Cycling Time Trials Response to EPiC

Many of you will have seen the public statement given by CTT on the 21st of January which can be found here. In summary, the statement announces that a CTT director has been appointed to look into issues of diversity and inclusion in the sport and recognises the existence of issues. This is something which will be of benefit to CTT and is a positive step for the organisation and Glen Knight’s success with Newbury Velo means he is well placed to promote participation in the sport in this role.  

However, the statement focused primarily on the CTT director role but did not respond directly to our letter containing the open letter and list of signatories sent on the 13th of December. We sought further clarification from CTT and requested a direct response to our open letter and offering further collaboration on the issue of equality.

We have received communication back from CTT. The letter states that CTT does not have the capacity to make a ruling on prizes and that prizes are solely at the discretion of the event organiser. They go on to say that they may address changes to rules in future if this was identified as needed through the project which they are planning to undertake looking into issues within the sport. The communication finished by saying that the details of the work and the findings will be published “when and where appropriate”. The letter can be found here

We have acknowledged their letter and again offered to meet with them to share our research and to participate in their project. We look forward to hearing more details of the CTT project in the coming weeks and months.

Treating people equally is fundamental to an inclusive sport which welcomes all people to it. When people feel included they will participate more often and in a diversity of ways contribute more to the sport. The prize money structure published by events represents a public statement by organisers on the principle of equality (or lack of), which is why we argue that it is important to address. We hope the CTT sees this link between the fundamental principle of equality and increased participation but it is difficult to interpret the CTT’s response as a firm commitment to the principle of equality or a recognition of the inequality which has been shown to exist. CTT have since confirmed that equality is the cornerstone of the project and something they are committed to and have acknowledged by commissioning the project. EPiC remain open to further dialogue with the CTT.