A motion on territorial restriction of Abta members, which was one of four resolutions voted on in a general meeting at its London offices last week, was the only one to be turned down by voting members.
Noel Josephides said that had the vote gone the other way, it could have helped raise standards around the world.
“I’m disappointed that the motion wasn’t passed to open up the membership to overseas companies that don’t necessarily operate in the UK or from the UK,” he told TTG.
“It was probably a step too far. It [the motion] is about looking into the future and it is looking into giving Abta far more of a global reach.
“It certainly wouldn’t detract from what Abta was doing in the UK and it wouldn’t stop it being representative of Abta members, but we probably didn’t explain it well enough.”
Instead he said it would have helped raise standards on measures such as financial protection overseas, as well as making the association’s services more widely available, while those joining would have benefited from the brand.
Josephides said: “This was far more strategic.”
However, he welcomed the move which saw 13% of the total membership vote to take the decision over future chairmen out of members’ hands, leaving it to the board to appoint one instead. He said: “The industry is very different from what it used to be and the role of chairman isn’t the role of the old Abta president.
“If you see the work that’s being done now on issues both in Europe and the UK… it is not something that someone can keep up with. You have to know things in greater detail.
“What they want to do is ensure the person understands the system, how it works and how Abta works.”
He added that the fact that two travel agent and two tour operator representatives are elected to the board will still mean members get their say over who is in charge.
The resolution was one of three passed at the meeting with the first concerning the board’s handling of conflicts of interest while the second updates various provision in the articles of association in line with current company law practice.
