Dispatches - Change of CVA name

I am a paid up Associated member with no voting rights,this I accept.

Like most I am opposed to change,so I am curious why the proposed dropping of" Veterans" from our title,what will be achieved,and what is it purpose.

What will the proposed Commando Association do that the present Commando Veterans Association cannot do.

Regards

Graham

Hi Graham,

I do not serve on the CVA Committee as I am only an Hon. Full Member so I don't know the real reason; however, I would guess that it's more to do with recruitment of new members.

It is no secret that, sadly, there are very few Founder Veterans left with us...
Although we do enjoy the membership of some post War veterans, I believe that most Units have their own associations so many may not be drawn to a 'Veterans Association'.
Yet to stay a viable association we must move forward - hence the proposal to become a registered charity.

I would guess that the move to drop the term 'Veterans' from the title is a bid to attract serving commandos to join our association?

Nick

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 28/10/2016 17:57:32

Hello Graham

Initially when the CVA was formed the word 'Veteran' was chosen to be translated like the American use of the term. Any ex-service individual is a 'Veteran'. It was also chosen to encompass all personnel qualified to wear the Green Beret. Navy/Army/RAF etc. The CVA was not just an association for Army Commandos. Vic Ralph and Stan Scott had the foresight to realize this was to smaller community for the CVA to survive and so all were invited.

Personally I am disappointed that this title may change but it is in the memberships hands to voice their opinion against it if they feel that way about it.

Also the associate member status was an innovation on the founding members part to encompass friends and family to aid the association etc.

Without the associate members the fledgling CVA would never have survived.

I know and understand that things change and evolve but I hope the Association can stick to the original ideals while moving into the future.

Best regards

John M

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 28/10/2016 19:08:58

Will the R. M. Commandos who serve today, be veterans at some point in time? And eventually become the modern day Commando Veterans? A change in name will involve a cost in £. s .d. to a website that is partially funded by subscribed members. A change in name is just a change in name, but for what reason. I participate on the forum like others as a son of a former Commando Veteran, and I see no reason why the WORD veteran would discourage any serving Commando today? Perhaps their thoughts on a name change or not would be a topic for discussion. Finally in my mind the word Veteran is far more emotive term of endearment. (This has now exhausted my limited literature knowledge of English, much prefere debating in my mother tongue) )
Kevin

Let us not forget that it was originally called 'The Commando Association'.

Interestingly in the same Dispatch edition is an article about the CVA Archive website by John Mewett,under Demographics are the following stats 61% of users are in the age group 18-34 years old
28 % are age group 35- 54 years
11 % are age group 55-65+

It appears that we already attract a healthy 61% who are not deterred by Veteran in the title.

I believe the original title was the Old Comrades Association of the Army Commandos.

Graham

As any of us that have served in HM Armed Forces know, we are all veterans from the day we leave service and we proudly wear the official HM Forces Veteran badge, as issued by HM Government, that denotes that fact...

I don't think the proposed change of name has any bearing on how The CVA looks upon its members - whether they be Full or Associate. The CVA is fully aware of how much Associate Members have done to keep the Association going and there has been absolutely no suggestion that it would become closed to associate members. I'm not sure why anyone would suggest otherwise!

Vic Ralph, Stan Scott and the other founder members of the CVA certainly did have the foresight to realise that the new Association would have to move with the times and they between them formed a very successful association; however, were they still with us today, I'm sure they would acknowledge that it is vitally important to keep abreast of things and not to get left behind...

There has to be changes and there has to be improvements if our association is to survive. But the Association does need people who are prepared to step up and give some of their time and efforts to help the very small core of dedicated folk that keep it running.

The statistics provided by John are not a reflection of the Commando Veteran Association's subscribing members, but only of those who use the CVA Website - we need fully paid up members!

I have not given the proposed change of the Association's title much thought and haven't decided whether it would be a detrimental move or not, but I do see that there are some positive moves ahead and welcome them and the folk who are prepared to sit on the Committee and make things work.

Nick

Hello Peter Cooper
The Commando Veterans Association was never called the Commando Association. The CVA was formed after the Commando Association stood down. In fact the original National Secretary of the Commando Association Henry Brown was never in favor of it continuing at all in any form.
Only the stoic characters of Vic Ralph Stan Scott Harry Winch and Frank Johnson enabled it to reform as the CVA. These were supported by numerous Associate members and Major Geoff Murray who did a sterling job in fostering the original aims and mission of the new CVA.

I think the members of the CVA need to be briefed fully on the implications of the proposed change....why....it is thought apt and the future policy of the Association needs to be spelt out in detail.

I was present at the formation of the CVA....and feel a full explanation is needed.

Regards

John M

Hello Nick

Unfortunately Nick the CVA web-site has been virtually ignored by most CVA members............the Forum is very little used by the members who prefer to post on Facebook.

The web-site statistics are the only tool we have to gauge usage. When we set up the forum we envisaged interaction among our members but apart from a dedicated few that does not seem to be happening.

The Web-site I feel is a professional interface and reflects well on the CVA as an organization.......unfortunately very few people seem to feel the same.

Are you going to volunteer to be on the committee Nick ?

John M

Hi John,

Yes my point was exactly that - because the discussion was more about the membership of the CVA rather than the Website users, I was pointing out to Graham that the statistics you provided for demonstrating the demographics for the Website users, has absolutely no bearing/reflection on CVA Membership.

Yes the Website does reflect extremely well on the CVA and I don't think there is much more that the four of us can do to improve things at the moment.
We have discussed the matter of Facebook and other Social Media, privately, with you & Pete and, although I believe it could be a very useful tool and an extension of the CVA if used properly, there is little we can do about it at present.

Thank you for your suggestion that I should volunteer for the Committee - unfortunately, I do not have the time to serve as an active member, as most of my time is taken up with other commitments.

Nick

What was the outcome regarding the name change.

Graham

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 17/01/2017 22:55:26

Graham,
Nothing has been decided yet - see extract from the AGM

National Secretary stated that the next copy of Dispatches will have a slip for every member to give their view about a name change.
There has been difficulty recruiting new and serving members into an association with the word Veterans in it. There may also be benefits of affiliation with other Commando Associations.
This led to a discussion about Associate members and their place within the organisation. With some members worried that they will lose their connection to their fathers if the name was changed.
The Chairman reassured that nothing will be decided without proper consultation.

Nick

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 18/01/2017 19:16:28

Like Nick and others here, I am not a member of the Committee, but am a member of the Association. Personally I think the issue with getting younger 'Veterans' to join up is simply because most regular units have their own Associations, and most have their own Facebook social media pages. So joining the CVA would be an additional cost of membership to them. Some like the RMA have an excellent set up across the world with fantastic online and other means of communication to members. So aside from the cost, there is considerable competition.

Again my own personal opinion would be for the CVA, rather than just change the name because of what was said by someone, to try a different tack. Start from the basics and first push for more branches to be set up by existing members. We only have 2 or 3 that I know of ! That is actually set as an objective in the Constitution but to my knowledge there has never been any encouragement to do so apart from the early days after it was founded. Even if there are only 3 or 4 involved at first who live nearby just meeting up at the pub for a drink and a chat.

That way new members joining can be told if there is a group near them.

Start with the basics before changing the name.