WS have given us no response since the meeting. As a result we are - TopicsExpress



          

WS have given us no response since the meeting. As a result we are publishing the minutes of the meeting. Tl:dr? The short version is this: At this moment in time, we do not feel WS or the SU have justified the price increases as they have not laid out a plan to efficiently spend the money - and therefore as it stands we do not know if its best value for money. ---Begin--- Question: Will WS give official response to open letter Answer: Yes Question: Will WS accounts be released? Answer: In due course Question: Elaborate on equitable, What will the money be spent on? Answer: No answer to allocations of funds however this will be provided. Question: What is the kitemark program? Answer: This was explained and it was clarified that this program will be funded from WS membership costs. Evidence to be provided that this is something that will benefit WS clubs. Question: What is price increase for? Answer: Make more equitable and provide more provision. Better answer required/tangible reasons such as what provisions. Question: Where is the £30 increase going? Answer: To make it more equitable and provision. Better answer required/tangible reasons such as what provisions. Question: Where is it going? Answer: Before non-club members payed for club members. This is still happening but the extent has not been provided. We seek clarification on the break down of the funds. This is something EWS have to wait for. Question: But you didnt decrease the non-club member costs? Answer: No because we wanted to increase the sports offer. We thought more provision is better value for money. Better answer required/tangible reasons such as what provisions. Question: What consultation did WS have with its users Answer: Nine consultations since 2012 and emails. EWS have requested access to the feedback results. This will be provided by WS. Question: How is inflation set? Answer: This is not a WS decision, the value is set by the university. EWS understand WS cannot affect this. Question: How do you know what non-club members want? What are the facts and figures. Answer: Feedback from WS survey. (10% of the approx. 10,000 members (staff and students) of WS responded). EWS have requested access to the feedback results. This will be provided by WS. Question: Is it the case that non-club members are no longer funding club member activity? Answer: They are but a bit less, there will still be an element of cross subsidy. EWS request the details like the £38/£17 split announced for previous years. Question: Before it was a £38/£17 split, what is the split of costs now to make it more equitable? Answer: No answer. Question: If it is determined that the students no longer want the increased services, will costs go down or are they hard wired into happening? Answer: WS dont think they are hard wired, reviews will happen but no guarantee that if services are not required then prices will go down. Some stuff you have to try to see if the community want it. Warwick Active has to be sustained so some budget goes towards that. Any new grants cannot be used for existing projects so the new grants have to go on new ideas. Question: Are the price increases going towards recovering from any previous years deficit or being collated to fund future facility projects? Answer: We do not have a surplus and we are not trying to plug a deficit. All the money is going back in but the discussion is where. WS is run to be budget neutral. Question: How have the funds been allocated? Answer: Some money has been allocated - will have to wait for freedom on information request to see where. Budget for a five year plan but no detailed breakdown provided. Question: You will have x amount extra now? Do we know which services this goes towards? Answer: Some of money we know where its going. Question: Some examples? Answer: Club development, Lifestyle fund (Warwick Active) Question: A lot of the information put out by WS does not make it clear where the money is going explicitly. Answer: Thats good feedback and we will look into that. Rubys document will aim to address some of this. Date for release still on 29th September. Question: Do you not think this is too late? Answer: This date chosen as sports council will be present. Question: Would it have been better if this information was put out to the public sooner? Answer: We tried to. The communication could have been better. We feel confident we did all we could at the time. EWS disagrees. Question: Would it have been better to tell students in term 2 for example about the increased costs? Answer: It didnt get signed off untill later. We told club execs in January of the price increases. EWS requests this contradiction needs clarification. Question: What about staff - it was tiered before and now its not. Why? Answer: This has been the case since 2012. Cant answer if it was a WS decision. Will have to go away to find out. WS did not make it clear if this is something WS will revisit. EWS requests clarification. WS agree to find out more information. Statements Made By WS During Meeting: So far since club membership has been on sale, it seems club membership has not been affected. Price increases were recommended by the feasibility study - the club execs were therefore not asked IF they should go up. Options presented included HOW they should as they were going to go up anyway regardless to improve provisions and become equitable. Questions: What are these provisions? What are they costing? Answer: WS will be providing this information for the allocation of funds. ---End--- We hope that gives you an insight into the meeting that happened last week.
Posted on: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 16:03:15 +0000

Trending Topics



Recently Viewed Topics




© 2015