With all the activity MAG is involved in these days and all the good responses that I get from so many quarters to the newspaper it is easy to believe that all is hunky dory on the good ship MAG. In stark contrast to the generally buoyant mood however I am getting warning signs that there is a degree of disquiet among many of MAG's more traditional members. Since these are the people who have supported MAG through thick and thin, who sustain our local group structure, who organise and attend our rallies and hence much of the funding of the group, and are the people who can be relied upon to turn out for demos when the need arises, this is a problem which I am not inclined to dismiss.

MAG is about more than money and numbers, it is about people and principles and it is not my intention nor that of the NC to replace the traditional members with the new wave members who might only join for the commercial benefits and depart as soon as someone else offers a more favourable package. Any company, organisation or nation that treats its core people with contempt in the quest for new friends does so at their peril and I am acutely aware of this. When I addressed the regional meeting at Stamford last year I made the point that while MAG welcomes the new wave, it is in the hard core membership that our trust resides, I didn't say that just to make a popular appeal but because it is true. MAG UK puts every other European country to shame when it comes to travelling hundreds of miles to Euro demos because we have that hard core, and the dedication of all who make such efforts is valued.

It bothers me therefore to hear that there is a sense of discomfort among the core membership which has reached me via comments or telephone calls and the occasional letter. In all the discussions that I've had with people, no-one seems really able to put their finger on precisely what it is that they are unhappy with.

If we had abandoned core issues such as our stance on helmet compulsion for example, in order to attract more new members then I would have no trouble understanding people's anxiety. If MAG did that then my interest in the organisation as a political action group would evaporate.

Clearly we have changed the image that we present to the world via the newspaper and the publicity material we distribute. Had we not done that then I really do believe we would be struggling for our survival today, probably we would already have gone under as a professional lobby group. In compiling the newspaper I look very carefully at all pictures since a picture says so much; and try to strike a balance. Since we started this make-over exercise we were up against a deeply ingrained prejudice and I felt it necessary to swing farther the other way than I felt comfortable doing, at least as far as the presentation of images is concerned. If everyone thinks you're a racist then there's nothing like marrying a black woman and moving to Brixton to make people think differently about you. I guess what we've done with the paper is the equivalent of that though I have consciously made an effort to include images which reflect traditional appearances so long as they are not oafish. I will not use the kind of images that BSH or Easy Riders would have used in their early days. Pictures of people urinating or throwing up or lying comatose among a heap of beer cans do so much damage to our credibility in political circles or with new wave bikers. You can write a million words and publish a thousand positive images that can be undone at a stroke by an image that presents oafishness or over indulgence as necessarily hilarious. It's difficult to make generalisations about images; you have to look at each one and judge it on its merits but I do spend a lot of time looking at pictures and speculating on their probable impact.

As I've written in the paper, I want images that demonstrate the fun and exhilaration of biking or are humourous and they don't have to be vulgar or school-boyish to achieve that. Someone riding down the road with his or her hair blowing in the wind might incense ROSPA but as far as I'm concerned that's OK whereas the outrageous wheelie shot be-loved of the high performance mags is more questionable, not to say, tired.' Someone dancing with a bottle of Jack Daniels in one hand is fine, someone vomiting over a heap of cans isn't.

While I have used modern sports bike images on the covers I have endeavoured to throw the paper open to contibutions via the 'My Bikes' section to the entire membership to supply me with material to ensure that the whole spectrum is represented. I doubt if I have had more than two or three contributions since I launched that slot; the rest are bikes that I have photographed myself at rallies or meetings, having then had to follow up by chasing people for copy if I haven't interviewed them at the time.

But is this concern just about images or acts or lack of acts?

I know that some people ask why we don't have more demos. I wouldn't be surprised if we actually have more demos than we used to have but they have changed. The recent piece I ran on Windsor MAG parking a bike in each car bay of a car park was a form of demo even though it only required a handful of people. The fact is it achieved results and put the authority on the spot in a very cute way that no-one could really object to. A few years ago we'd reached a stage where demos were being organised to accompany rallies before it had been decided what it was that we were demonstrating about. It was getting a bit like punching people and then trying to decide what it was that they'd done wrong. Gratuitous demos are likely to be counter productive. The last Euro demo in Germany was a case in point. The nearest thing that approximated to a slogan to hang the demo on was something along the lines of 'fair treatment for bikers within the context of an integrated transport system for Europe,' what? That's certainly what I would say if I were an independent journalist trying to get to the core issue. You have to be careful about wearing out those who might sympathise with you if you are not to fall into the flat shoed crop headed, dungareed clans of bloated lentil sucking lesbians with enough chips on their shoulders to complement a 'Great White' fish supper.

'Helmet laws suck' is simple and comprehensible, 'No to spy in the sky' might provide a similar rallying point around the telematics issue.

MAG hasn't given up on demos but they have to be used judiciously.

I think if people are having trouble deciding in their own minds what it is about MAG that is making them uncomfortable then they need to analyse their own feelings and ask, is it about style or content?

Are people unhappy with the issues MAG has taken on board or rejected as un-winnable or unimportant? Or is it a case of not liking the way the organisation operates. Do people think there is a lack of democracy?

I have heard complaints that some think things are steamrollered, some people think the Chairman is too bullish. Everyone should bear in mind that the Chairman does not have a single vote unless there is a tie, in which case he employs a deciding vote but I can't remember the last time he used it. Most decisions are arrived at by very large majorities, frequently they are unanimous.

I suspect there may be a perception among some people that MAG is turning into something other than what it was. What is MAG? In a line I would say that MAG is a campaigning libertarian pressure group that defends the freedom to enjoy the road despite its dangers but with the condition that the exercise of those freedoms does not prejudice the safety or reasonable expectations of others.

We are not a road safety lobby, we are not a sales arm for the industry and we are not a charity fund raising body. Now we do all of those things and more so than we used to but we try to maintain a sense of balance so that we do not go so far down those side turnings, (complementary though they may be to our core mission) that we lose sight of our prime objective. A case in point was the recent request from FEMA to pump thousands in to the European Young Rider of The Year contest. A laudable exercise in itself you might say but tangential to our main mission and very expensive in terms of money and time. As The Chairman pointed out, what better ploy by the Commission than to tie up our time and money in innocuous programmes that will divert our attention from the more contentious issues where we will find ourselves in conflict with them?

Whether this was the Commission's conscious intent or not is less important than the fact that that is precisely the effect it would have had on FEMA and MAG UK, given our limited resources. Mike Tyson spent more on a wristwatch recently than MAG UK turns over in a year and with such limited funding it needs eagle-eyed surveillance to ensure that members get value for money. The Chairman is very good at sifting bullshit from true value and the NC consistently makes the right decisions in such matters. In 27 years with MAG there is not a shred of doubt in my mind that we have the most effective and level-headed committee that we have ever had.

I wonder if some people are concerned about the commercial deals MAG has made; perhaps there is a feeling that we are selling out? If people think that then let them tell us how. If we had dropped the helmet issue in return for the sponsorship of motorcycle companies and finance houses under the corporate membership scheme then I would be forced to agree with such a criticism but we haven't done that. I have actually written more about the helmet issue in recent issues than probably ever before and we have had no complaints from any of our corporate members - not one. I am totally comfortable about defending the radical end of MAG's policy portfolio, partly on factual grounds but primarily on subjective grounds - essentially, what kind of a world do you want to live in?

My feeling is that the whole libertarian debate is going to be stirred up big time as the threat of telematics grows and the soft drug debate climbs the political agenda. Furthermore the money from the corporate sponsors and deals that Henry has worked so feverishly hard to achieve, has enabled not only our survival but our ability to take on more staff in the shape of Phil Neale to perform the research that MAG has always been weak on. Phil also represents MAG at many meetings that we could not otherwise be represented at and has increased the level of our representation dramatically whilst making my life easier also.

The value that we get out of all our staff would make most companies green with envy, the BMF by contrast spend money in a way that makes Louis (Sun King) the fourteenth seem like Scrooge. I'm sure that if you could see all MAG's accounts laid bare, and you can on request, and then look at the BMF's, you would get quite a shock, not as big a shock as the BMF members would get mind you, but I think you would be impressed.

To say that all bikers are one big happy family and that we are all united in a common love of motorcycles is bullshit. We have a common thread in two wheels of course but it is only a little stronger than the common thread binding the rest of the country together in that they use four. The differences between the knee-down R1 riders and the Harley cruisers or BMW tourers are as great as between bikers, gardeners or sail boat enthusiasts. If I had to choose between riding on a track day or going hill walking, I'd opt for hill walking without hesitation. In fact if someone said you have to ride on a track day or join the audience of TFI Friday I'd probably go on the TV - well so long as I could stay up the back and wear dark glasses. I was once employed to photograph a HOG touring holiday in the Vosges mountains, and got left behind - by HOG members! OK that's just me.

The fact remains that though we are all different we do face common threats and the problems of one sector of the bike market can rub off on the others. The majority of bikes sold in the UK today are sports bikes so we cater for sports bike riders; hence the road tests on new bikes. I have consistently put a big sports bike picture on the cover as part of the changed image policy which has worked, though I think now we could opt for a little more variety and use some different images from now on; maybe a run shot or a social lifestyle shot. I use virtually everything that I get from the regions though to be blunt some of the photography is so poor I just can't use it without making the paper look very amateurish. I cannot use a fuzzy picture of a car park with some bikes scattered around the edge of it and half a dozen people doing nothing except looking in different directions.

Our patronage of the Bikesafe 2000 initiative is an element of the sports bike involvement. If we were putting 20K a year into Bikesafe and a thousand hours of employees' time then I would say that was too much but we're not, and the fact that we take an active role in promoting the scheme is extremely useful in rebutting the assertion that we are anti-safety loonies.

Everywhere I look in the organisation I see the right decisions being made about the way we operate, who we employ, the issues we embrace, those we reject. The credit for this must go to the NC under the Chairmanship of Neil who to be frank lets people have their say a good deal more than I would but then I get extremely impatient with meetings and frequently 'lose the plot' when it comes to the operation of the organisation. Anyone who witnessed the argument between the Chairman and Yorkshire region over the affiliate discount scheme re. The Farmyard would not have left with the impression that Neil heads the 'Yorkshire PLC' that he is supposed to.

The frustration of seeing people who, through no fault of their own are not privy to everything that goes on in MAG , getting a totally false impression of what's really happening, is for me exasperating beyond description; mostly because, like everything we fight, it is so unfair. Not just unfair because it is exaggerated but unfair because it is the inverse of the truth, which makes it ironic to say the least.

In Mulhouse MAG UK re-asserted its credentials emphatically by proposing the resolution, drafted by Neil, to unreservedly oppose telematic control of engines. Some voices opposed that stance and have tried to belittle the danger posed by telematics. My view is that it is critical to adopt a philosophic position immediately on such a threat which threatens the core of the biking lifestyle. There comes a point with every issue, even with the laudable aim of cutting road accidents, where you have to say, 'you're going too far.' MAG, headed by Neil, rose to the occasion in style and not a hand was raised in opposition to the resolution not even by the BMF Chief Executive who had tried initially, to rubbish the warning to governments appended to the resolution.

To summarise: - If people are concerned about the direction MAG is taking then let them say exactly what it is they are concerned about. My belief is that if all those who harbour such concerns could spend a few hours at Central or come to some of the meetings MAG attends then their anxieties would evaporate.

It bothers me a lot that there are those who actually drop out of MAG for no good reason. Increasingly I feel that we are truly on the edge of the mega lift off that we have always dreamed of. The newspaper gives us a voice and profile that the mainstream bike press will never grant us because they are just commercial operations who steer away from devoting space to anything that they fear will reduce their sales.

Any member has the right to come to an NC meeting as an observer if they provide notice in advance and given the physical constraints of space but really I think more can be achieved through a dialogue outside of that forum. Neil has indicated his willingness to visit regional meetings to explain where MAG is going and I will do the same though to make efficient use of time it will need a little preparation so that the maximum number of people can be gathered together at one place. If we have to go round the country talking to half a dozen here and half a dozen there then we're never going to have the time to do anything else.

In the meantime I would welcome letters from members specifying precisely what it is they are unhappy with. Don't forget we do have a mechanism for communicating concerns to the NC via reps and regional reps which should be a two-way line of communication but if people wish to phone me directly to ask questions then I will do my best to provide answers. In the meantime you might like to print off this letter and show it to people first.

Ian Mutch
Tel 0181 556 6495 magnews@mag-uk.org