By
this excellent Cycling News article, I stand corrected: the body that picks the President is made up of 42 voting delegates, who are appointed by the five confederations (Europe - 14 delegates, Asia - 9 delegates, Africa - 7 delegates, Oceania - 3 delegates and the Americas - 9 delegates) who in turn comprise the 179 national federations.
The delegates from some confederations such as Africa are picked by a management committee. Some confederations pick their delegates by their member federations voting at general meetings. Some confederations vote as a bloc, where one confederation's delegates agree to all vote for the candidate favoured by a majority of its delegates.
Voting is by secret ballot, so it's impossible to know just how delegates have voted in the past. But the general take is that Pat McQuaid has Africa and Asia sewn up, the challenger Brian Cookson has Oceania and most of Europe on his side, leaving the Americas delegates as possible tie-breakers.
Cookson has said he wants to address governance and make decision-making more transparent. But he hasn't released any specifics yet.
Can anyone with experience at Cycling Canada Cyclisme (Peter, Lister...?) tell us how the Americas confederation determines its voting delegates and whether they're directed to vote for a particular presidential candidate? Do confederation delegates have complete freedom to select any candidate, or are they obliged to consult with and/or consider the wishes of member federations? And where does CCC stand on the candidates? Let's shed some light on this stuff.
The UCI management committee election reminds me of US presidential elections with their insane system of electoral colleges. These voting systems are a throwback to times when the physical and technological challenges of sharing information about candidates and platforms - never mind simply getting everyone in one place and recording their vote! - made it necessary to rely on a system of proxies. But with both the efficiency of modern travel and information technology, there is no rational reason for international organizations such as the UCI to persist with delegate-voted elections.
The combination of voting delegates and bloc-voting accommodates and encourages manipulation of results, undue influence and in the worst case: corruption. It concentrates voting power in a small body of officials, each of whom often has an interest in installing a candidate with whom they can curry favour, whether for personal gain (e.g. appointment to other commissions, boards, the IOC etc. and associated opportunities for personal travel and perquisites) or for the benefit of their national federation (e.g. hosting international races, securing more delegates or increased state representation on other international bodies.)
Geez, I'm ranting about UCI governance and it's not even Friday. Time to go get on the bike...
