NARGC

cavan shooter

MEOW pst pst......Cat fight....😂😆šmind your eyes!!

I was kinda keeping out of this discussion lately and up till this post I would have been sitting squarely on the fence regarding the alleged rumour that the dissident counties and their representatives should be punished or not.

However, I have to comment now after reading the last post.

Are you so innocent to think that If the vote of confidence in the Chair and Exec' failed at the EGM.....that there wouldn't have been a collection of spokespersons from the Dissident Counties shouting that the Chairman and Executive should fall on their swords.

If I remember from documents seen was there not on the agenda put forward but wisely pulled on the day, that a 3 person committee be put in to run the Association till the AGM could get rid of the existing PTB

The clear fact remains and still remains : There was a vote of confidence in the Chairman and Executive and they won by an over whelming majority....The existing Chairman and Ececutive have the support at this moment of the Majority of the GB.

Should it not follow that at least those particularly on the Executive who wouldn't support said Chairman and Executive not have the Courage of their convictions/respect for themselves and leave the room....get of the stage....so to speak.

As to the comment that why don't the majority of the other counties leave....that is just nonsense and a bit of a childish rant.

No one wants to be fighting we all want to get back to getting the woodcock survey in, moaning about pine martin and giving out about the Antis, but we are here now and the die is cast.....I like MMA so if I can cadge a lift I might go to the GB meeting.

Backbarrel

Ok. Lets go with the notion that the five counties backed their delegates and were trying to oust this Executive because they were genuinely concerned with how the Association was being run.;) Fair enough..

Here is the thing for me:
Information was put on screen in that presentation about key officers of the Association that shows that their loyalty was not to the members of NARGC that they represent but to someone else.

How can the hon secretary run for a position again after the issue with the minutes?

How can a former vice chair and self styled "last surviving founding member"of the Association stand for election at the agm when he has acted the way he has after every Executive meeting?

Fair is fair. They were caught rotten..now be men enough and do the right thing and do not stand again.. simples..

cavan shooter

Only getting to this now had late duties all week.

Do you think we will ever see this presentation, our delegates doesn't have it but expect that it would be sent out with the minutes of the EGM.

Was it the minutes or the tape recordings used to write the minutes that where subject to sheanigans, From what I was told the recordings were given to SOMEONE.. That's what has our lad so annoyed that tape recordings used solely for personal use for minute taking where given to the xxx

There is something rotten when Senior Executive members are passing on e mails and giving running commentaries of the Executive meetings to a person suing the Association (Who are they representing) and the gas thing is the stupid ****ers get caught.......

The mails and the texts are put up on the screen and they still sit in the room and after loosing their little coup don't have the Balls to resign.

What has me very pissed off is the fact it's buisness as usual and they are now actively canvassing to get re elected. Something has to be said at the next governing body meeting.

It's obvious that the Chairman and existing executive are trying to fix the rot What's also obvious is that those with skin in the game have a vested interest not to sink this gravy boat.

On the Dissident Counties...it did cross my mind that the individuals were only representing the views of their counties......but then again when you read the agenda of the EGM, it doesn't read that way...I'm on the fence on that one

berettaman

cavan shooter wrote: »

Only getting to this now had late duties all week.

Do you think we will ever see this presentation, our delegates doesn't have it but expect that it would be sent out with the minutes of the EGM.

Was it the minutes or the tape recordings used to write the minutes that where subject to sheanigans, From what I was told the recordings were given to SOMEONE.. That's what has our lad so annoyed that tape recordings used solely for personal use for minute taking where given to the xxx

There is something rotten when Senior Executive members are passing on e mails and giving running commentaries of the Executive meetings to a person suing the Association (Who are they representing) and the gas thing is the stupid ****ers get caught.......

The mails and the texts are put up on the screen and they still sit in the room and after loosing their little coup don't have the Balls to resign.

What has me very pissed off is the fact it's buisness as usual and they are now actively canvassing to get re elected. Something has to be said at the next governing body meeting.

It's obvious that the Chairman and existing executive are trying to fix the rot What's also obvious is that those with skin in the game have a vested interest not to sink this gravy boat.

On the Dissident Counties...it did cross my mind that the individuals were only representing the views of their counties......but then again when you read the agenda of the EGM, it doesn't read that way...I'm on the fence on that one

To be clear:

The recording of the governing body meeting were altered.. and forwarded to an individual for typing up the amended recordings.

An email from the Officer involved was put on screen confirming what he had done.
That officer is nominated again I believe. Surely he cannot run after doing that. Perhaps he can come to the next Governing Body meeting and clarify..

The Association was being sued.. There was an informant on the Executive leaking information to the person suing the Association. That informant was named and evidence of the leaks was put on screen for the presentation. Bizarrely again that individual is nominated again I believe and I heard that he will run for position.:eek:

cavan shooter

Lads...Where can you buy tickets for the NARGC AGM. Some of us rednecks are thinking of making an evening of it. Can anyone go??

cavan shooter

cavan shooter wrote:

Lads...Where can you buy tickets for the NARGC AGM. Some of us rednecks are thinking of making an evening of it. Can anyone go??

Sorted managed to get 3 tickets sent to me in the post.....funny it had a Brazilian post mark on it........

MrTom1

cavan shooter wrote: »

Sorted managed to get 3 tickets sent to me in the post.....funny it had a Brazilian post mark on it........

Heard they like Olympic tickets these days 😂😂😂

arrowloopboy

In Mr Hickeys defence,he''d only be in the hapenny place compared to some of the absolute rogues that were mixed up in certain ''countryside'' associations/councils in this country !

Backbarrel

arrowloopboy wrote: »

In Mr Hickeys defence,he''d only be in the hapenny place compared to some of the absolute rogues that were mixed up in certain ''countryside'' associations/councils in this country !

Agree with this. But the times are changing. There were some lads getting votes because they talked a good game and didn't give a **** about the sport other than what they could get out of it.

They wanted the position for the status. You would see lads in blazers from when they were officers years ago going around looking for attention but there was nothing behind it only bullsh1te..

Some of those lads are doing everything they can to stop this current Executive from making changes.

I think it will be gas when the nominations come out to see who is running for what position. I think these lads are mid way through a process and we should let them at it.

Our county was canvassed by an former key officer who said he was running for Chairman and he was going to save the association!:eek:

Save from what? Transparency? Openness or new ideas?
He was there over a decade himself and he didn't do much saving.

As a lad at the back said during the last meeting .."We know a lot more now than we did a year ago.."

Feck it I am cranky after doing long shift at work but we are where we are ..

cavan shooter

[QUOTE Our county was canvassed by an former key officer who said he was running for Chairman and he was going to save the association!:eek:

Save from what? Transparency? Openness or new ideas?
He was there over a decade himself and he didn't do much saving.

As a lad at the back said during the last meeting .."We know a lot more now than we did a year ago.." ..[/QUOTE]

I'm kicking myself that im on duty this Weekend as I would have loved to go. I have heard about this "Saviour of the Association" I believe that its the same Saviour who wrote a cheque for 200K after the Executive told him not to. who would have handed every penny over to the former Solicitor without putting it through the legal cost accountant.

Do People/Ordinary Members not realise that we went from owing about 1 million to actually paying áround €400K. All because the existing Executive said no **** Off....we will only pay after we have got a legal cost accountant to look at it and come up with a figure. Thats the stuff that needs to be discussed on Saturday.

Its a bout time that these so called corner stones/pillars of the NARGC woke up and smelled the coffee...BTW Any news on the report by the independent investigators report.

arrowloopboy

Any chance this weekends meeting could be recorded (LEGALLY),for members that can't attend ?

Rimfire Shooter

What 1 million? How?

arrowloopboy

Or maybe a pay per view option,i'd gladly pay 20 quid and get in a few beers !

berettaman

Rimfire Shooter wrote: »

What 1 million? How?

[mod edit]Former Solicitor claimed outstanding fees of €1m [/mod edit]

Last Exec refused to pay without seeing little things like invoices etc.

Former Treasurer paid €206K against wishes of much of Executive. Chairman of the day (Last surviving founding member) could not be reached when Executive tried to prevent payment.

New Chairman and Executive came in last October.. [mod snip].. eventually mediation and he Got €475K or so.

A staff member insisted he should be paid in full but that's another days work.

Current Exec is solid, Current Chairman is a decent man. Current Treasurer is tight as a ducks...outlook on life...:D

berettaman

arrowloopboy wrote: »

Or maybe a pay per view option,i'd gladly pay 20 quid and get in a few beers !

It could be worth a watch.. some people cannot see what's in front of them..and then they ask for a microphone!!

if you are a member you can go but a live stream would be great!!

cavan shooter

berettaman wrote:

Former Treasurer paid €206K against wishes of much of Executive. Chairman of the day (Last surviving founding member) could not be reached when Executive tried to prevent payment.

This gravy train needs to be derailed. I pay E55 a year to this shower of ****s and if a person says he is owed x it's just paid no ****ing questions asked... it's a disgrace....Whoever signed that cheque should be dismissed ****ed out by the ear

I said it already on a previous post somebody please derail this gravy train.

There has to be accountability from the very top. This is looking like another IFA. It is disgusting..the more I read the posts here and what I am told in the County the angrier I get "pigs around a trough" comes to mind. I bet you a E10 that when the names for the Executive comes out you will see:
1. those who want to change/break and rebuild the NARGC and
2. those who only are in it for themselves and there quite obviously their cronies.....I'm pissed off

Rimfire Shooter

How in God's name did they run up a legal bill like that?

I'm a long time NARGC member. How come I haven't heard about this before??????????

That's a lot of lads subs!!!!

arrowloopboy

I sometimes forget to put out the bin,this guy ''forgot'' a bill of a million,i should have listened more in school !

cavan shooter

Rimfire Shooter wrote:

I'm a long time NARGC member. How come I haven't heard about this before??????????

None of us knew.....ssshh ....say nothing...plebs pay E55 per annum thank you for your contribution... and your treated like a mushroom "kept in the dark and fed bull****"....we found out by listening to our County Delegates

berettaman

cavan shooter wrote: »

None of us knew.....ssshh ....say nothing...plebs pay E55 per annum thank you for your contribution... and your treated like a mushroom "kept in the dark and fed bull****"....we found out by listening to our County Delegates

We only know about this because of the hard work of this Executive and the former Executive. This Chairman had to fight to see the books.

The inner circle has been broken up but this Executive needs to be backed to complete the work it is doing.

cavan shooter

berettaman wrote:

We only know about this because of the hard work of this Executive and the former Executive. This Chairman had to fight to see the books.

Why does a chairman need to fight to see the "books" at our Club both GAA and Gun the books are there for all to see.

cavan shooter

berettaman wrote:

The inner circle has been broken up but this Executive needs to be backed to complete the work it is doing.

If there voted back in then the NARGC members are the thickest load of cnts in this country...
I'm joining CAI...at least you know what you getting with the brits...FEK all but there honest.

Sparks

[Mod Note]
Folks, please remember that the earlier notes about defamation still apply. We've had to edit one post for what is literally an example in a legal textbook on defamation law - please don't do this kind of thing.

berettaman

Sparks wrote: »

[Mod Note]
Folks, please remember that the earlier notes about defamation still apply. We've had to edit one post for what is literally an example in a legal textbook on defamation law - please don't do this kind of thing.

Apologies for the inconvenience caused. I will keep it clean.. I did not mean that to happen but I am passionate about the Association and our sport.

Backbarrel

Well I fecked things up and I can't go to Mullingar on Saturday. I need those going to ensure that some things are kept an eye on.

Basically anyone named in that presentation the last day better not be getting onto their high horses looking for votes.

Also nomination lists and annual reports and annual accounts will be given out so make sure to get onto your county delegate to get a copy of those.

berettaman

It should be interesting. It will be last chance saloon before the agm in offally in 2 weeks time..

I have to say that the year flew. There has been so much change in the Association. Fair play to those driving it on the Executive and on the Governing body. Let's keep the ball rolling.

mannlicher666

To be honest not going to the meeting today as fed up with the carry on, rather go stalking.We seem to have lost respect and dignity and honesty as shooting people, what happened to the man/woman, dog and gun going out for enjoyment and sport. No hassle, if i get a bird great and if not so what i enjoyed it. Now it is all positioning, legal hassle, mind the p&q's.
Having read the posts on the NARGC thread I am a little bit worried about what I am reading. I have been a long term NARGC member and have held many officer posts. Along with that I am as are many other NARGC members and as are a lot of non NARGC members grateful for what the organisation has done for the shooting sports down through the years. While our grass roots and indeed our core members really limit themselves to game shooting with a shotgun they have always supported other branches of the sport. Without the NARGC’s support and drive there would be no large calibre rifles or short firearms and thus no target or centrefire clubs or sport in Southern Ireland I believe. Deer stalking would still be limited to 22/250 calibre rifles. That support comes at a cost. Increasingly the cost and prevalence of legal battles have drained the coffers. As well as that, in my personal opinion we as an organisation were getting a little set in our ways and needed change. We need to provide good value to the ordinary member and to attract new members to both our sport and our organisation. I had hoped that the change of leadership last year would provide that impetus but now I am not so cocky. The recent issues affecting the organisation could I believe prove to be fatal if not managed properly. Rather than write about rumour, innuendo and thoughts like who is behind what and for what reason perhaps we need to look at the FACTS. Anything else is just supposition and could get one into trouble. These days we seem to love litigation and I for one hate giving legal people my hard earned dosh.
NARGC have a constitution.The bible for us. That can be found on their web site. There are also a few motions passed by the governing body at various meetings that are rules in addition to the constitution and can be found through the various meeting minutes. All NARGC members have to abide by that constitution and rules regardless of whether individually we agree with them or not.
I would suggest that we should be familiar with what has been happening in general before posting and there are in addition 3 items we need to include as well as what is posted on the NARGC web site.
They are:
The book of pleadings issued to County Secretaries and Delegates on the NARGC v Desmond Crofton
The book of pleadings issued to County Secretaries and Delegates on the NARGC v 7 Defendants
(both publications are the NARGC side in effect)
The High Court Judgment of Ms Justice Murphy handed down on Friday 29th July 2016 on the second book of pleadings case as mentioned above.
To the facts
A new Executive took over last October. Within a short period of time many long serving executive members either resigned or took a back stage. Letters emerged suggesting strange goings on. Our director became embroiled in internal controversy, his secretary resigned and a legal case is pending. Attempts were made to sack the Director and he took an injunction to stop it and succeeded. At this point I think we should not mention the Directors case again as it is both ongoing and he is in a serious condition in hospital. We should wish him a speedy and full recovery. So much going on impossible to determine fact from fiction. Several counties became concerned at the lack of financial information being given, the rumours concerning same and the potential legal cases being bandied about. Having failed to get any cohesive information those counties took the desperate but correct (according to the constitution) step of requesting a EGM primarily to see where we were financially and to discuss what in general was happening. The Litigation Sub Committee of the NARGC took a High Court Injunction to stop the EGM. That Injunction was lost by the NARGC, costs are in effect awarded to the defendants but who pays for those costs is yet to be decided. The EGM was held, no financial information was provided and the governing body overwhelmingly endorsed the executive.
Now let us examine some of those in more detail.
The Injunction was taken not against the County bodies but taken against 7 named individuals making them individually personally liable for costs should that arise. If one recalls the previous furor which resulted in a change of Association Solicitor. The entire Governing body was up in arms and rightly so in my personal opinion when the executive were named individually in a case. Yet a short while later our litigation committee entered into a high court action while deliberately targeting individuals rather than county bodies and this was pitting NARGC against NARGC in this case. Examination of the legal pleadings book clearly shows that the committee were well aware that the individuals were acting with the full authority of their counties, indeed they were doing their job as mandated and within the terms of the constitution, of that there can be no doubt. That raises a further issue because at a previous governing body meeting a motion was passed restricting the taking of any further legal cases without the express authority of the governing body. Thus there was no authority given to take a legal case. I would expect that is why the issue of appropriation of costs were not assigned. For mention on 05/Oct. Despite the postings on this site I would suggest that they should be praised for the manner in which they acted, always properly, within the constitution, they did their job.
The decision to take the injunction was completely flawed and doomed from the start. The court’s decision (pages 13 to 19) make that clear and makes shocking reading. It also makes very clear that the Association can discuss legal litigation pending where they are a party and indeed one must in order to give approval to any cases to go ahead. I would suggest this is mandatory reading for interested parties. Obviously as an aside where individuals were targeted and thus pressurised they have the right to countersue and only time will tell whether that will happen. The costs to date are likely to be in the order of 200 to 400 thousand in my estimation and if the association is to pay then that is a shocking waste of money. One poster suggests a 10 year pay back till we recover from just that case and that is likely correct.

At the recent EGM our Chairman when asked said that the reason they targeted individuals rather than County Bodies was based on the best legal advice given to them. At that EGM when the issue of recording the meeting for to enable the drawing up of proper minutes came up a gentleman stated that his county would not allow that and the Chairman agreed. Interesting again in that at a previous governing body meeting a motion was passed that meetings would be recorded for that reason. Here once again we have governing body decisions being ignored, indeed flagrantly disobeyed. What are we turning into?
Also at that EGM the first and most important point was the financial report. It was stated that none could be given as there was no sitting treasurer.( In my opinion at that stage the EGM should have been deferred) Interesting is that scheduled for the same day was a Governing body meeting which was cancelled at short notice yet a financial report was scheduled to be delivered at that meeting.
Also at that EGM it was stated that the independent investigation into the Directors conduct would take probably another month. However it appears that at this stage even the terms of reference have not been agreed so in effect the investigation has NOT EVEN STARTED.A discussion on the court findings was not allowed and i believe that if that happened we may have started to heal the rift.
Our AGM is due shortly and I as an ordinary member need to get a full financial report of the state of finances including estimated provision for legal cases. I also need to know what we have planned and what we are facing in legal cases and who approved same.
I require that Connellan Sols attend to answer three questions. I am paying their bills and I am hiring them, us, the ordinary members foot the bill.
Why did they give such disastrous advice that NARGC sue NARGC INDIVIDUALS?
Why did they advise taking an injunction in the High Court when it was clear that they would lose?
Did they advise that the authority to take court proceedings was not present and if not why not?
From my perspective given what information I presently have I would be of the opinion that we again require a change of legal representation and I would like to give them the chance to say their piece.
I need a full financial disclosure. I need our accountants to be present to answer questions at the AGM. We have the financial report from last year’s AGM and while rumours abound about costs being extremely increased these are just rumours and should not be entertained. However the lack of proper financial information has led us to where we are I believe. On page 254 of the legal pleadings book there is mention of 806k owing to the compensation fund and a further 112k to the habitat trust fund, what is this about?
Further to that any attempt to suggest that we as an association pay for the recent high court injunction taken without our approval is to my mind ludicrous. Any discussion on that need to go to each member of the association for a decision owing to the far reaching consequences, nothing less should suffice.
I would be surprised to get a full comprehensive financial report but we need one.
Finally I would like to agree with posters that suggest that a lot of the present executive do not go forward for re-election. The why is explained in the facts above?

Mods, if you disagree with any of the above please remove. I hope this has clarified some of what is going on and while it does appear to be one sided it is not meant to be. The facts are the facts.

Sparks

[Mod Note] We don't remove things we disagree with. We remove things we're required to in order to avoid legal issues or when things like the forum charter have been broken too badly. The above does not fall into either category. [Mod Note]


On a personal note, not as a mod:

Ignoring the NARGC-specific stuff because I'm not a member, there's something I'd like to point out from the point of view of people who run an NGB, because like a few hundred others over the years, I've had some time at that wheel. And it's this:

The decision to take the injunction was completely flawed and doomed from the start. The court’s decision (pages 13 to 19) make that clear and makes shocking reading.

That's flat-out, utterly, totally, wrong.
The level of litigiousness in our sport is, as in every other sport in the country, shockingly high. Only a few weeks ago, one of the very people you are talking about - the NARGC director - took a defamation case against someone for a post on Facebook and won a seventy-five thousand euro judgement against that person. Not only was that an NARGC officer taking a legal case against an NARGC individual but on the "other side" of the table, so to speak; but it was a new precedent in Irish law because of the on-line nature of the comment.

I'm not saying he didn't have a personal right to take the legal action; it's obvious that he did. Whether or not exercising that right put him in conflict with the ruling against taking legal actions without NARGC approval I don't know, I don't have enough details on that particular rule you're talking about and it's an internal NARGC matter anyway. My point is - that's the kind of environment people are operating in. So if you consider a meeting of potentially hundreds of people on a contentious issue that was not yet resolved fully before the meeting so that facts could be stated openly and nothing would be sub judice, from the point of view of preventing further such cases being presented, it's an understandable action.

As to the court's opinion, until the court had given it, it did not exist. So you could have asked ten solicitors for their opinion on what would be allowed and what wouldn't, and you'd have gotten ten different answers, not one of which would have been definitive. Getting the court's opinion on the other hand, gave not just the NARGC a more solid footing in this case, but set a precedent that I don't doubt will be of use to other sports bodies in the future, given how much litigation there is in Irish sport.

richiedel123

Also at that EGM the first and most important point was the financial report. It was stated that none could be given as there was no sitting treasurer.( In my opinion at that stage the EGM should have been deferred) Interesting is that scheduled for the same day was a Governing body meeting which was cancelled at short notice yet a financial report was scheduled to be delivered at that meeting.

This extract wasTaken from mannlichers post. I was at that egm and you decline to write the reason for the governing body meeting being cancelled. It was clearly stated that it could not go ahead because of solicitors letters received by the chairman telling him not to have it or else there will be legal action taken again him.
Also the comp fund officer got solicitors letters threatening him with legal action taken against him too if the meeting went ahead.
You also state that with no financial report available that the egm should have been deferred. The reason the injunction came about was because the individuals and county bodies couldn't wait until the next governing body meeting to bring up whatever worries they had.
Do u really think they would have been happy to defer it once the meeting started when the financial report wasn't compiled????

Backbarrel

Hi Männlicher,

Interesting point about the Habitat Trust. The person running for Chairman against current Chairman said it was ring-fence but just not in the account at the moment!!

I think we are in very safe financial hands now.