Proposed rule-change might help McQuaid back in the president’s seat at UCI
Proposed rule change may allow McQuaid to run for re-election as UCI president without the support of his home federation. Photo: Colourbox
30.07.2013
The rule change is being put to the vote at the UCI congress, but will be backdated if successfully introduced, meaning that it would apply to the current election.
Currently, the UCI rules states that presidential candidates must be backed by their national federation. McQuaid, who failed to get final support from the Irish federation, instead requested the backing by the Swiss federation, his home base for a decade.
In May, the Swiss federation stated that it would back McQuaid’s nomination, but this soon fell into uncertainty as it was suggested that several of the Swiss board members had voted against this support.
In June, legal action was launched over the nomination by three Swiss Cycling members and the chairman of the sportswear company Skins, Jamie Fuller. The legal action will be resolved at a hearing on 22 August.
But if the new amendment is passed, McQuaid will not need the support of neither the Irish nor the Swiss federations. In a press release yesterday on the proposed rule change, the UCI confirmed that McQuaid has the backing of both the Thai and Moroccan cycling federations.
"Two candidates have so far been nominated to stand for President. Current President, Pat McQuaid, has received nominations from Swiss Cycling, the Thai Cycling Association and the Fédération Royale Marocaine de Cyclisme (all three of which he has membership), and Brian Cookson has been nominated by the British Cycling Federation."
Should the Swiss backing fail, the new rule, if accepted, will therefore still allow McQuaid to run for reelection.
In a letter, UCI director general Christophe Hubschmid informed members of the management of the proposed amendment to the rules.
McQuaid’s challenger, Brian Cookson, is less pleased by this development. In a statement to on his website today, Cookson writes:
"The efforts to change the nomination and electoral process announced last night on behalf of the UCI Director General are a clear sign of desperation from the incumbent President, Pat McQuaid."
"This latest twist appears to be nothing more than a fraught attempt to undemocratically and unconstitutionally impact on the process while it is underway."
"It is no wonder that many in the cycling family as well as fans and sponsors have lost faith in the UCI to govern ethically when the man at the top of the organisation is prepared to embarrass an entire sport in an attempt to try and cling onto power," he stated.
Jamie Fuller, who has also launched the campaign group Change Cycling Now, said in an email to VeloNews that:
"The latest actions from UCI president Pat McQuaid are those of a desperate man trying to hold onto his dwindling power base. This abuse of process and power are unheard of in sports administration circles and his tactics most resemble those of Zimbabwean dictator Robert Mugabe,"
"Mr. McQuaid obviously recognizes that Swiss Cycling could lose their defence of their endorsement of Mr. McQuaid and therefore he has set off down a path to twist and manipulate the UCI rules in his own self-interest."
"The fact that he has now become a member of the Thai and Moroccan Federations and has proposed changes to the constitution to enable them to nominate him for president should Swiss Cycling lose their action, shows the lengths that Mr. McQuaid will go to in order to maintain his well-abused position," he claimed.
The Report says in its Introduction “The practical organisation of the Olympic Games is extremely complex. The detailed plans of how each city proposes to deliver the Games are set out in the Candidature File. During a visit to each city, the Commission verified the information presented in the Candidature File and studied the feasibility of implementing each city’s plans as proposed.” This means that the data verified was submitted by the three Candidate Cities, in other words, the Commission did not voluntarily collect the data by itself. The IOC probably has certain yardstick and insight into the requisites to the practical organization of the Olympic Games because of their experiences and data. However, in such a manner, their yardstick and insight will not be effective against what will happen and how it will happen if a big earthquake or tsunami occurs because I do not think the Commission has sufficient experience in the big earthquake and tsunami, the expertise, and the data. The Commission must have never dreamed of the hazardous nature of Tokyo under such circumstances that the Tokyo 2020 Bid Committee did not disclose the hazardous nature of Tokyo at all.
Mainly the item of Safety and Security in the Report is a target of my argument. In reply to a foreign journalist’s question as to earthquakes, the Tokyo 2020 Bid Committee stated positively “Japan is a safe country.” However, is there any Japanese who believes “Japan will be a safe country even though a big earthquake occurs”? Having learned constructive lessons from the Great East Japan Earthquake of 2011, the Japanese government, the local governments, and Japanese people now share the common idea that to prevent damage by disaster is impossible and therefore to lessen the damage is the best and only way. The perception that there is no place of safety in Japan forms the basis of the common idea. It seems that the above item as a whole focuses on security. As for the safety measures against earthquakes, it says that the measures have been sufficiently taken as the Tokyo 2020 Bid Committee asserts. It is a sign that the Commission casts a glance at the Candidature File, which was presented by the Tokyo 2020 Bid Committee, without expertise and that the Report lacks objective observation and scientific perspective.
More specifically, although the Report says “Japan is situated in an earthquake zone and robust measures have been adopted by the Japanese authorities in terms of construction standards,” the present Japanese situation is such that 13-minute-shakiness of a high-rise building at Shinjuku, Tokyo which is thirteen times longer than the national earthquake resistance standards was detected at the time of the Great East Japan Earthquake of 2011 and therefore the Japanese government is going to review the standards. Furthermore, the recent discoveries and studies bring out defects of some existing standards, but it can be hardly said that the review has been conducted by the Japanese government. As a matter of fact, the construction standards are only one of the measures against earthquake.
The Report also parrots words of the Tokyo 2020 Bid Committee saying “Following the 2011 earthquake and tsunami, numerous studies and simulations have been undertaken by relevant experts to evaluate future risks to the Tokyo Bay area. These have shown that the topography and shape of the bay significantly reduce the possible impact of a tsunami. Nevertheless, the necessary safety measures such as sea walls and breakwaters are being implemented.” However, according to the recent academic reports, (1) when a tsunami reaches a bay whose shape is just like the Tokyo Bay, the tsunami moves backward and forward and the movement makes it larger, (2) the tsunami wave has a tendency that when it comes into collision with a blocker like a wall, it moves upward by several meters, and (3) cockboats and floating matters carried by a tsunami bump against the blockers with destructive force. Therefore, it makes no sense at all that both the height and strength of the existing walls constructed along the coast of Tokyo Bay are sufficient.
There are more than 5,000 gas and oil tanks including more than 600 floating roof tanks, which are at risk for sloshing phenomenon, in reclaimed waterfront areas along Tokyo Bay and the soils of the waterfront areas are soft. Professor Masanori Hamada at Waseda University and some other experts have issued a warning that those tanks will be broken and exploded by a liquefaction, the accompanying lateral flow of soils, and sloshing phenomenon at the time of earthquake and therefore Tokyo Bay will become a “sea of fire.” When Mr. Inose, the deputy governor at the time and the Governor of Tokyo and the chairman of the Tokyo 2020 Bid Committee at present, appeared on a TV debate program on March 7, 2012 which was before the experts had founded the latent risk for sloshing problem at the Tokyo Bay area, he only said the fire had been successfully extinguished in reply to my posted question about the fire of Tokyo Bay in connection with the plan of the Metropolis of Tokyo to build a natural gas thermal power plant in the Tokyo Bay area. As for the insufficient measures against the liquefaction, he admitted it, but continued saying he will hand the oil companies to the measures against liquefaction. However, everybody knows it costs huge amount of money for the measures and it will be unrealistic for the companies to put money on it. In other words, it sounds like “although I leave the measures to other people, I believe the Tokyo Bay is safe and as the tank fire was extinguished once, any tank fire will be extinguished.” It shows his irresponsibility as the Governor of Tokyo and the chairman of the Tokyo 2020 Bid Committee and his assumption is very unrealistic. It is estimated that a huge earthquake will cause the Tokyo Bay area severer damages than the Earthquake of 2011. More than one tanks will be on fire and sufficient fire fighting activities cannot be performed because of the destruction of buildings, railways and bridges, fire of buildings, destruction and traffic jams of roads and decrepit highways, and the like. Although the hazardous nature of Tokyo covers the whole of Tokyo, here I focus on the Tokyo Bay area because the Report focuses on it in terms of the safety and advantages of Tokyo as a candidate city.
It was difficult for even Japanese people who live in a country with frequent earthquakes to cope with the Great East Japan Earthquake of 2011. To my knowledge, in the world there are people who have never experienced an earthquake and a huge amount of people do not get used to earthquakes. If such foreigners encounter a big earthquake in Tokyo, it will be almost impossible to cope with. If they do not speak Japanese well, the situation will be worse.
I would like to add one more thing. The Report reminds me of a scene from my favorite film “God Father Part Ⅱ” in which the leading character portrayed by Al Pacino who has believed his wife had a miscarriage gets to know the truth by a declarative representation of his wife portrayed by Diane Keaton who has decided to separate from her husband. What she said is “Oh, oh Michael. Michael, YOU ARE BLIND. It wasn’t a miscarriage. It was an abortion. An abortion, Michael....”