This is the post I thought I’d never have to write. The article I waited six months before writing; the action I never mentioned at the time, but last November (2019), I took the decision not to renew my membership of CAMRA - the Campaign for Real Ale.
After 45 years continuous membership, it wasn’t an easy choice to make, but during the last few years, I’d felt increasingly disillusioned with the direction the CAMRA had been taking. I’d been a member since my student days, having joined in 1975 at the relatively young age of 20.
Unlike today, CAMRA was very much a young persons' organisation; although there was a healthy mix of older members as well. It was good talking to them, as many had been drinking beer before the advent of keg and top-pressure dispense, back in the days when virtually all draught beer was cask-conditioned “real ale.”
There was still a healthy sprinkling of local independent brewers spread throughout the country, and whilst this number had slowly dwindled, there were still quite a few family-owned independents plying their trade when CAMRA first came on the scene in the early 1970’s.
Fast forward to the present day, where the beer scene in the
UK has changed
beyond all recognition. There are now almost 2,000 breweries operating in the
country, many producing a range of beers that would have been unimaginable 45
years ago. The beer scene in these islands would certainly have been far poorer
if CAMRA hadn’t have come along. Furthermore, there has been a massive upsurge
of interest in beer which has spread right across the world.
Times change and success too, sometimes comes at a price. CAMRA has increasingly become inward looking and lost its overall focus. More and more it seems like a ship adrift. This loss of purpose has accelerated in recent years, with people aged sixty and over now accounting for most of the membership. We now have a situation that is almost the polar opposite of that prevailing when I first joined the campaign.
Like many older members I warned that the shortage of young and enthusiastic volunteers in their twenties or thirties would have a detrimental effect on CAMRA activities, and unfortunately these dire predictions have come true. The campaign’s inability to attract new blood onto its ranks has led to many local CAMRA branches struggling. Some are dying on their feet.
My disillusionment with CAMRA set in several years ago, when the group had already arrived at a crossroads in its existence. After 40 years of dogmatically using cask-conditioning and dispense methods as the sole yardstick of quality, CAMRA had backed itself into a corner. Things had changed and time had move on, there were plenty of excellent beers on the market that, whilst not cask-conditioned, were every bit as good. The well-intended, “Revitalisation Campaign,” set up to re-dress this in-balance, proved a disaster and ended up making matters worse.
As the campaign softened its approach to beers which didn’t meet their definition of real ale, the reformers within the campaign were met head-on by the “dyed in the wool,” old-school, diehard CAMRA stalwarts, who refuse to accept any beer which has so much as looked at a cylinder of CO2. This effectively drove a stake through the heart of the organisation, despite the best endeavours of the national executive to try and patch things up.
It really did seem like it was time for either the Campaign to call it a day, or for CAMRA and me to part company. However, there was still something deep in my unconsciousness which didn’t want to let go of an organisation which had been part of my life for four and a half decades. The fact I had put my heart and soul into the campaign, made any decision to quit even harder, and at times, I agonised over what to do.
In the end, I knew what my answer would be, so I cancelled my direct debit mandate and wrote to the campaign’s membership secretary, explaining my decision. You can read my full resignation letter, at the end of this post. Had I been a life member, then things might have been different, but when this facility was made available to members, I couldn’t afford it. Life membership, costing ten times the annual subscription rate came at a time when I was financially embarrassed. I had recently changed jobs; a move which involved a long commute into work. We’d bought a bigger house, with a larger mortgage and my wife had given up work owing to birth of our son. Instead, I continued renewing my membership annually, by direct debit paying considerably more over the past quarter century than life membership would have cost, but that’s just the way of things. To be honest, I didn’t expect CAMRA to be around for as long as it has, so I was wrong on that score too! To wrap up, there are many more things I don’t miss from not being a CAMRA member, than the handful of things I do miss. Top of the “don’t miss” list are Good Beer Guide surveys and GBG selections meetings. The later are often divisive and can be biased as well. The guide itself is now way past its sell-by date and, despite claims to the contrary, exists primarily to generate income for the Campaign.CAMRA committee meetings come a close second, as do being involved with organising local beer festivals – an unbelievably stressful and time-consuming occupation, especially when you’ve got a full time job as well..
I also don’t miss the CAMRA Discount Vouchers; Wetherspoon or otherwise. Back in the day, I only used a fraction of them and besides, I don’t agree with CAMRA supporting large pub chains at the expense of small, independently run locals. Tim Martin isn't exactly my favourite person either.
The social side of the Campaign has always been for me, one of the most important aspects of CAMRA, but despite no longer being a member, I still keep in touch with what is going on within the branch, either via friends or by means of the various WhatsApp groups set up to keep people informed as to what is going on at a local level.
The one thing I really do miss is receiving copies of CAMRA's award-winning, quarterly Beer magazine. This publication is a real credit to the campaign and is an asset which should be exploited by being made more widely available.
Finally, here is the letter I wrote to CAMRA, tendering my resignation.
Dear CAMRA
It is with regret that after 45 years as a member of the Campaign, I have decided not to renew my membership.
It's been a lot of fun along the way, I’ve met scores of interesting people, made many good friends and got to drink some amazing beers in some equally amazing pubs, but all good things come to an end.
Had I been a life member my decision might have been different, but I feel that CAMRA has lost its way and is no longer relevant in today's fast changing world.
CAMRA can hold its head up high though, for providing the spark which led to the totally unforeseen rise in interest in beer around the world, and the creation of hundreds, if not thousands of new breweries, producing an unprecedented and ever expanding range of different beers.
I'm proud to have played a part in this incredible achievement, and for this reason alone I think it's best to go out on a high. With this in mind, I have instructed my bank to cancel the direct debit mandate, in respect of my membership.
Wishing the Campaign all the very best for the future.
Best Regards
Paul Bailey
11 comments:
Very interesting. If I hadn't signed up as a Life Member soon after that scheme started, I would have resigned myself before now. Where I would take issue with your comments is regarding all the new breweries that have opened. There are just too many for all to be viable, even before the present economic issues. A steady decline in pub numbers is not a good background for an increase in supply. CAMRA has been too 'happy clappy' in cheering on people who are risking their life savings and possibly their pensions in trying to compete in a way over-saturated market. Ironically, pubs local to me tend to stick to what they know will sell, and it is only the Wetherspoon that rotates micro brew beers.
You are of course correct Ian, about the huge increase in new breweries that have have sprung up in the past decade or so. The viability of many was questionable, even before the start of the current pandemic and I would wholeheartedly agree that CAMRA's unquestioning support for them has not been helpful.
It could also be damaging, not just to those individuals who, as you say, have staked their life-savings on such ventures, but also for existing brewers, due to further dilution of the sales opportunities in a declining market.
However, whilst I mentioned this rise in general as one of CAMRA's most significant achievements, the group's unwavering support for these start-ups was not really a major factor in my decision to resign.
Looking back at previous posts, I warned in 2013, that the "brewing bubble" was close to bursting point. I also published a much harder hitting article in May last year which highlighted that the increase in new start-ups had finally slowed down.https://baileysbeerblog.blogspot.com/2019/05/has-craft-beer-bubble-finally-burst.html
Up until now, CAMRA has certainly had a blinkered approach to this issue, but the gathering economic woes, resulting from the lock-down, could now see many of these breweries going to the wall.
Unfortunately, as I said in last year's post, it will not just be those companies producing over-hopped and over-hyped murk that will go under; those brewing high quality beers are at equal risk of failing - particularly in a market where outlets for their products is drying up.
I have been impressed by the way small breweries and independent pub operators have responded to the challenges of the current medical emergency and also by the support that CAMRA as an organisation has offered to such businesses. The majority of new entrants to the industry are young and whilst some businesses will inevitably fail their failure will not affect the rest of their founders' lives apart from gaining valuable life experience. A thriving and competitive pub and brewing industry helps everybody and I believe that those in the industry who have adapted to the current difficulties will continue to prosper,this includes CAMRA. I can recall reading a 'health warning' regarding an excessive number of new breweries chasing a limited market in Brian Glover's 'New Beer Guide' which was published in 1985 the industry has evolved since then with some conspicuous success stories such as Brew Dog and it will continue to do so in the future.
The Campaign for Real Ale started out as the Campaign for the Revitalisation of Ale, the name change occurring at the 1973 AGM. Prior to that the founder members were as uneducated about the difference between good and bad beer as the average man in the street. "We started by talking to publicans about the difference between what we liked and disliked, and [found] out that the stuff we favoured was cask beer... Our mission would be to promote and save cask beer." (Quoted in Brew Britannia by Boak & Bailey, p26.) I'd say that Camra has been pretty successful. I'm sure you agree. In fact you said so: “In its four and a half decades of campaigning, CAMRA has achieved far more than its founders, and early members, could ever have dreamt of.”
Along the way they have also campaigned to preserve historic pub interiors and to prevent community assets being removed from towns and villages up and down the country. Whether they can also claim some credit for the recent flowering of thousands of new breweries worldwide is a matter for debate, but since the majority of the British ones at least were established with a view to supplying real ale to pubs, and a large proportion of American ones avow that they were originally inspired by British ale styles, there's obviously a lot to be said for this view. So, a pretty successful organisation. (The successful lobbying for a guest ale resulted in unintended consequences, but it was arguably also to some extent “a good thing”.)
It may well be, as you claim, that by "dogmatically using cask-conditioning and dispense methods as the sole yardstick of quality, CAMRA had backed itself into a corner". You may be right that there are now "plenty of excellent beers on the market that, whilst not cask-conditioned, [are] every bit as good", though there are many who would argue with you about that. But the Campaign for Real Ale's reason for existing is to "promote and save cask beer", not to half-heartedly mutter "this other stuff is pretty good too". Isn't it Camra's role in this situation to make sure that beers that have undergone a secondary fermentation in the cask really are the best draught beers you can get?
That's where the Revitalisation Campaign went wrong. If a Camra member or spokesperson replaces that half-hearted mutter with a full-throated roar, "Golly, this keg beer is absolutely superb, have you tried it yet?", then it surely is time to pack up the tents and go home. If Camra doesn't appeal to young people, the future will sort itself out. Trying to embrace keg beers in the hope of rekindling an organisation whose primary purpose was to oppose the complete takeover of pubs by brewers of keg beers is not just wishful thinking, it's rather pathetic.
Having read your blog post and your letter to Camra, I am still a little unsure what tipped the balance for you. You state that you “didn’t want to let go of an organisation which had been part of my life for four and a half decades. The fact I had put my heart and soul into the campaign, made any decision to quit even harder, and at times, I agonised over what to do. In the end, I knew what my answer would be, so I cancelled my direct debit mandate and wrote to the campaign’s membership secretary, explaining my decision.” I sympathise with you in this situation. But the only explanation you provide for your resolution of the dilemma is that “all good things come to an end.”
Is it that you think the Revitalisation Campaign was too half-hearted? Or that Camra should drop the definition of real ale? Or that you think Camra has run its course and should disband, rather than you having to leave them? What was it that overcame your commitment of many decades to a campaign that you used to support so whole-heartedly? You've said that you agonised, but (a little like someone or other before the referendum campaign) you haven't said why you came down in favour of one thing rather than the other.
Hi Sheffield Hatter, thank-you for your lengthy and well thought out response to my article. There is little in what you say that I would disagree with, and the detail you have gone into about CAMRA’s early days, its successes and also it failures (guest ale policy and “revitalisation campaign”), make what I am about to say that much harder.
It may sound flippant and it might come across as shallow, but in the end, despite the Johnson-style agonising and the fact I had dedicated much of my free time to the campaign, I just became bored with the whole thing.
It was the same routine, year after year. Good Beer Guide nominations, surveying and selection. Branch AGM. A social calendar which also seemed to repeat on a yearly basis, a brewery visit – normally a highlight, although three visits to Old Dairy did get a bit monotonous! The annual visit to GBBF, which also ceased to appeal and then there was the planning, organisation and staffing of the annual branch beer festival – run jointly, with the Spa Valley Railway. Finally, the branch Christmas dinner to mark the start of the festive season and then the cycle would repeat the following year.
As well as being repetitious, the fun had gone out of the campaign, helped by a lack of active members and the increasing demands, placed on branches, by head office. I decided I could still attend the odd social, even if I wasn’t a CAMRA member, whilst saving the £32 annual joint membership fee.
So, there it is in a nutshell, CAMRA had run its course as far as I was concerned. I don’t regret my decision and can live with not receiving Beer magazine, once a quarter. Possibly the only thing I do feel slightly sad about, and even then, I’m being rather sentimental, is my membership number was in the low three thousands (30xx), and there are not many current members who can say that!
A fascinating post and well reasoned comments, as you'd expect from those folk.
Quite simply, I'm not sure what value get from CAMRA anymore, Paul.
You can still meet likeminded folk for walks and pub crawls, youcan get all the inspiration you need for pubs and beer off the internet, and you can still buy the GBG as long as volunteers produce the raw material for an annual guide (which may be the issue, as with the excellent WhatPub).
I'm a life member. It gives me a few quid off the GBG and access to what now seem dull What's Brewing.
I don't care about beer festivals or beer styles, and I've little interest in campaigning to preserve in aspic historic buildings with no future as pubs.
As a former branch chairman I agree with your comment that the limited numbers of active members are being put under increased pressure by CAMRA's head office. A 'completetist' tendency seems to dominate CAMRA which is shown in the demands to keep 'What Pub' up to date and the ever increasing demands for data requested from Brewery Liaison Officers.these demands take much of the fun out of active membership of an organisation which (see my earlier comment) I still believe to be relevant
Paul - thanks for sharing your introspection so honestly. Some people might criticise you for just walking out because you were bored. But a membership organisation is not like a marriage - there's a limit to what one member can do to make the group change. You're saying, if I may interpret, that Camra is stuck in a rut and you didn't much fancy being stuck in there too.
Thank-you gents for all your thoughts, comments and replies regarding my resignation decision. It’s good to see there is some common ground amongst us all, over the direction taken by CAMRA in recent years along with a concern over the future of the organisation, and your various views are much appreciated.
Quite what the future holds for the Campaign for Real Ale, in a post lock-down scenario, remains to be seen and we can only speculate at present, as to what might happen. As you might guess I have a few thoughts of my own on this, but will wait and see how things pan out after July 4th before revealing them.
The main thing for me is that for the majority of my 45 years of membership it was fun and I got to meet scores of interesting people along the way. I also made many good friends. In addition, CAMRA helped me secure my present job; proof, if it was needed, that it’s not what you know, it’s who you know!
Finally, the campaign sparked my lifetime interest in beer and pubs and for that, possibly more than anything else, I am eternally grateful.
Sheffield Hatter makes the point that for me underlines everything that CAMRA should be doing to preserve and promote an almost unique type of beer: "Isn't it Camra's role in this situation to make sure that beers that have undergone a secondary fermentation in the cask really are the best draught beers you can get?"
The big problem is that a lot of this so-called cask conditioned beer absolutely isn't anything of the sort. It's brewery conditioned and racked with a minimum of sediment and a dash of finings. The only thing missing is carbonation. I had a can of something grapefruity, hazy, very strong but unusually naturally-carbonated a few days ago as part of my lockdown beer explorations. Other than the deliberate haze it was no different from many of the beers CAMRA stands for.
Having been involved in my local branch many years ago, I'm surprised you didn't part ways with the campaign a long time ago - that says a great deal about your dedication and commitment.
Thanks electricpics, I wholeheartedly endorse your comments regarding “cask-conditioning” – or rather the lack of it! This problem has been around for much longer than many in the industry would care to admit, and I’m sure CAMRA have known about it as well.
Fifteen years ago my wife and I ran an off-licence selling real ale to take away by the pint. It was during the cellaring of these beers that I first became aware of how little conditioning was actually taking place in the cask. Many beers didn’t require soft-spilling and would drop bright within a couple of hours. There was certainly no evidence that much conditioning had taken place, and many of these beers would quickly lose any condition they once had.
I agree that CAMRA's role should be to make sure that beers that have undergone sufficient secondary fermentation in the cask, in order to ensure these types of draught beers really are the best you can get. Realistically though, I’m not sure how this could be achieved.
It makes sense from the brewers perspective to condition the beer as much as possible whilst it is still at the brewery, and before racking into casks. The last thing they want are customers being served cloudy beer and licensees returning casks, but given the scarcity of properly trained cellar staff, despatching brewery-conditioned beer with a low yeast count is their way around this problem.
For pragmatic and also practical reasons, CAMRA has ignored this issue and because of the lack of skilled cellar staff, I quite understand why. It does however, call into question their reasoning that cask-conditioned beers present the pinnacle of the brewer’s art, but unless there are independent, technically minded people checking things like yeast counts and dissolved CO2 levels, I can’t see any way round it.
Instead, CAMRA has been happy to designate any beer that leaves the brewery in a cask, as real ale, and like, I said in the original post, backed itself into a corner. Worrying instead over petty side-issues, such as cask-breathers, only detracts from the main issue.
So, when I look back at what has occurred over the past couple of decades, I too am surprised that CAMRA and I didn’t part company a lot sooner than we actually did.
Post a Comment