NASRPC's exit of the Sport Coalition.

homerhop

badaj0z wrote: »

As the main unofficial apologist for NASRPC Homer, you can do better than that.

I am entitled to my opinion,I don't need an organ grinder unlike some

Cass

Keep it civil, and on topic.

First and ONLY warning on this.

badaj0z

Let us hear your opinion of the issues at the heart of this debacle then Homer. Why do you think that the NASRPC committee broke their agreement not to do solo runs at the DOJ/Minister? Why do you think they did not go back to the SC to explain themselves when they were found out? What was so compelling about the "Apprentice scheme" that it was worth sundering the coalition to attempt to get it adopted? This last one is the most puzzling. A similar scheme was mooted a while ago by the NASRPC committee and was soundly rejected by the shooting community at large.

Tackleberry.

badaj0z wrote: »

What was so compelling about the "Apprentice scheme" that it was worth sundering the coalition to attempt to get it adopted? This last one is the most puzzling. A similar scheme was mooted a while ago by the NASRPC committee and was soundly rejected by the shooting community at large.

I was told Mick Tope and Mark Maguire had started a business together to accommodate this apperentice scheme ... Not a big venture I would think but if it was pushed true the SC/FCP, it would be lining there own pockets if it was true..a conflict of interest also I would think myself..

homerhop

Tackleberry. wrote: »

I was told Mick Tope and Mark Maguire had started a business together to accommodate this apperentice scheme ... Not a big venture I would think but if it was pushed true the SC/FCP, it would be lining there own pockets if it was true..a conflict of interest also I would think myself..

You mean the company they have started that makes electronic circuitry for car parts? This was also one of the many rumours addressed at the meeting held by the NASRPC, along with mark being a member of fg, spending 12 thou euro on tent and committee members earning thousand.

cra

Hi Homerhop, can you please expand on these rumours as I have been involved in this debate and this is the first I've heard of them. There are always rumours about any organisation but those rumours are not the problem here, the problem is the committee of the NASRPC are railroading over some of there members that are disagreeing with them. Now I know that some of their members do agree with them but that does not make it right to ignore the rest, all we asked for is an EGM which is well within our rights and all we want is our questions answered, now you could say why didn't we go to the Manor hotel last Sunday, personally I didn't go because it was the first of November and I was hunting as I always do, but having said that it was badly advertised there was a small post on facebook and that was it. I recieve an email about every NASRPC shoot why was there no email notification.

badaj0z

badaj0z wrote: »

Let us hear your opinion of the issues at the heart of this debacle then Homer. Why do you think that the NASRPC committee broke their agreement not to do solo runs at the DOJ/Minister? Why do you think they did not go back to the SC to explain themselves when they were found out? What was so compelling about the "Apprentice scheme" that it was worth sundering the coalition to attempt to get it adopted? This last one is the most puzzling. A similar scheme was mooted a while ago by the NASRPC committee and was soundly rejected by the shooting community at large.

Shall we stay out of the realm of speculation Homer and stay in the realm of actual happenings? Opinions awaited.

homerhop

badaj0z wrote: »

Shall we stay out of the realm of speculation Homer and stay in the realm of actual happenings? Opinions awaited.

I really wish people would. I haven't forgot to reply to you, was out last night and my head isn't in it today

grasncov

There seems to be a lot of he said she said with posts and he said she said e mails. To be quite honest you don't know who to believe. You think that EVERYONE involved, would sit in a room with proof of what is going on and show their hands? This country is to small for the shooting community to be fighting against each other. People shouldn't be trying to give up one thing for the sake of another, especially if what they are wanting to give up doesn't affect them. I for one am ****ing pissed of listening to grown adults bickering over something that will affect us all if they don't cop the **** on. If you want your name in lights and a pat on the back **** off to Hollywood.

cra

grasncov wrote: »

There seems to be a lot of he said she said with posts and he said she said e mails. To be quite honest you don't know who to believe. You think that EVERYONE involved, would sit in a room with proof of what is going on and show their hands? This country is to small for the shooting community to be fighting against each other. People shouldn't be trying to give up one thing for the sake of another, especially if what they are wanting to give up doesn't affect them. I for one am ****ing pissed of listening to grown adults bickering ov
er something that will affect us all if they don't cop the **** on. If you want your name in lights and a pat on the back **** off to Hollywood.

Exactly all in a room and sort it out sounds like an EGM.
Don't really understand what the rest of your post has to do with this problem.

badaj0z

badaj0z wrote: »

Let us hear your opinion of the issues at the heart of this debacle then Homer. Why do you think that the NASRPC committee broke their agreement not to do solo runs at the DOJ/Minister? Why do you think they did not go back to the SC to explain themselves when they were found out? What was so compelling about the "Apprentice scheme" that it was worth sundering the coalition to attempt to get it adopted? This last one is the most puzzling. A similar scheme was mooted a while ago by the NASRPC committee and was soundly rejected by the shooting community at large.

It would help if one of the NASRPC committee members came on here and answered these questions. There is no dispute about what happened. What is not clear is why it happened.

NicholasF

I understand that a meeting was held by membership at Hilltop where a debate was held as to weather or not to continue to engage in talks with the Shooting Sports Coalition (SSC). At that meeting it was decided by all of the membership their, to remain in talks with SSC.
This did not happen, why.

Thank god the resent work on behalf of NARGC and the Shooting Sports coalition has been fundamental in the cohesion that we have all enjoyed, the outcome of which is meaningful negotiations with the state bodies to bring forward fair and balanced regulation.

The government have kindly put forward an opportunity that people within the shooting community are able to make representation to formulate laws that govern our sport.

The sum of Irish Shooting Sports experience is greater then one group, NASRPC for example, the information relating to the actions of NASRPC committee should be held up for scrutiny by its members.
All of us should be putting forward information which will help the policy makers understand or needs, and forget about the individual, and work for the group.

The NASRPC need to have a meeting and explain to its membership what has happened.

My question to the NASRPC members is why would anyone walk out of a discussion and do the membership object, my feeling is that they do and would.
It makes no sense to be outside the discussion.

NicholasF

I have little if any confidence in the NASRPC committee and it is sad to see the actions which have followed.

I would work from a club level to organise and call for an EGM so as to be able to put to the committee the questions which have come up, rather then be fed like mushrooms and kept in the dark.

Leaving it to January for an AGM would be wrong, its almost akin to tribunal :-)

Your seeing little bits and pieces being said online .......but nothing substantive, the big questions

Why leave the Discussion with SSC

Why Have meetings behind the SSC

Why did they go against the memberships decision to stay in negotiations with SSC

To say that certain members of the NASRPC decision making is not in the interest of shooting sports, is I feel is a valid one

In my experience truth all ways wins out, I have no doubt that all though this comes at a bad time for the NASRPC, the rest of the shooting community will not let them down.

It is such a monumentally bad decision.

And maybe some alternate way may be brought forward to seek representation of there individual sporting requirements and interests through the SSC.

I have no confidence in NASRPC and this why I feel and EGM needs to be called

Nicholas F

badaj0z

That is a long list of points, none of which address the main issues which are :
---Why did the NASRPC committee break their agreement not to do solo runs at the DOJ/Minister?
--- Why did they did not go back to the SC to explain themselves when they were found out?
----What was so compelling about the "Apprentice scheme" that it was worth sundering the coalition to attempt to get it adopted? This last one is the most puzzling. A similar scheme was mooted a while ago by the NASRPC committee and was soundly rejected by the shooting community at large.

Now, to address their statement:


The NASRPC has received two requests for an EGM by Affiliated clubs,
this falls short of the requirements detailed in the constitution, but recognising the need to resolve outstanding issues the NASRPC Executive Committee has decided to call the AGM forward to the first reasonable date.

There is no time limit on requests for an EGM. Other requests are inbound so the committee does not have the right to ignore them and wait for an AGM
An explanation is called for here so that all readers will know what is going on. There are 19 clubs shown as affiliated on the NASRPC web site.

An Riocht Co. Kerry

Bracken Gun Club Co. Tyrone

BRC Shooting Club Co. Dublin

City of Dublin Pistol Club Co. Dublin

Donegal Target Club Co. Donegal

Dublin Rifle Club Co. WIcklow

Eagle Rifle & Pistol Club Co. Dublin

East Coast Shooting Club Co. Wicklow

East Coast Sports Shooting Club Co. Wicklow

Fermoy Rifle Club Co. Cork

Gorey & District Rifle & Pistol Club Co. Wexford

Harbour House Sports Club Co. Kildare

Hilltop Shooting Club Co. Wicklow

Iarthair Tir Chonaill Co. Donegal

International Police Association Pistol Club Co. Louth

Lough Bo Shooting Club Co. Sligo

Munster Target Shooting Club Co. Limerick

Phoenix Sports Club Co. Kildare

Suirside Target Sports Co. Tipper





3 of these clubs no longer exist. 5 clubs are listed who have not yet paid their annual fee or who have had their fee sent back, such as An Riocht.In any previous year, these clubs would have a vote but not this year. That leaves 11 clubs who can vote, hence 4 requests(one third of the affiliated members) justify an EGM. At least 4 currently affiliated clubs have sent requests. We expect another 3 will follow. In addition, 3 clubs that would be considered “affiliated” in any other year, have sent request for an EGM. This justifies an EGM which should be called immediately. Please explain how many clubs do you believe have valid affiliations according to your new rules and how many of these have sent letters.




. The NASRPC executive committee did not ask the clubs permission to
join the Sports Coalition, and therefore did not seek their permission to leave it.

You knew the prevailing mood of the members was to join the SC and hence joining was an obvious thing to do. But the opposite is true about your leaving. You knew the prevailing view of the members expressed at the Hilltop meeting was not to leave the SC, but you went directly against it. You statement here is frankly laughable.


. The NASRPC Executive has never expelled any club from the NASRPC.

Maybe not. But you have refused renewals, such as the An Riocht one because it did not suit you.


. The NASRPC Executive consider every application for affiliation
submitted (in the prescribed format) in detail before any decision is taken.

Of course you do-in the current situation you consider whether letting a club renew suits your purposes or not.

. No member of the NASRPC Executive is part of any Training company
and does not stand to benefit financially from any current or future legislation.

Is that a rumour? Thanks for sharing

. The NASPRC did not spend 15k on a tent in Birr.

See above.

. The NASRPC have every year at the AGM, made available all
accounts including every Invoice/receipt/expense/cheque for review and scrutiny.

Of course you do.

. The NASRPC Executive does not get paid for the time/effort in
fulfilling its duties. All members fulfil their roles on a voluntary basis.

See above.

. Every action taken by the NASRPC executive has been for the
benefit of shooters - such as direct recognition/representation at the FCP.

How can you say this when the overwhelming view of the member clubs is that your actions vis a vis the SC are not in the interests of shooters and your motivation for so doing is unclear.

. The NASRPC did not make any "Solo Runs" - Three members of the
sports coalition were fully aware of any and all representations made and actively encouraged same.

You told these people after you had your solo meetings so how could they encourage you? You did not tell them the contents. Your admissions were shared with the other members of the SC and confirmed what they had heard from the DOJ. You did not attend any more SC meetings or offer any explanation for your behaviour and you still do not offer any explanation.

You are desperately wriggling to avoid an EGM because you know you will be voted out of office. You are offering the AGM to buy time in the hope that it will all go away.

NicholasF

garrettod wrote: »

I would think that the fact that we are getting close to Christmas party season and many venues might be booked out, could play a part.

Likewise, for all we know, some of the committee may be out of the country this month or next, so the date in January might have been the best they could facilitate.

We are all very busy at this time of year; really, that is not a reason

But remember the constitution is the constitution and if 4 clubs request an EGM
Then it does not matter if one or two members of the committee are away, the meeting will be held 30 days after the request.

Besides the committee should not be worried, they will get the chance to have there say, and can if they wish put them self s forward for re election.


From what some people have said there are some good people on it, and some who have questions to answer

Role on EGM

Cass

Okay lads and ladies.

I've split all the discussion posts relating to the NASRPCs exit from the SC from the Gardaí proposals to ban firearms thread into it's own thread here.

habitformin

Okay how do I vote to NOT be represented by the NASRPC . Is there a poll or something where I can opt out of being represented by people I think they have no right to represent me. What was and is their mandate? Is it from the club's and range owners. A lot of people on here feel the same. A united front is and Always was our best front . Leaving the coalition was a bad move an egotistical move .and when an affiliated club dares to raise it's head call for resignations and asks questions .They get booted out ?what the hell is that all about? This carry on is absolute rubbish.
what or who made the decision to leave the sports coalition .and why?clarity now please.

LB6

Go to the AGM in January and get your answers there

habitformin

LB6 wrote: »

Go to the AGM in January and get your answers there

Again this needs answers now .the AGM too far away.you simply cannot allow this kind of behaviour to go unanswered until January. Is it an affiliation of clubs?or a dictatorship where we do as we want and you shut up or get out?
Come on LB6 you cannot be serious,

habitformin

Clarity and openness is what is required nothing else will fix this.

garrettod

NicholasF wrote: »

We are all very busy at this time of year; really, that is not a reason

But remember the constitution is the constitution and if 4 clubs request an EGM
Then it does not matter if one or two members of the committee are away, the meeting will be held 30 days after the request. ...

While we disagree about whether or not the suggestions I made are possibly genuine reasons or not, I have no reason to argue the point so won't bother....

The other point I made stands on it's own - if there are more than two clubs which have formally called for an EGM, lets hear from them publically. I don't see any reason why there would be confussion over how many clubs have sought an EGM. Would you agree ?

LB6

There have been two information days, one at Hilltop and another at Harbour House. Then at beginning of November there was another open meeting in Abbeyleix. Plenty of opportunity to have got your answers then if you had turned up.

next meeting is AGM on 16th January. Are you going to be there? How many opportunities are you going to pass up to get the answers you want?

habitformin

LB6 wrote: »

There have been two information days, one at Hilltop and another at Harbour House. Then at beginning of November there was another open meeting in Abbeyleix. Plenty of opportunity to have got your answers then if you had turned up.

next meeting is AGM on 16th January. Are you going to be there? How many opportunities are you going to pass up to get the answers you

I want the committee of the NASRPC to make a public statement clarifying the reasons for leaving the sports coalition .I want to know why an affiliated club was refused affiliation , a real reason .and I do not want to wait until January. This is bad for shooting all over the shop .this split from the sports coalition is wrong . Egos have been bruised I get it but that has to be put aside now before this gets out of hand. The committee has to address this this month not next year.

LB6

Again these were dealt with at the info day in Abbeyleix. You're just going to have to go to the meetings in future.

At the moment you sound like someone spitting the dummy. They've answered the questions. Next opportunity will be the AGM to get your answers.

habitformin

It looks a lot like the NASRPC committee actually has something to hide.?I don't want to believe this so why not come out and address this ? Could it be that they for some reason are stalling or just out of answers.clarity is needed .

habitformin

LB6 wrote: »

Again these were dealt with at the info day in Abbeyleix. You're just going to have to go to the meetings in future.

At the moment you sound like someone spitting the dummy. They've answered the questions. Next opportunity will be the AGM to get your answers.

LB 6 with the greatest of respect to you .this is completely unacceptable.
Don't you realise how much of a split is happening or do you simply not care? I think the committee owe shooters more than this.its a complete disregard for the concerns of the shooters they profess to represent.

badaj0z

The NASRPC committee fell out with the Sports Coalition

Many of the clubs who were/are affiliated were unhappy with this.

A meeting was held in Hilltop club, which was attended by many of these clubs and the committee. The outcome of this meeting was that the committee agreed to go back to the SC "to make it up".

They did not do this and instead resigned from the SC

The clubs were clearly upset by this dishonourable behaviourand had a meeting which resolved to call for an EGM to change the committee
.
Now the numbers:
the current list of affiliated clubs on the NASRPC website is 19.Remove the 4 no longer in existence(I just found out that another club is added to the “gone” list), leaves 15.
Of these 8 are for an EGM, 2 are likely to support the EGM call,2 are deciding and 3 are not likely to support the call.

This adds up to 10 for an EGM, 3 against and 2 not sure.

Whatever way you look at it, the majority of clubs want the EGM

The committee have decided to break with established practice and disenfranchise the clubs who have not paid yet this year. This is because these clubs want an EGM. The version of the constitution on the web site says that the committee will invoice each year. They have not done so this year. The version of the constitution used by the committee says that clubs have to pay within a month of the AGM, i.e. Last April. If they get away with this then the numbers are as follows;

Starting with 19 listed clubs, remove 4 no longer in existence, leaves 15
5 of these cannot vote, leaves 10 of which 4 have already written asking for the EGM and 2 are likely to write. 3 clubs are against the EGM and 1 is deciding.
This means that as at least 4 have asked for an EGM then it has to be called(4 out of 10, i.e. more than one third). At the EGM votes for removing the committee will be 4 plus 2 plus any of the undecided. This is a majority .
6 out of 10)
Now for the really interesting part. The constitution says that Voting at an EGM is by the clubs, one vote for each club but voting at an AGM is by members of affiliated clubs who are present. So in hoping to last to an AGM, the committee is hoping that by organising the meeting close to the clubs which support them, both Leinster based and whose members make up the majority of the committee, they can swing things in their favour.
If this succeeds then the inevitable outcome is a breakaway by between 10 and 12 clubs leaving 3 to 5 in the rump. The new organisation, which would then represent a large majority of the Target clubs would then seek to displace the NASRPC from those bodies on which it no longer represented the majority of target shooters in this country. Not good for the sport in general and even less good for the shooters who no longer had any National level representation.

habitformin

All that is needed is a comprehensive letter to affiliated clubs from the committee clearly explaining their actions .ie.leaving the sc .expelling clubs. Plan forward . Afterwards they can pass the information to their members . This will address matters and allow us all to push hard for a solution that can get up all behind the wheel again.

LB6

badaj0z wrote: »

4 have already written asking for the EGM and 2 are likely to write. 3 clubs are against the EGM and 1 is deciding.


who are the four that have asked for the EGM, the 2 likely to write, who are the 3 against and 1 deciding? How do you know this?

btw I do care!

My dander is well and truly up with all the he said she said malarkey that keyboard warriors (who didn't attend any of the meetings) are spouting here.

:mad:

habitformin

LB6 wrote: »

badaj0z wrote: »

4 have already written asking for the EGM and 2 are likely to write. 3 clubs are against the EGM and 1 is deciding.


who are the four that have asked for the EGM, the 2 likely to write, who are the 3 against and 1 deciding? How do you know this?

btw I do care!

My dander is well and truly up with all the he said she said malarkey that keyboard warriors (who didn't attend any of the meetings) are spouting here.

:mad:

It would have been nice to have known about these meetings .
We all are not as privileged to know what is going on all the time with all due respect to the boards,I never come on this place as a rule .I am here because I want this fixed I want a united front . And I don't know where to go .next year is a crap decision, call the EGM and be done with it if that is what is needed I prefer clarification.