Home
Governing body says members had urged it to fight Pat McQuaid's re-election...

Brian Cookson’s successful bid for the UCI presidency cost £120,000, says British Cycling – which adds that its members had urged it to oppose the re-election of Pat McQuaid, who had been seeking a third term running the sport’s world governing body.

Money to support then British Cycling president Cookson’s campaign ahead of the election in Florence in late September in which he beat McQuaid 24-18 came from the national governing body’s international relations budget, reports Orange.co.uk.

Cookson’s trips around the world as he sought to canvass support among the 42 delegates who would be voting at the UCI Congress in Florence were undertaken by standard class to keep costs down.

According to a spokesman for British Cycling: "The cost was just under £120,000. The expenditure is within the limit which was set and came from British Cycling's international relations budget.

“It covered the costs of the entire campaign including travel, the production and launch of his manifesto and professional support. All Brian's travel was standard class and, in most cases, he travelled alone.”

Cookson emerged as the sole candidate to mount a challenge to McQuaid’s leadership of the UCI, which had been implicated in helping cover up doping in the United States Anti-Doping Agency’s Reasoned Decision in the Lance Armstrong scandal.

"The impetus behind the campaign came from a groundswell of demand for change from our membership,” the spokesman continued.

“Following the publication of USADA's reasoned decision, we were inundated with correspondence from ordinary members insisting that we had to oppose the re-election of Pat McQuaid.

"That gave us a clear choice as a membership organisation, especially when it became obvious that there would not be an alternative candidate unless Brian put his name forward.

"Brian's candidacy for the presidency of the UCI was fully supported by the British Cycling board and as an organisation we have developed a culture of committing completely to goals once they have been agreed."

According to British Cycling’s latest annual report, in the year to 31 March 2013 it had funds and reserves of £1.75 million. The organisation had income of £23.762 million during the financial year, recording a deficit of £349,026 after tax.

Born in Scotland, Simon moved to London aged seven and now lives in the Oxfordshire Cotswolds with his miniature schnauzer, Elodie. He fell in love with cycling one Saturday morning in 1994 while living in Italy when Milan-San Remo went past his front door. A daily cycle commuter in London back before riding to work started to boom, he's been news editor at road.cc since 2009. Handily for work, he speaks French and Italian. He doesn't get to ride his Colnago as often as he'd like, and freely admits he's much more adept at cooking than fettling with bikes.

20 comments

Avatar
zanf [898 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

"Giverning body" typo in byline.

Avatar
alotronic [502 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

Well spent!

Avatar
Ad Hynkel [148 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

I would say 120 grand is pretty "give-rning"...I'll get my jacket.

Avatar
sean1 [177 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

Money well spent, glad to see Mr Cookson in charge.

Avatar
CJSTEVENS1955 [86 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

120,000 UK pounds. If thats all it cost to get rid of that blight MCQUAID I would have made a donation.

Avatar
kitkat [410 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

I wonder how much McQuaid's campaign cost and where the funding came from. Irish Cycling Federation?

£120k sounds reasonable and i'm glad of the transparency, a new age!

Avatar
step-hent [723 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes
kitkat wrote:

I wonder how much McQuaid's campaign cost and where the funding came from. Irish Cycling Federation?

Doubt it, since they refused to back him after the second time of asking. I would guess he shoehorned it all in to the UCI budget (whilst at the same time claiming that the UCI budget is tiny and it is underfunded).

Avatar
jollygoodvelo [1606 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

Someone had to do it, and we probably have the most cash-rich federation due to all the new members.

Money well spent, I'd say.

Avatar
Simmo72 [637 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

We could have saved £119,00 by just seeing each person present their views once then voting for the one which wasn't a corrupt, ignorant stain on the sport.

Avatar
usedtobefaster [193 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes
CJSTEVENS1955 wrote:

120,000 UK pounds. If thats all it cost to get rid of that blight MCQUAID I would have made a donation.

if you're a BC member you did  1

Money well spent.

Avatar
Oscarzero [25 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

The fact that British Cycling publish this with such openness and transparency, only goes to demonstrate further why it was all money well spent and that Brian is absolutely the right man to clear out the muck at UCI headquarters. Glad I was able to contribute!

Avatar
litespeed_di2 [8 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

Money very well spent. I am more than happy as a member for them to have spent this money.

Avatar
jarredscycling [456 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

Seems a tad steep considering the source as I would have assumed more private funding would have been used. Either way that is a cheap sum to keep the entire sport of cycling functioning

Avatar
antonio [1151 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

Cheap at the price!

Avatar
Lemond75 [3 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes
jarredscycling wrote:

Seems a tad steep considering the source as I would have assumed more private funding would have been used. Either way that is a cheap sum to keep the entire sport of cycling functioning

Probably a good thing that there was little, if any, private funding used to back Brian's campaign. That way, he can't be accused of having any vested interests or shaping policy to assist any backers.

Avatar
flobble [114 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes
Lemond75 wrote:

Probably a good thing that there was little, if any, private funding used to back Brian's campaign. That way, he can't be accused of having any vested interests or shaping policy to assist any backers.

Yes there was...
http://www.britishcycling.org.uk/staticcontent/bcst-British-Cycling-s-Pa...

I'm not implying that there's anything untoward going on here, but British Cycling *is* partly funded by commercial interests. Which is perfectly fine IMO.

Avatar
Sniffer [353 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

Yes there was...
http://www.britishcycling.org.uk/staticcontent/bcst-British-Cycling-s-Pa...

I'm not implying that there's anything untoward going on here, but British Cycling *is* partly funded by commercial interests. Which is perfectly fine IMO.[/quote]

Once again, visible to all. Happy that some of my membership fees was spent on the Cookson campaign

Although I like to block it out, if we remember the mud slinging, misinformation and probably outright lies from the other candidate, he did have to run a decent campaign. Even though it looked bloody obvious from this part of the globe.

Avatar
evo111 [20 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

As others have said good value for money. I suspect we are already starting to see returns for having the right person in the job.

Avatar
russyparkin [570 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

great news, i would happily throw £10 into a fund to help top it back up. mcquaid had to go at all costs, wouldnt have cared if it cost £1.2m

Avatar
edster99 [338 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes
litespeed_di2 wrote:

Money very well spent. I am more than happy as a member for them to have spent this money.

me too  1