Swoffer wrote:

---

Santa wrote:

---

Swoffer wrote:

---

 just find it odd that Campervaners/Motorhomers regard van and vanners so lowly (or vice versa for that matter)

---

 I don't recall anyone saying that.

---

 No ,not in this thread in so many words  sure but the feel is out there and has been for many years , surely y'all know what I mean .

---

 No! I don't know what you mean.

Caravaners and motor homers choose different ways of seeing Australia, neither one better, simply different.

In many years of travel we've never experienced any negativity from van owners.

There's aggression both ways . I have a motorhome . The amount of vaners who come up to us and say things like . I bet you have trouble parking . Did you sell your house to buy that ? This is after watching them trying to back into a space taking 20 min . I have a licence to drive a heavy vehicle . That's about the only reason . Cost wise is about the same . Thing is I thought we are all Grey Nomads .. But there's always that underlying beef . I don't care either way .

madaboutled wrote:

---

Once bitten twice shy....  Why anybody would pay full price to get half a membership in any club is beyond me.  We've had too many run ins with the CMCA when we had a caravan that we decided we would never join them till everybody was equal and that includes voting rights. Being from both worlds we hate the them and us attitudes, there's no such thing in our book we're all travellers enjoying this great country but until the club's treat everybody as equal the them and us attitudes will continue despite the claims that doesn't exist.

---

 That is sad really that one experience can colour one's opinions for life. I do find statements like "we've had too many run in with the CMCA" incredible when the CMCA represents around 6% of the RV vehicle population in Australia which just happens to make it the largest RV club in the southern hemisphere. It is surprising that we rarely see posts on the various forums saying "I've had so many run ins with the hundreds of caravan clubs in Australia" when they represent a goodly part of the other 94%. Yes I know some people are not in any club.

I have been a member for some considerable time and in that time I have seen much change in the CMCA both management wise and member wise, and that change is on going, and change can only be brought about by the members and I'm afraid if you are not a members voting or associate you have very little change of effecting change from outside the club.

I just happen to be the Chairman of the Constitution Review Working Group who over the past 8 months or so have be tasked with making a set of recommendations for a complete review of the constitution. We have done this by asking the members, both voting and associate to make submissions on their views as to where the club should go in the next 20 years or so and we hopefully will come up with a constitution which will provide for that. I must say we have had some interesting and varied submissions from both ends of the spectrum, some wanting nothing to change and some wanting everything to change and all points in between. What has been important in this process is that the review is being driven by members for members for their future and will only be approved by the members when it finally gets to an AGM. We will no doubt have an interesting debate among our members when proposals get placed before them.

Regardless of the outcome of this review one thing I believe will always remain constant will be the knockers. Despite a proud record over at least 30 years of growth and community service with the club spending the members money on facilities for all of RVers, dump points, RV Friendly Towns, Destinations, and fighting unjust anti camping laws and regulations and many many things the average RVers never hears about, there will always be those who cannot see the trees for the forest.  One thing that may surprise you though is that the fastest growing sector of the club is Associates so I guess many are looking past the trees that block others views.

So Bugsy , why is it that a caravan owner cannot be a full member ?

Bugsy wrote:

---

madaboutled wrote:

---

Once bitten twice shy....  Why anybody would pay full price to get half a membership in any club is beyond me.  We've had too many run ins with the CMCA when we had a caravan that we decided we would never join them till everybody was equal and that includes voting rights. Being from both worlds we hate the them and us attitudes, there's no such thing in our book we're all travellers enjoying this great country but until the club's treat everybody as equal the them and us attitudes will continue despite the claims that doesn't exist.

---

 That is sad really that one experience can colour one's opinions for life. I do find statements like "we've had too many run in with the CMCA" incredible when the CMCA represents around 6% of the RV vehicle population in Australia which just happens to make it the largest RV club in the southern hemisphere. It is surprising that we rarely see posts on the various forums saying "I've had so many run ins with the hundreds of caravan clubs in Australia" when they represent a goodly part of the other 94%. Yes I know some people are not in any club.

I have been a member for some considerable time and in that time I have seen much change in the CMCA both management wise and member wise, and that change is on going, and change can only be brought about by the members and I'm afraid if you are not a members voting or associate you have very little change of effecting change from outside the club.

I just happen to be the Chairman of the Constitution Review Working Group who over the past 8 months or so have be tasked with making a set of recommendations for a complete review of the constitution. We have done this by asking the members, both voting and associate to make submissions on their views as to where the club should go in the next 20 years or so and we hopefully will come up with a constitution which will provide for that. I must say we have had some interesting and varied submissions from both ends of the spectrum, some wanting nothing to change and some wanting everything to change and all points in between. What has been important in this process is that the review is being driven by members for members for their future and will only be approved by the members when it finally gets to an AGM. We will no doubt have an interesting debate among our members when proposals get placed before them.

Regardless of the outcome of this review one thing I believe will always remain constant will be the knockers. Despite a proud record over at least 30 years of growth and community service with the club spending the members money on facilities for all of RVers, dump points, RV Friendly Towns, Destinations, and fighting unjust anti camping laws and regulations and many many things the average RVers never hears about, there will always be those who cannot see the trees for the forest.  One thing that may surprise you though is that the fastest growing sector of the club is Associates so I guess many are looking past the trees that block others views.

---

 Sorry Bugsy, Not one incident but many over the last six years some instagated by members and others by management. So, unfortunately the "trees" you speak of that block my views were planted and cultivated by the CMCA themselves.  That said, I don't dispute that the CMCA do some wonderful things for the RV fraternity and IF the time comes where caravaners can become FULL members then give me an application and I'll gladly sign up.

Bugsy wrote:

---

I guess the simple answer to that is because the constitution says so, and it is a constitution (which has evolved over time) which has served the club well over 30 years other wise we would not see the organisation that the CMCA has become today. Nobody is saying that the CMCA is perfect, nothing is, but there is an acknowledgement of the need to update hence the review process currently under way.

Don't want to play silly buggers but the constitution as it stands does not say "caravan owners" cannot be full members, many of our full members may own a caravan ( I know some who do) but it is the lack of what the current constitution describes a "qualifying vehicle" that denies a person voting rights. The term Associate Member does not just apply to "caravan owners" but equally applies to many members who do not meet the requirements of "full" membership.

---

Gday...

Interesting comments Bugsy.

I have just read the CMCA constitution and you are quite correct to suggest it does not say "caravan owners" cannot be full members.

However, it certainly does clearly state what constitutes a "qualifying vehicle"

Qualifying Vehicle means a motorised vehicle capable of independent road travel, commonly referred to as a campervan or motorhome which has:
(a) inbuilt facilities for food storage and preparation; and
(b) inbuilt facilities for eating and sleeping;
(c) and includes:
(i) a slide on or slide in unit when the removable accommodation section is fitted to the tray of a motor utility or motor truck;
(ii) a campervan or motorhome, which term includes converted commercial vans, pop top vehicles,
6 Amended 15 November 2013 Constitution of Campervan & Motorhome Club of Australia converted buses and other converted vehicles; or
(iii) a vehicle commonly referred to as a fifth wheeler comprising a prime mover in the form of a motor utility or motor truck with the trailer accommodation section
attached by means of a hitch mounting located wholly within the chassis perimeter of the prime mover in the immediate vicinity of the rear axle.

Ordinary Member

(a) A person who owns or jointly owns a Qualifying Vehicle shall be eligible to be an Ordinary Member. The spouse of an Ordinary Member or the partner of an ordinary Member who has a domestic relationship with that Ordinary Member which is analogous to that of husband and wife shall be eligible to be an Ordinary Member regardless of whether that spouse or partner is the owner (or joint owner) of a Qualifying Vehicle.

Associate Member

(b) A person who does not own or jointly own a Qualifying Vehicle but is interested in motorised living or in the advancement of the Company shall be eligible to be an
Associate Member.

Cheers - John

Yes John it is clearly spelt out and the only way it can change, if the members decide it should, is for a 75% majority to pass it at an AGM