The war of words between Pat McQuaid, president of cycling’s governing body, the UCI and challenger Brian Cookson escalated a nortch this afternoon as McQuaid issued a statement “clarifying misinformation” about his multiple nominations.
Accusing Cookson of not “showing an interest in cycling around the world over the years” McQuaid claims his multiple candidature is perfectly legal under the UCI constitution.
“The UCI Constitution permits anyone to be a member of multiple federations – although only one licence may be held by any one individual – and any federation to nominate one of their members as a candidate,” says the statement.
McQuaid said: “No one has changed the rules. No one has broken the rules. I have received enormous support from federations around the world urging me to stand for re-election and expressing their hope that I will continue on as UCI President. These nominations are a testament to that.
“Morocco, for example, is now African’s number one cycling nation qualifying riders for the UCI World Championships and the Olympic Games. I have witnessed the growth of cycling in Morocco on my many visits there since becoming UCI President in 2005 and my membership of that federation goes back to early 2009.
“There was nothing stopping Brian Cookson from showing an interest in cycling around the world over the years by joining other federations that would have allowed him to secure additional nominations when he decided to stand for President. I respect that his horizons however do not stretch much further than British Cycling and that his home is where his heart and ambitions as a Presidential candidate lie.”
McQuaid claims that Cookson and UCI management committee member Mike Plant should not be surprised at the rule change proposed by the Malaysian federation, which would allow any candidate to stand for president with nominations from any two federations.
“The very essence of this proposal was first suggested in an email from the Asian Continental Confederation to all members of the UCI Management Committee on 22 May 2013 as a means of strengthening the independence of the President,” says the statement.
“This proposal should not come as a surprise to anyone on the UCI management committee. It has now been formally submitted in accordance with the rules and it is for Congress to decide whether it should be accepted or rejected. Unlike Mr. Cookson, I have enough confidence in my candidature to respect that,” said McQuaid.
“Whatever the decision of Congress it will not change the fact that I have three valid nominations to stand as a candidate for re-election. While Brian Cookson and his commercial supporters may wish otherwise I am pleased to declare that he will face an election in September and that they can not escape that reality.”
“As Brian himself stated recently:
“Democratic institutions become stronger by having leadership contests, not weaker, so I welcome anybody who wants to stand as a candidate.
“Let’s have the debate – it’s good, it’s healthy and that’s how democracy should be. I’m quite happy to be the only challenger, or one of several challengers.”
“Brian should explain what has changed since he made that statement,” said McQuaid.
31 thoughts on “UCI presidency: Pat McQuaid strikes back”
Increasingly desparate to
Increasingly desparate to explian himself. Ashamed is a word that springs to mind. Obviously not in some people’s vocabulary. If the UCI was not in disrepute before and needed a change, this confirms the need.
Do we think Pat reads
Do we think Pat reads this?
If so, here’s a question for him:
What the hell are you so scared of that you will go to such lengths to ensure your re-election?
So Pat claims to be a member
So Pat claims to be a member of the Irish, Swiss, Moroccan, Malaysian, and Thai Cycling Federations. Why has he not mentioned this until now, and when were the nominations from Morocco and Thailand actually made?
McQuaid said: “… I have
McQuaid said: “… I have received enormous support from federations around the world urging me to stand for re-election and expressing their hope that I will continue on as UCI President. These nominations are a testament to that.”
I shudder if this really is the case :O
Sadly Biggins wrote:McQuaid
[quote=Sadly Biggins]McQuaid said: “… I have received enormous support from federations around the world urging me to stand for re-election and expressing their hope that I will continue on as UCI President. These nominations are a testament to that.”
Not from Ireland though
SevenHills wrote:Not from
Indeed. His proposed gerrymandering suggests that he’s not too confident about his Swiss nomination either.
It seems more patently clear
It seems more patently clear that this man should be removed the more desperately he clings to power.
His Burlesconi attempts to wrest power for himself are as corrupt as a two-headed coin. Cycling and sport are not benefitting from his time in power. If he wins this time, when will he lose?
Anyone for a Revolution?
If McQuaid does get to stand
If McQuaid does get to stand in the election, what are his chances of actually winning? Presumably he has at least 5 votes (Malaysia, Morocco, Thailand etc). How many more does he need?
Pat McQualude… time for you
Pat McQualude… time for you to go…
Really should have just gone
Really should have just gone the whole hog with the headline. The Empire Strikes Back: Darth McQuaid says…etc!
Anyone but McQuaid, seriously
Anyone but McQuaid, seriously
This is the text of an e-mail
This is the text of an e-mail which I sent to the Malaysian cycling convention a few minutes ago. Feel free to copy and paste it. Let’s not get mad, let’s get organised. If only a hundred of us send this e-mail, it’ll show the depth of feeling on this matter. You can send it to: pkbmalaysia@gmail.com – courtesy of Jon Vaughters twitter feed.
“Dear Sir,
I have recently read of the proposed changes to the UCI’s election procedure, specifically relating to the nomination of the UCI president and their relationship with the national committees.
While I feel that changing the rules to make the UCI president less hidebound to nomination by their national committee could lead to an over-all increase in presidential accountable on a global level, the time of this move is highly suspicious.
As there is already an on-going election process within the UCI, it is deeply suspect to change the rules by which this election is governed. As there appear to be some difficulties for the current UCI president in gaining nomination by his national convention – both Ireland and Switzerland – this move is highly damaging as it appears to be made in order to support the incumbent UCI president to the detriment of the current challenging candidate, Brian Cookson.
As there is already a lack of trust in both the cycling community and the wider world due to the Armstrong affair, such moves are extremely damaging to the wider trust in your organisation. Additionally to this, this looks to be the most extreme example of legislative change to support the incumbent president, who may struggle to gain re-election otherwise.
In short, this is a farce of democracy for the UCI, and does nothing but further damage the already ruined image of the UCI in the wider world, while doing nothing more than supporting an incumbent president to the detriment of everything else. These are the actions of an autocrat, rather than anyone who respects the democratic traditions and conventions of the UCI.
I hope that, as members of the national conventions who understand that the UCI needs to re-build it’s support, you will vote against this measure when it is offered for debate in September.
Yours Sincerely…”
Let’s see if we can make something happen.
Not KOM wrote:This is the
Do you not think that the timing of the Malaysian Federation’s actions is not an unfortunate coincidence, but just a demonstration that they are every bit as bent as Pat?
Absolutely, yes…..
…. but
Absolutely, yes…..
…. but if I write that without evidence that’s libel. This is the best I can do without being libelous because it talks of suspicions rather than just saying ‘you’re totally bent’.
It will probably get ignored, but if there is enough of an outcry maybe those who have been corrupted will become more scared of the people writing to them rather than Pat Mcquaid.
Let’s give it a go, eh? I’m tired of sitting on the sidelines and watching this car wreck.
Not KOM wrote:Absolutely,
Well I don’t suppose it will hurt, but any success is still dependent on them giving a damn.
Incidentally, the statement “This shows the Malaysian Federation are just as bent as Pat” is not libellous, being “Fair comment” i.e. a conclusion a reasonable person could reach. (Note the word “could”).
GO Pat, time for a
GO Pat, time for a change…….
Can someone not just do a
Can someone not just do a Kennedy style assassination please….Guns are legal if I remember rightly in Switzerland, I’m willing to travel if you can teach me how to aim at a LARGE, Smelly, Slimy, Creepy, Turd like substance X( X(
I just had to copy and paste
I just had to copy and paste this comment from Gary_K on a different forum as it made me laugh out hard
“And the organisers of the Eurovision song contest will now let countries select singers / bands from other countries to represent them if they can’t find anyone good enough from within to potentially win!”
Shouldn’t we get all those Moroccan and Malaysian cycling clubs to challenge their national federation’s nomination of McQuaid – what if there was someone else interested in standing from those countries?
and by the way, we now have a
and by the way, we now have a different photo of Pat, more in line with his general demeanour, but any chance we could get a more recent one. Maybe the one where he gets of his private jet returning all tanned and souvenired from Marrakech?
Metjas wrote:and by the way,
What we need is the second picture from this article:
drheaton wrote:Metjas
Agreed. We could have a caption competition!
Would it be libellous if i
Would it be libellous if i was to say ‘McQuaid really is a dick isnt he’?
Because if it is – i would not say that. Obviously.
Some Fella wrote:Would it be
No. That would be covered by ridicule and insult, and consequently be something you are perfectly entitled to say. You would only fall foul of the Law if, while insulting Pat, you made specific reference to his ethnicity, nationality, religious faith, or sexual orientation, in a manner to stir up hatred against whole sections of the community as a whole.
The Rumpo Kid wrote:Some
Thanks for the legal advice.
Well it helps to be au fait
Well it helps to be au fait with slander and libel laws when one discusses the leadership of the UCI. (Bribe taking liars, Pat and his predecessor. Oh dear I’ve done it again. Made a fair comment, that is.)
My God. It makes FIFA look
My God. It makes FIFA look honest.
Just go.
Seriously, it’s time. Off you
Seriously, it’s time. Off you f***.
Where does it say in the UCI
Where does it say in the UCI constitution that someone (in this case, the President) may be a member of multiple federations?
Article 51 of the constitution states that the nomination must come from the federation of the candidate…Mr. McQuiad is Irish, and they will not nominate him. Alternatively, he lives in Switzerland (lucky him), and their nomination is being contested in the courts soon.
How can he be permitted to be nominated by Thailand and Morocco when he doesn’t hold a passport for either country through birth, residence, or by marriage?
Pat, you’re wrong in this instance…so do the good thing and fall on your own sword. Resign, in other words.
Thanks in advance.
cxmad
Nothing to do with working on
Nothing to do with working on the Tour of Langkawi obviously
thanks for the new fat pat
thanks for the new fat pat photo 🙂
“Accusing Cookson of not
“Accusing Cookson of not “showing an interest in cycling around the world over the years” McQuaid claims his multiple candidature is perfectly legal under the UCI constitution.”
You have to question whether FP’s ‘interest in cycling around the world’ is more to do with improving/extending the sport rather than self-interest.
And if it’s the former, why is it Brian Cookson that’s talking about developing the women’s side of the sport, when FP’s had more than enough time to address it ?