils throughout Straya.
Part of that campaign is to strongly put the position that their members are "self-contained" and are registered under their "Leave no Trace" accreditation.
Therefore, councils are gaining the impression that motorhomes are "self-contained" and caravans (generally speaking - although this is changing) are not generally "self-contained". Hence, councils are being quite specific about which "RV travellers" they will allow to overnight in their towns.
It is quite probably the "right" of CMCA to promote their members needs/requirements and to further the RV Friendly campaign from their point of view and strength to their arm.
However, over the years I have listened to radio interviews with CMCA office holders (president etc) and sometimes they have displayed quite a badgering attitude whilst pushing how these towns will not thrive without CMCA and its members patronage. Consequently, the picture of the "general RV traveller" becomes somewhat muddled.
Add to this the unfortunate way too many "travellers" (vans, motorhomes, backpackers etc) leave sites within shires/towns, no wonder councils are only too eager to follow the "guidelines" promoted by CMCA and add specific restrictions for overnight stays.
This is further compounded that quite probably the only organisation that is actively, constantly and aggressively promoting the "camping" requirements of their members is CMCA.
I guess, on that point, we can't expect anything different to be achieved unless those of us who are not in an organisation like CMCA - particularly one that so actively promotes the RV Friendly campaign - get organised and either join or form such an organisation and add to their campaign, or counter their direction.
As others have said on here, attempts to form a combined "caravan" group/organisation have petered out through either lack of enthusiasm or participation.
I guess, as individuals, there is really little we can do.
Cheers - and happy bushing camping - John
mjt57 said
02:15 PM Sep 25, 2015
Steve, as long as CMCA does it without any form of taxpayer or ratepayer subsidy, then that's fine. Let them buy up land at commercial rates.
Councils Australia-wide are struggling with revenue shortfalls as costs increasingly stretch their budgets. So, it's the ratepayer who suffers in the end.
I have no vested interest either way. I'm looking at vans, but my wife has also expressed interests in 5th wheelers and motorhomes. It's just that I resent the idea of this exclusivity which is ratepayer subsidised.
Baz421 said
03:36 PM Sep 25, 2015
SS Mirada wrote:
what started out as a rant against a council has quickly turned into a rant against CMCA and Motorhome Owners?
Well not entirely Miranda, there are some facts there if you look closely. I agree with John in general and endorse his last post.
I'm not anti CMCA either just stating what I was told years ago and saw first hand in the NT.
Ondabeach said
04:56 PM Sep 25, 2015
mj, I don't believe it's costing councils anything, there's no infrastructure being put in to support the sites as far as I'm aware. There's nothing wrong with them leasing the land rather than buying it either, that's common practice and I think it's better that the land stay in public hands anyway. If the land isn't being used for anything now and the CMCA lease it for the use of their members then that doesn't affect anyone else.
Here's an idea... why don't all the caravan owners join the CMCA, then if you're in the majority you can bring about change from within. You can bleat your heads off like a pack of old goats here until the cows come home and it won't change a damn thing.
Very happy camper said
05:23 PM Sep 25, 2015
Ondabeach said
<<<Here's an idea... why don't all the caravan owners join the CMCA, then if you're in the majority you can bring about change from within. You can bleat your heads off like a pack of old goats here until the cows come home and it won't change a damn thing.>>>
HA HA
The CMCA is not quite that stupid.
The Caravan people can only join as associate members ( they have no voting rights ).
It always has been a Motorhome Club and it always will be.
msg said
05:45 PM Sep 25, 2015
I think it has a lot to do with perceptions. I have a smalll wizz bang. Most people are surprised to hear that I have a shower and toilet on board and it is a certified "leave no trace" Its fully self contained with grey water tank. Most caravans don't have this facility, although it is becoming more common.
Waving: A lot of the time I am too busy watching the oncoming traffic to wave. I don't discriminate between motorhomes and caravans and wave to both when I can.
Gidday, JC, when do you arrive at Greens !! and how long are you there for, ?? [ Dougwe said i can go off topic ]
Don't pay any attention to Phantom, he always posts in the 'negative' ?
Once heard of a guy that Talked so much Sh-t, that when he went in for a Colonoscopy, they inserted the Camera Orally
I have PM you ,mate.
Bugsy said
07:41 PM Sep 25, 2015
Very happy camper wrote:
The CMCA is not quite that stupid.
The Caravan people can only join as associate members ( they have no voting rights ).
It always has been a Motorhome Club and it always will be.
Perhaps they read threads like this and wonder if it would be smart to allow in a bunch of whingers to cause disharmony.
There is so much misinformation out there about these member only sites, some of it I think deliberate to try and discredit the scheme. I have posted this in several places and I repeat it here, can anyone give me ONE GOOD reason why a club should not spend its own members funds to provide benefits for its own members. The RSL does it, the RACQ does it, the local bowls club does it and the list goes on and on, but when the CMCA does it for some reason, and I think we all know why, the non members get their knickers in a twist. How come none of you are complaining about the RSL or the RACQ.
As for the sites the councils set the lease fees and the rates and the development requirements (which is all done by local contractors) and in many cases a disused piece of liability land for the council is turned into a money earning venture with not one cent of ratepayers money involved. Is that a good deal or what for a community. As for the sites they will be available to all members who can conform to a set of rules just like I have to have a certain dress code rules to enter the RSL I will have to have a certain self containment standard to use these sites. That is an internal club matter and I fail to see why people are rabbiting on about it.
For many years the CMCA has spent millions of club members funds in developing dump points, RVFTs, negotiating with governments at all levels (and I might add got little appreciation for it) and I heartily endorse the new Board's new direction is finally doing something exclusively to benefit it own members. If you want to partake in the benefits you pay your money and join, if not that fine also. It's a matter of personal choice but I can't see for the life of me what the hell people have got to bitch about if they make that choice.
Baz421 said
08:00 PM Sep 25, 2015
Bugsy wrote:
Very happy camper wrote:
The CMCA is not quite that stupid.
The Caravan people can only join as associate members ( they have no voting rights ).
It always has been a Motorhome Club and it always will be.
Perhaps they read threads like this and wonder if it would be smart to allow in a bunch of whingers to cause disharmony.
There is so much misinformation out there about these member only sites, some of it I think deliberate to try and discredit the scheme. I have posted this in several places and I repeat it here, can anyone give me ONE GOOD reason why a club should not spend its own members funds to provide benefits for its own members. The RSL does it, the RACQ does it, the local bowls club does it and the list goes on and on, but when the CMCA does it for some reason, and I think we all know why, the non members get their knickers in a twist. How come none of you are complaining about the RSL or the RACQ.
As for the sites the councils set the lease fees and the rates and the development requirements (which is all done by local contractors) and in many cases a disused piece of liability land for the council is turned into a money earning venture with not one cent of ratepayers money involved. Is that a good deal or what for a community. As for the sites they will be available to all members who can conform to a set of rules just like I have to have a certain dress code rules to enter the RSL I will have to have a certain self containment standard to use these sites. That is an internal club matter and I fail to see why people are rabbiting on about it.
For many years the CMCA has spent millions of club members funds in developing dump points, RVFTs, negotiating with governments at all levels (and I might add got little appreciation for it) and I heartily endorse the new Board's new direction is finally doing something exclusively to benefit it own members. If you want to partake in the benefits you pay your money and join, if not that fine also. It's a matter of personal choice but I can't see for the life of me what the hell people have got to bitch about if they make that choice.
When I read your post, I thought fair comment. However you can't say the RSL and RACQ actively tried to "freeze out" another section of the community? Or can you?
Bugsy said
05:48 AM Sep 26, 2015
Baz421 wrote:
When I read your post, I thought fair comment. However you can't say the RSL and RACQ actively tried to "freeze out" another section of the community? Or can you?
No I can't say that about the RSL or the RACQ just as you can't say that about the CMCA because it simply is not true. It may be in your mind but the facts just do no substantiate your argument, if they could to start with and did you would not have access to over 45% of the dump points in Australia paid for by the club members or access to RVFTs or access to many of the sites they have had established by negotiation with councils etc. As Caravanning Qld gleefully pointed out in their letter to Qld councils re these club operated sites, the CMCA represents just 6% of the 550,000+ registered RV in Australia so are you seriously suggesting an organisation this small is trying to "freeze out" the other 94%. Caravanning Qld forgot to mention to councils that their organisation represent less that .8% of businesses in Qld.
This whole ludicrous thread started because a sign or two said "motorhomes only" so somebody gets up in arms and writes to councils protesting. Just image if I, a motorhome driver, complained that CARAVAN parks were not called Motorhome parks or those parking bays at information centres and shopping centres are marked caravan parking only.
Really some people need to get their facts right before shooting from the hip and then they need to get a life. Is it any wonder we have trouble presenting a united front to governments when we see thread like this. Think about it some of us are our own worst enemies.
mjt57 said
12:09 PM Sep 26, 2015
Ondabeach wrote:
mj, I don't believe it's costing councils anything, there's no infrastructure being put in to support the sites as far as I'm aware. There's nothing wrong with them leasing the land rather than buying it either,
Agreed. As long as whatever land is leased is at commercial rates. If they lease it to a minority group at discounted rates where the taxpayers or ratepayers have to pick up the tab (it could be leased to others at normal rates), then that's where I find the practice objectionable.
And in spades for where governments own football grounds, lease it to exclusive clubs who then limit membership and general public access.
dazren said
02:59 PM Sep 26, 2015
very happy camper wrote. ?? -- HA HA
The CMCA is not quite that stupid.
The Caravan people can only join as associate members ( they have no voting rights ).
It always has been a Motorhome Club and it always will be.
Bit of a sm-rt a-se c--ky attitude there Happy Camper, ?? the very same attitude that created the division in your club, As for your last comment ? have you ever heard about Change,? Advancement ? progress.? growth,? consolidation ? If nothing ever changed ;[ for the better ] Then This great country of our would be entirely different, we would still have '' The White Australia policy '' ? it was changed and the Country grew proud and strong ?
So maybe you had better take your ****y attitude back to your club and attend to the division that is within your own confinds ? If you do not want Caravanners in your club, That is fine, ? tell your board to please stop inviting these caravan type people to join your club, just for the extra $$$$ Even if they will not let them vote, ! You tell your board THIS IS A MOTORHOME CLUB and always will be, It will not upset Caravanners, What does effect caravanners , is discrimination, and arrogance and this is what is displayed by a lot of your membership,
I would be quite happy to Join your club, and pay my way, However i will never join a club that will take my subscription, and say Ok you can do this, and you can do that, and sometimes we may let you do something else, ??It will Never happen,?? I join the RACV pay my dues, when it comes time to vote I get to Vote, I am in a caravan club, I pay my dues, when it's time to vote i get to vote, ? If you become a member of a club, it is usually by invitation, IF a person does not meet the criteria to be a member, Then do not Invite them to join ?? I can join an ''RSL Club as An Associate Member'' with restrictions, and that is fine As I did not go to war or was A member of the forces, '' I respect that '' However to be treated differently Because I Tow My Rig, and You Drive yours ?? HuH ?? WELL I too can have a sm-rt a-se c--ky Attitude, ?? so Take your club, and stick it , !!
-- Edited by dazren on Saturday 26th of September 2015 03:01:46 PM
The Phantom said
03:27 PM Sep 26, 2015
dazren wrote:
Bit of a sm-rt a-se c--ky attitude there Happy Camper, ?? the very same attitude that created the division in your club, As for your last comment ? have you ever heard about Change,? Advancement ? progress.? growth,? consolidation ? If nothing ever changed ;[ for the better ] Then This great country of our would be entirely different, we would still have '' The White Australia policy '' ? it was changed and the Country grew proud and strong ?
So maybe you had better take your ****y attitude back to your club and attend to the division that is within your own confinds ? If you do not want Caravanners in your club, That is fine, ? tell your board to please stop inviting these caravan type people to join your club, just for the extra $$$$ Even if they will not let them vote, ! You tell your board THIS IS A MOTORHOME CLUB and always will be, It will not upset Caravanners, What does effect caravanners , is discrimination, and arrogance and this is what is displayed by a lot of your membership,
I would be quite happy to Join your club, and pay my way, However i will never join a club that will take my subscription, and say Ok you can do this, and you can do that, and sometimes we may let you do something else, ??It will Never happen,?? I join the RACV pay my dues, when it comes time to vote I get to Vote, I am in a caravan club, I pay my dues, when it's time to vote i get to vote, ? If you become a member of a club, it is usually by invitation, IF a person does not meet the criteria to be a member, Then do not Invite them to join ?? I can join an ''RSL Club as An Associate Member'' with restrictions, and that is fine As I did not go to war or was A member of the forces, '' I respect that '' However to be treated differently Because I Tow My Rig, and You Drive yours ?? HuH ?? WELL I too can have a sm-rt a-se c--ky Attitude, ?? so Take your club, and stick it , !!
-- Edited by dazren on Saturday 26th of September 2015 03:01:46 PM
I really would not have thought that Happy Camper was a member of the CMCA. At least she hasn't said so, so I guess Ol' Daz is just jumping to conclusions again and showing us all that intelligence is not a prerequisite in joining a caravan forum.
And while I'm on the subject, I notice from her Profile that Happy Camper is a lady and I think your comments and name calling towards her are unwarranted and may be cause for a bullying call against you. I suggest you smarten up your act or leave.
The Phantom
-- Edited by The Phantom on Saturday 26th of September 2015 03:35:44 PM
dazren said
05:04 PM Sep 26, 2015
The Phantom wrote [ make that scribbled ] I really would not have thought that Happy Camper was a member of the CMCA. At least she hasn't said so, so I guess Ol' Daz is just jumping to conclusions again and showing us all that intelligence is not a prerequisite in joining a caravan forum.
And while I'm on the subject, I notice from her Profile that Happy Camper is a lady and I think your comments and name calling towards her are unwarranted and may be cause for a bullying call against you. I suggest you smarten up your act or leave.
Geez Phantom you still around, ? shame about that, ? I thought we had an understanding, from back in December, when you sent me your PM in a rude and weak attempt to intimidate me, !! In my reply to you it was made clear we do not like each other, ? and as such, we would refrain from commenting on each others posts, I have done the right thing and just ignored yours, however here you are once again putting in you petty opinion of no value to anyone, as for people to listen a person needs respect, and respect is not a quality you command, ? So if your memory is fading, Here is a copy of my reply to your Rude and Unwanted PM from December, please can you re-read it to refresh your memory, ? And Ignore my future postings, ? As I ignore yours ? Thank You
Dec 11, 2014
09:18 PM Dec 12, 2014
-- Edited by dazren on Sunday 27th of September 2015 12:06:03 AM
greyhoundtom said
08:36 PM Sep 26, 2015
Deleted my post
-- Edited by greyhoundtom on Saturday 26th of September 2015 08:42:30 PM
Webmaster said
09:38 AM Sep 27, 2015
Hi all, Thanks for your input but I think I'll close this down now. Again, I would just remind members to please keep posts respectful. Although we welcome robust discussion, please ensure that your post is directed towards the issue at hand, not at the member that you disagree with. Also, a reminder from our 'forum rules' that the private message system is in place to help members to communicate directly one another in a positive way and perhaps provide each other with email addresses or other personal details once they get to know each other a bit better. We ask that members retain their friendly and helpful manner when using the messaging system. Please do not use the PM system to criticise other members or their views. If anyone has an issue with another member or any of their posts, please send me a PM and I will address it.
Too true
Aussie Paul
But don't start convincing towns to become their version of RV Friendly Towns which means only those with grey tanks can now free camp. Not only are they being totally selfish, but all the caravans that don't stop will just pass through and the local businesses miss out on the trade.
Funny that State National Parks don't get on their high horses about grey water......these dept's employ scientists etc who know the benefits that grey water bring to our patched scrub and trees. Its only when grey water is stored too long that it becomes toxic - as JC says, its common to see m/homes in front of you with their waste water tank taps turned on and spilling the contents on the road, in the rest areas, servos, town streets - wherever they go before they have the tanks emptied (and I appreciate that many of you do the right thing and dump it in dump points)
Gday...
Quite right Bruce ... and many inland towns and van parks welcome (some insist) grey water be put on their trees and lawns.
However, it needs to be realised that the "camps" that CMCA are developing are mainly to be 'hard stand' and cannot absorb greywater. Add to that the amount of water that goes on the ground when RVs with showers are used it becomes just a (technical term) yukky mess. Hence, the 'strict rules' about "self-contained".
Thankfully, I travel and camp in areas where very few of these style of "camps" are - hopefully those of us who stay "bush" will not suffer as those who stay close to the coast and want to 'freeby" within towns will suffer.
Honestly, I find if completely abhorrent to park ("camp"?) in a town, packed in, with everyone in everyone else's pocket, and not be able to swing a cat should the urge take me. If I have to suffer that life, then I would prefer to be in a van park which usually, although well patronised, quite often have trees, gardens separating most sites and some sort of atmosphere - and I am happy pay for the privilege.
As already stated, hopefully all those who want/need/expect to be provided with those CMCA developed "camps" will be kept away from where I camp and I can continue to enjoy my lifestyle.
Cheers - John
Justcruisin01, wrote
Who said any thing about leaving a mess apart from you??maybe you are the problem! I am talking about the right to park;be it for lunch or what ever.from what I see of CMCA members they are the biggest problem they claim to leave no trace. Many times we see them leave a camp a once they hit the road they partly open the tap of grey water a spread it for the next 25kl down the road.
Only just recently i saw a bus camped near us over night only to drop a tank of water right where he was camped on a blue metal surface; stunk the rest of the camp out then left like a dog shot in the arse.
Needless to say there were three dump points within 100mtrs of him.
Bloody hipacrits that give us all a bad name.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gidday, JC, when do you arrive at Greens !! and how long are you there for, ?? [ Dougwe said i can go off topic ]
Don't pay any attention to Phantom, he always posts in the 'negative' ?
Once heard of a guy that Talked so much Sh-t,
that when he went in for a Colonoscopy, they inserted the Camera Orally 
terry
Gday...
Firstly, welcome SS Mirada.
I can see your point. However, I think the reason it has 'drifted' toward CMCA is that CMCA, in their ongoing promotion of the RV Friendly town campaign, are actively and aggressively canvassing all shires and town councils throughout Straya.
Part of that campaign is to strongly put the position that their members are "self-contained" and are registered under their "Leave no Trace" accreditation.
Therefore, councils are gaining the impression that motorhomes are "self-contained" and caravans (generally speaking - although this is changing) are not generally "self-contained". Hence, councils are being quite specific about which "RV travellers" they will allow to overnight in their towns.
It is quite probably the "right" of CMCA to promote their members needs/requirements and to further the RV Friendly campaign from their point of view and strength to their arm.
However, over the years I have listened to radio interviews with CMCA office holders (president etc) and sometimes they have displayed quite a badgering attitude whilst pushing how these towns will not thrive without CMCA and its members patronage. Consequently, the picture of the "general RV traveller" becomes somewhat muddled.
Add to this the unfortunate way too many "travellers" (vans, motorhomes, backpackers etc) leave sites within shires/towns, no wonder councils are only too eager to follow the "guidelines" promoted by CMCA and add specific restrictions for overnight stays.
This is further compounded that quite probably the only organisation that is actively, constantly and aggressively promoting the "camping" requirements of their members is CMCA.
I guess, on that point, we can't expect anything different to be achieved unless those of us who are not in an organisation like CMCA - particularly one that so actively promotes the RV Friendly campaign - get organised and either join or form such an organisation and add to their campaign, or counter their direction.
As others have said on here, attempts to form a combined "caravan" group/organisation have petered out through either lack of enthusiasm or participation.
I guess, as individuals, there is really little we can do.
Cheers - and happy bushing camping
- John
Councils Australia-wide are struggling with revenue shortfalls as costs increasingly stretch their budgets. So, it's the ratepayer who suffers in the end.
I have no vested interest either way. I'm looking at vans, but my wife has also expressed interests in 5th wheelers and motorhomes. It's just that I resent the idea of this exclusivity which is ratepayer subsidised.
Well not entirely Miranda, there are some facts there if you look closely. I agree with John in general and endorse his last post.
I'm not anti CMCA either just stating what I was told years ago and saw first hand in the NT.
mj, I don't believe it's costing councils anything, there's no infrastructure being put in to support the sites as far as I'm aware. There's nothing wrong with them leasing the land rather than buying it either, that's common practice and I think it's better that the land stay in public hands anyway. If the land isn't being used for anything now and the CMCA lease it for the use of their members then that doesn't affect anyone else.
Here's an idea... why don't all the caravan owners join the CMCA, then if you're in the majority you can bring about change from within. You can bleat your heads off like a pack of old goats here until the cows come home and it won't change a damn thing.
Ondabeach said
<<<Here's an idea... why don't all the caravan owners join the CMCA, then if you're in the majority you can bring about change from within. You can bleat your heads off like a pack of old goats here until the cows come home and it won't change a damn thing.>>>
HA HA
The CMCA is not quite that stupid.
The Caravan people can only join as associate members ( they have no voting rights ).
It always has been a Motorhome Club and it always will be.
Waving: A lot of the time I am too busy watching the oncoming traffic to wave. I don't discriminate between motorhomes and caravans and wave to both when I can.
The Phantom
I have PM you ,mate.
Perhaps they read threads like this and wonder if it would be smart to allow in a bunch of whingers to cause disharmony.
There is so much misinformation out there about these member only sites, some of it I think deliberate to try and discredit the scheme. I have posted this in several places and I repeat it here, can anyone give me ONE GOOD reason why a club should not spend its own members funds to provide benefits for its own members. The RSL does it, the RACQ does it, the local bowls club does it and the list goes on and on, but when the CMCA does it for some reason, and I think we all know why, the non members get their knickers in a twist. How come none of you are complaining about the RSL or the RACQ.
As for the sites the councils set the lease fees and the rates and the development requirements (which is all done by local contractors) and in many cases a disused piece of liability land for the council is turned into a money earning venture with not one cent of ratepayers money involved. Is that a good deal or what for a community. As for the sites they will be available to all members who can conform to a set of rules just like I have to have a certain dress code rules to enter the RSL I will have to have a certain self containment standard to use these sites. That is an internal club matter and I fail to see why people are rabbiting on about it.
For many years the CMCA has spent millions of club members funds in developing dump points, RVFTs, negotiating with governments at all levels (and I might add got little appreciation for it) and I heartily endorse the new Board's new direction is finally doing something exclusively to benefit it own members. If you want to partake in the benefits you pay your money and join, if not that fine also. It's a matter of personal choice but I can't see for the life of me what the hell people have got to bitch about if they make that choice.
When I read your post, I thought fair comment. However you can't say the RSL and RACQ actively tried to "freeze out" another section of the community? Or can you?
No I can't say that about the RSL or the RACQ just as you can't say that about the CMCA because it simply is not true. It may be in your mind but the facts just do no substantiate your argument, if they could to start with and did you would not have access to over 45% of the dump points in Australia paid for by the club members or access to RVFTs or access to many of the sites they have had established by negotiation with councils etc. As Caravanning Qld gleefully pointed out in their letter to Qld councils re these club operated sites, the CMCA represents just 6% of the 550,000+ registered RV in Australia so are you seriously suggesting an organisation this small is trying to "freeze out" the other 94%. Caravanning Qld forgot to mention to councils that their organisation represent less that .8% of businesses in Qld.
This whole ludicrous thread started because a sign or two said "motorhomes only" so somebody gets up in arms and writes to councils protesting. Just image if I, a motorhome driver, complained that CARAVAN parks were not called Motorhome parks or those parking bays at information centres and shopping centres are marked caravan parking only.
Really some people need to get their facts right before shooting from the hip and then they need to get a life. Is it any wonder we have trouble presenting a united front to governments when we see thread like this. Think about it some of us are our own worst enemies.
Agreed. As long as whatever land is leased is at commercial rates. If they lease it to a minority group at discounted rates where the taxpayers or ratepayers have to pick up the tab (it could be leased to others at normal rates), then that's where I find the practice objectionable.
And in spades for where governments own football grounds, lease it to exclusive clubs who then limit membership and general public access.
very happy camper wrote. ?? -- HA HA
The CMCA is not quite that stupid.
The Caravan people can only join as associate members ( they have no voting rights ).
It always has been a Motorhome Club and it always will be.
=============================================================================
Bit of a sm-rt a-se c--ky attitude there Happy Camper, ?? the very same attitude that created the division in your club, As for your last comment ? have you ever heard about Change,? Advancement ? progress.? growth,? consolidation ? If nothing ever changed ;[ for the better ] Then This great country of our would be entirely different, we would still have '' The White Australia policy '' ? it was changed and the Country grew proud and strong ?
So maybe you had better take your ****y attitude back to your club and attend to the division that is within your own confinds ? If you do not want Caravanners in your club, That is fine, ? tell your board to please stop inviting these caravan type people to join your club, just for the extra $$$$ Even if they will not let them vote, ! You tell your board THIS IS A MOTORHOME CLUB and always will be, It will not upset Caravanners, What does effect caravanners , is discrimination, and arrogance and this is what is displayed by a lot of your membership,
I would be quite happy to Join your club, and pay my way, However i will never join a club that will take my subscription, and say Ok you can do this, and you can do that, and sometimes we may let you do something else, ??It will Never happen,?? I join the RACV pay my dues, when it comes time to vote I get to Vote, I am in a caravan club, I pay my dues, when it's time to vote i get to vote, ? If you become a member of a club, it is usually by invitation, IF a person does not meet the criteria to be a member, Then do not Invite them to join ?? I can join an ''RSL Club as An Associate Member'' with restrictions, and that is fine As I did not go to war or was A member of the forces, '' I respect that '' However to be treated differently Because I Tow My Rig, and You Drive yours ?? HuH ?? WELL I too can have a sm-rt a-se c--ky Attitude, ?? so Take your club, and stick it , !!
-- Edited by dazren on Saturday 26th of September 2015 03:01:46 PM
I really would not have thought that Happy Camper was a member of the CMCA. At least she hasn't said so, so I guess Ol' Daz is just jumping to conclusions again and showing us all that intelligence is not a prerequisite in joining a caravan forum.
And while I'm on the subject, I notice from her Profile that Happy Camper is a lady and I think your comments and name calling towards her are unwarranted and may be cause for a bullying call against you. I suggest you smarten up your act or leave.
The Phantom
-- Edited by The Phantom on Saturday 26th of September 2015 03:35:44 PM
The Phantom wrote [ make that scribbled ] I really would not have thought that Happy Camper was a member of the CMCA. At least she hasn't said so, so I guess Ol' Daz is just jumping to conclusions again and showing us all that intelligence is not a prerequisite in joining a caravan forum.
And while I'm on the subject, I notice from her Profile that Happy Camper is a lady and I think your comments and name calling towards her are unwarranted and may be cause for a bullying call against you. I suggest you smarten up your act or leave.
The Phantom
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geez Phantom you still around, ? shame about that, ? I thought we had an understanding, from back in December, when you sent me your PM in a rude and weak attempt to intimidate me, !! In my reply to you it was made clear we do not like each other, ? and as such, we would refrain from commenting on each others posts, I have done the right thing and just ignored yours, however here you are once again putting in you petty opinion of no value to anyone, as for people to listen a person needs respect, and respect is not a quality you command, ? So if your memory is fading, Here is a copy of my reply to your Rude and Unwanted PM from December, please can you re-read it to refresh your memory, ? And Ignore my future postings, ? As I ignore yours ? Thank You
-- Edited by dazren on Sunday 27th of September 2015 12:06:03 AM
Deleted my post
-- Edited by greyhoundtom on Saturday 26th of September 2015 08:42:30 PM
Hi all,
Thanks for your input but I think I'll close this down now. Again, I would just remind members to please keep posts respectful. Although we welcome robust discussion, please ensure that your post is directed towards the issue at hand, not at the member that you disagree with.
Also, a reminder from our 'forum rules' that the private message system is in place to help members to communicate directly one another in a positive way and perhaps provide each other with email addresses or other personal details once they get to know each other a bit better. We ask that members retain their friendly and helpful manner when using the messaging system. Please do not use the PM system to criticise other members or their views. If anyone has an issue with another member or any of their posts, please send me a PM and I will address it.