Advertisement

Shooting Forum - Firearms licencing information


Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

GRPAI

1…1617192122

Comments

  • #542
    Cass
    Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 28,817 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cass


    jb88 wrote: »
    CASS, You told me before you know nothing about whats happening, so I have to say little has changed by the above request for information.
    I told you i'm not a member of the NASRPC so don't know the full details of the internals. As i'm not a member i don't attend meetings and am not informed of any changes/updates via e-mail, letters, etc. So the only way for me to find out is to ask.
    This forum wont do anything to solve the issues,
    It's a discussion forum and a place for people to exchange ideas, comments, information, etc. It's not a resolution forum so its not surprising it won't solve any issues.
    frankly all it does is give a lot of non participants or occasional participants a chance to make statements.
    As they should be able to, but according to you this should not be the case. Can you not see the harm you are doing by saying unless you attend every shoot and give your life over to the sport you have no right to comment.
    Running with the studs up and other comments only add fuel to the fire so more keyboard warriors can wade in and stake their claim.
    Again with the insults. Coupled with telling those that have not got a high level of attendance to stay quiet you are alienating the very people you are trying to convince.

    The studs up reference was in relation to your aggressive attitude, and frankly whether i used that saying or not is irrelevant as your attitude is coming through regardless. You won't get your point across and only serve to start a row. As you have laid your allegiance to the GRPAI out for all to see they will link your bad attitude to that of the GRPAI.
    Pity they don't do that at AGM's or at a club level to see the split which has developed, one which I helped discuss.
    Can you not see that the "bully boy" tactics, insults, etc that you use here indicate a worse treatment should anyone either attend or "dare" voice their opinion at any meeting.
    But its all a futile exercise on this forum I see that now.
    Don't talk to me about futile. I, and others, have asked for any updates and in the last 15 or so posts since all you've done is insulted, made accusations, but not once answered or even indicated if you know what happened.

    That is futility.
    jb88 wrote: »
    The SSAI were originally the Irish NGB
    And straight aay you're wrong.

    The SSAI were NEVER an NGB for anything. They could not be as it was a name given to the umbrella group of associations, and it was in itself NOT an NGB.
    , But at this time the IGRF was not formed.
    So if someone told the IGRF, when it was formed, that the SSAI were an NGB they lied.
    The SSAI was not a "proper", shooting organization and after it ended the IGRF were told it had changed its name to the NASRPC but this was incorrect as the NASRPC was a separate body from the SSAI.
    The SSAI was NEVER a "proper" shooting organisation from the point of it being any sort of an NGB. It never was, and if you were told that it was you were lied to.

    The NASRPC, NRAI, NARGC, Pony Club, etc, etc, etc were all separate groups which made up the SSAI. A Chairman was elected from within these groups as a single point of contact for the Sport Council to make contact with.
    More than two committees ago and means that the NASRPC Claims to be an NGB are completely false.
    So who was the chairman of the NASRPC from two committees ago. That is the person you need to talk to.
    1. Ask them why they allowed the lies that the SSAI were the NGB to continue.
    2. Ask them why when the IGRF were created did they not distinguish that the SSAI were NOT an NGB nor could they be.
    3. Ask them was a person named as the NGB
    4. Ask them did this person allow themselves to still be classed as the NGB when the SSAI dissolved
    5. Ask them why in all these years the IGRF STILL were not informed of the fact that the NASRPC, at the time, were the NGB (before the GRPAI was even a notion).
    When all that is done ask yourself this. Why did the person in the NASRPC sitting on the SSAI not clarify this at the time. Why would they allow this mistake to continue.
    There was never a vote to select the NASRPC as the NGB. The IGRF were conned into putting their name down as the NGB.
    As there was no other Gallery rifle group, and as the SSAI cannot be an NGB it makes sense the NASRPC were listed as the NGB. Again there is one or two people from that time that can easily answer these questions. If the SSAI cannot be the NGB, the GRPAI (or any other group) did not exist, and the NASRPC were not the "proper" NGB then it means one (possibly more) person took it upon themselves to put their name down as the NGB or point of contact as an NGB to the IGRF, and so if they leave and start a new group they can bring that status with them.

    So go back, find those people and ask them what they did. Then you and everyone else will have their answers.
    the NASRPC Claim to be NGB is, now wait for it "FALSE". Bullying a meeting of the IGRF wont help, ask the IGRF for some documentation to confirm this, even better ask the NASRPC, I am sure they can dream up something.
    As opposed to the GRPAI that appeared out of thin air after the old committee stepped down, claimed NGB status with even less "proof" than the NASRPC (as you claim), and have caused a split in the currently recognised organisation?


    If you don't ask the questions above to the people that were in charge then, and are in charge now (in both groups) or if they won't give you a truthful answer then you need to question the validity of what you are being told.

    Better again use the Freedom of Information requests, and direct request of the NASRPC/SSAI/FSAI and find out the exact details. You can find out who was over the SSAI at the time, who within the SSAI named themselves as the NGB (because again the SSAI cannot be), and did they inform the NASRPC at the time that they held it and not the association and can they bring it with them if they leave the NASRPC.
    Forum Charter - Useful Information - Photo thread: Hardware - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads - Upcoming Events - RFDs by County

    If you see a problem post use the report post function. Click on the three dots on the post, select "FLAG" & let a Moderator deal with it.

    Moderators - Cass otmmyboy2 , CatMod - Shamboc , Admins - Beasty , mickeroo



  • #543
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,867 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    No matter who the IGRF recognise as the NGB, I don't see the GRPAI going away. Their competitions are well attended and well run and results are posted promptly.

    I'm not knocking the NASRPC by the way. I'd be in Lough Bo this weekend but unfortunately 'she who must be obeyed' has given me orders that I have to go to a wedding with her this weekend.


  • #544
    Gleefulprinter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 206 ✭✭Gleefulprinter


    Judging by the IGRF website, they recognise the NASRPC as the NGB.

    Again, outside of a minority, this really isn't an issue for the shooting world. It is essentially all about egos and who picks the teams. Literally, that is it.

    I think it is a good thing that they are running their own competitions. They are running some really good local matches. But honestly, they need to cut the politics out.

    Some posters here need to have a Snickers as well before going full diva.


  • #545
    Rimfire Shooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 251 ✭✭Rimfire Shooter


    Why is the NGB status which seems to be at the centre of this split so important?

    Also it looks like GRPAI intend to introduce a membership fee after 2016 (refer "About Us on their website). NASRPC do not charge individual a membership fee.

    Yet another "membership fee" on top of all the other costs we have to pay?


  • #546
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,867 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    Rimfire Shooter wrote: »
    Why is the NGB status which seems to be at the centre of this split so important?

    Also it looks like GRPAI intend to introduce a membership fee after 2016 (refer "About Us on their website). NASRPC do not charge individual a membership fee.

    Yet another "membership fee" on top of all the other costs we have to pay?

    I'm not a defender of the GRPAI but I don't see on the website where it says that they intend to introduce a membership fee next year. It just says that for 2016 membership is free if you shoot in one GRPAI competition.

    The NASRPC did have a levy of €10 per club member at one stage if I remember correctly. It was done away with at the last AGM.


  • Advertisement
  • #547
    Cass
    Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 28,817 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cass


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    No matter who the IGRF recognise as the NGB, I don't see the GRPAI going away. ............. I'm not knocking the NASRPC by the way.
    I don't know if i've said this yet but i will, possibly again, just to be clear.

    I have no horse in this race. I am neither for nor against either group. I have been a very outspoken critic of past actions of the NASRPC, and for the purposes of this thread i have appeared as though i'm against the GRPAI.

    I was as amazed as anyone else when you started this thread with a new NGB appearing out of nowhere. I was hesitant to believe at first but eventually when they "came out" i was amazed. Not at their formation, but their claims of NGB, etc. I've seen it before how such a split, regardless of their stated good intentions, will irreparably weaken the sport.

    As expected dirt started to be flung and coupled with the dubious nature of their beginnings, the outright claim of NGB status, etc, etc. i wanted to ask questions. However as before i never got answers and not ones that reply to the questions.

    The GRPAI may very well have a claim on the NGB status, but if the NASRPC are not the NGB or not on paper at least and the GRPAI have a proper claim to it, a claim is a far cry from actually being the NGB. The aggressive and confrontational tone of their claims, the info on their website, etc. serves only to cause a row. Not that anyone has to be cap in hand, but this could have been handled so much better. Not least of which is the timing of the appearance of the GRPAI straight after the last election/meeting of the NASRPC committee.

    It looks to the outsider that the GRPAI was a "bullet" that was only going to be fired if things within the NASRPC did not go as some people wished. IOW i'm taking my ball and going home.
    Rimfire Shooter wrote: »
    Why is the NGB status which seems to be at the centre of this split so important?
    It gives an association the ability to sit on an FSAI/SSAI type committee, at the FCP table, apply for funding under the umbrella group from the sports council of Ireland (although that is a lame Duck given the f**k up from years ago that has all but stopped any future funding).
    Also it looks like GRPAI intend to introduce a membership fee after 2016 (refer "About Us on their website). NASRPC do not charge individual a membership fee.
    I don't see anything about being charged so long as you enter at least one comp.
    Forum Charter - Useful Information - Photo thread: Hardware - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads - Upcoming Events - RFDs by County

    If you see a problem post use the report post function. Click on the three dots on the post, select "FLAG" & let a Moderator deal with it.

    Moderators - Cass otmmyboy2 , CatMod - Shamboc , Admins - Beasty , mickeroo



  • #548
    jb88
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 484 ✭✭jb88


    Rimfire Shooter wrote: »
    All well & good BUT will you tell us until the previous NASRPC committee were replaced did you agree with NASRPC being the NGB?

    I don't expect an answer this time either as looking at the content in your previous few posts I reckon you'll not be posting here again.

    And my other still unanswered question. is the GRPAI committee democratically elected?

    Really

    NGB for whomever who cares, If people got away from their keyboards and took a more active participation in their sport we wouldn't have moderators defending the indefensible.

    After all as I have been reminded its an open forum. Maybe its not so open after all

    Don't expect that answer above from me, most of the decision makers in the NASRPC now are unelected, I have remarked on this before.

    Talk to your club, talk to your members, talk to the NASRPC, If you were that concerned with Democracy maybe you should speak to the NASRPC.


  • #549
    Gleefulprinter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 206 ✭✭Gleefulprinter


    It's true, they are unelected. Many of you may be under the impression that an election was held and votes were cast but I can assure you this is the mind trying to protect itself from harm.
    I remember the coup that was performed. Any cursory look around the internet will show you they are on the "Most Wanted" lists of many nations.

    1. Omar Al-Bashir
    2. Joesph Kony
    3. The NASRPC
    4. Robert Mugabe.


    Seriously, people have asked you question after question regarding the NGB status and how the GRPAI can claim it and you haven't answered a single question. So again-

    By what right do the GRPAI claim NGB status?

    And try to focus on the issue rather than more gibberish about you competing or secret emails that you have.


  • #550
    jb88
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 484 ✭✭jb88


    Cass wrote: »
    The GRPAI may very well have a claim on the NGB status, but if the NASRPC are not the NGB or not on paper at least and the GRPAI have a proper claim to it, a claim is a far cry from actually being the NGB. The aggressive and confrontational tone of their claims, the info on their website, etc. serves only to cause a row. Not that anyone has to be cap in hand, but this could have been handled so much better. Not least of which is the timing of the appearance of the GRPAI straight after the last election/meeting of the NASRPC committee.

    It looks to the outsider that the GRPAI was a "bullet" that was only going to be fired if things within the NASRPC did not go as some people wished. IOW i'm taking my ball and going home.

    I just burst your ball CASS :) Stuck a nice pin in it.
    The GRPAI was created for Gallery shooters within an organization of Target shooting clubs the NASRPC, because Gallery shooters represented the vast majority of the members of those clubs, the NASRPC made a bad decision not to work with the GRPAI, for Gallery shooters.
    Benchrest and sils shooters have their own groups within the NASRPC why shouldn't Gallery shooters. That's where the mistake was made, and that one mistake by the NASRPC, has cost them dearly.

    In addition the NASRPC committee and various hangers on made a lot of bad decisions on how to treat the members of those clubs with whom they look to for competitors to go to their matches. (And compete internationally)

    Myself like many more will or have already given up NASRPC competitions at the end of this year given whats gone on and will refuse to compete in any more NASRPC Competitions until something changes.

    But with the NASRPC then going broke or being privately subsidized with 20% of its previous support base, it wont be but a short time until the NASRPC is forgotten.

    Its only taken 8 months to wreck an organization. There wont be a next time for them im sad to say its all over, just no one admitting the truth yet.

    That is the NASRPC Legacy.


  • #551
    Rimfire Shooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 251 ✭✭Rimfire Shooter


    To clarify my statement about their intention to introduce a membership fee post 2016 I didn't say they were going to I said it looked to me like they were which I intrepreted from the way it is written on their site.

    l
    jb88 wrote: »
    Really

    NGB for whomever who cares, If people got away from their keyboards and took a more active participation in their sport we wouldn't have moderators defending the indefensible.

    After all as I have been reminded its an open forum. Maybe its not so open after all

    Don't expect that answer above from me, most of the decision makers in the NASRPC now are unelected, I have remarked on this before.

    Talk to your club, talk to your members, talk to the NASRPC, If you were that concerned with Democracy maybe you should speak to the NASRPC.

    Once again you refuse to answer simple questions. You either do not know the answers or realise you are in fact the one trying to defend the indefensible. You are not a good advertisement for the GRPAI.


  • Advertisement
  • #552
    jb88
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 484 ✭✭jb88


    all further questions should be directed to info@grpai.ie and info@nasrpc.ie


  • #553
    jb88
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 484 ✭✭jb88


    Rimfire Shooter wrote: »
    To clarify my statement about their intention to introduce a membership fee post 2016 I didn't say they were going to I said it looked to me like they were which I intrepreted from the way it is written on their site.

    l

    Once again you refuse to answer simple questions. You either do not know the answers or realise you are in fact the one trying to defend the indefensible. You are not a good advertisement for the GRPAI.

    I represent no one, GRPAI nor any other shooting organization. Its just me :D


  • #554
    Gleefulprinter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 206 ✭✭Gleefulprinter


    It is a pity you are unable to answer basic questions about the organisation you are apparently supporting. Perhaps you should ask some of these questions before offering your loyalty as soon.

    I would love to see the emails and proof you have.

    Pity you won't be around much longer at the NASRPC events due to it being a dying organisation. As a matter of interest have you let them know this?


  • #555
    Rimfire Shooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 251 ✭✭Rimfire Shooter


    jb88 wrote: »
    I represent no one, GRPAI nor any other shooting organization. Its just me :D

    I just got a PM saying the same. Seems you're not a big deal in the GRPAI.

    Borderline troll here I reckon at this stage.


  • #556
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Mod Note:
    Lads, could we keep the first rule of the forum charter in mind please?
    Thank you.


  • #557
    Gleefulprinter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 206 ✭✭Gleefulprinter


    So in response to the claim of "undemocratic" by jb88, I had a look around the internet last night regarding the set up of the GRPAI and the NASRPC.

    The NASRPC committee were voted for and elected by the members, whatever claims people are making.

    From what I can see, the GRPAI is a company limited by guarantee- registered company number 578589 with the Companies Registration Office and operating out of Johnstown Business Centre. There seem to be very few rules about how one of these companies operates but they are allowed to share the profits they make amongst themselves. Now presumably they need to have directors who will remain in charge despite whatever committee is there.

    According to one article they should be calling themselves GRPAI CLG to show everyone they are private and a company limited by guarantee.

    So my questions:
    1) Will all money made by the GRPAI be reinvested into the sport?
    2) Are any of the directors receiving remuneration/expenses for their role?
    3) Will they make their finances public and if so when?
    4) If they take over as the NGB doesn't that mean that gallery rifle disciplines will have been privatised with the GRPAI being allowed to retain the profits instead of investing them in the sport?

    Like I say, I don't think it is a bad thing that the GRPAI are around and running competitions. But I would like an answer to those questions if anyone has them.


  • #558
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    A quick point on the company thing - to repeat what I said in Post 313, Post 314 and in other posts over the years, the company thing is not bad, it's not insidious, it's not underhanded - it's how properly run NGBs should be set up. If your NGB is not a company limited by guarantee, they're very probably doing it wrong and you need to fix that. The ownership of NGB assets, the liabilities of NGB volunteers, the appearance of the NGB's proficiency to external bodies like state funding sources, the longevity of the NGB after the inevitable passing of founding members, the rigour with which the NGB adheres to its own rules both on a day-to-day basis and when muck hits fan, and a whole bunch of other things - all of those are badly compromised if the NGB is not operating as a company.

    And "operating as a company" does not mean the same thing as "run like a business" either btw. A business's focus and reason for existing at all is to make profits; the focus and reason for existing of an NGB run as a company is sport. They try not to make a loss too often, but any surplus goes in the coffers for future years. The board do not get all the profit for any year - it's not legally theirs.

    I don't have any iron in the fire on gallery rifle, it's not my cup of tea - but this idea that NGBs should be unincorporated bodies where there is no requirement to adhere to their own rules, where assets are owned by individuals even if the NGB pays for them and there's no legal protection of the asset from being sold on a whim, where when a founder leaves or passes the entire structure can fall apart and where a dozen other bad things can happen before lunch on a Tuesday? That idea needs to die in a fire.


  • #559
    Gleefulprinter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 206 ✭✭Gleefulprinter


    Not suggesting they are doing anything insidious. Which other NGBs use it?


  • #560
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Yes, you were:
    There seem to be very few rules about how one of these companies operates but they are allowed to share the profits they make amongst themselves. Now presumably they need to have directors who will remain in charge despite whatever committee is there.
    That's not how those companies operate - in fact, it's 100% wrong. There are way more rules about how those companies operate than there are about how an unincorporated club or association operates. In fact, unincorporated clubs and associations have no rules governing how they must act - if they want to, they can even ignore (and in our sport, this has happened many times) the rules they write for themselves. Companies on the other hand, have to abide by their own rules and the companies act; and the Act allows members to hold them to those rules with the courts - see the recent fun and games with the NARGC EGMs for the most recent example in the shooting world.

    Also, the board of directors of the company is the committee you elect at the AGM. By law. That's how that works. And no, they are not allowed to share the profits amongst themselves, that would be theft because the surplus belongs to the NGB, not the directors (that's the point of the company, it gives an independent legal persona to own the assets of the NGB and prevent any one person from being able to abscond with them).

    Most Irish sports NGBs are set up that way. In shooting, the NRAI and NTSA are, the NRPAI used to be before they were changed to the SSAI, the ICPSA is, the NARGC are, and so are a dozen or so large clubs from An Riocht to Courtlough to East Coast.


  • #561
    Rimfire Shooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 251 ✭✭Rimfire Shooter


    So an unelected committee and no AGM would be against the rules in the longer term?


  • Advertisement
  • #562
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    In the long run, yes. There's a period in the initial phases of incorporation where there's more leeway for getting things started, but it's not decades long, the idea is that after that first AGM, AGMs become annual and committees get elected (usually that'd start from either the first or the second AGM because of the leeway).


  • #563
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    You could though, for an example that I've seen somewhere before, write into the NGB's rules that there had to be no more than 18 months between AGMs (to give enough leeway to let volunteers get things done in time). It's not an inflexible system in terms of what rules there are; it's just that once you've written them, you have to follow them. Which personally I'd be in favour of, but that's me, I'm a bit of a dry expletive.


  • #564
    Cass
    Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 28,817 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cass


    If you wish to identify yourself that is completely each persons decision. However there is to be NO asking for others to identify themselves.

    I have removed the entire post so you can have time to think about whether you want your real name disclosed. If you do then re-post it, however you cannot ask others to do the same.
    Forum Charter - Useful Information - Photo thread: Hardware - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads - Upcoming Events - RFDs by County

    If you see a problem post use the report post function. Click on the three dots on the post, select "FLAG" & let a Moderator deal with it.

    Moderators - Cass otmmyboy2 , CatMod - Shamboc , Admins - Beasty , mickeroo



  • #565
    jb88
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 484 ✭✭jb88


    Cass wrote: »
    If you wish to identify yourself that is completely each persons decision. However there is to be NO asking for others to identify themselves.

    I have removed the entire post so you can have time to think about whether you want your real name disclosed. If you do then re-post it, however you cannot ask others to do the same.

    So Can you also delete the post about the implication of me being a Troll, or is that allowed. I notice Sparks made note of it but that post was not removed and my name is posted on this thread as I have identified myself already.


  • #566
    Cass
    Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 28,817 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cass


    jb88 wrote: »
    So Can you also delete the post about the implication of me being a Troll, or is that allowed.
    If you have a problem with a post use the report post button and a Mod will look at it. It's this one - report.gif
    I notice Sparks made note of it but that post was not removed
    Sparks posted a warning for all to be civil. HE made no mention of any post calling you a troll.

    It was not reported by you or anyone else. Also comments don't usually get removed unless they give personal info, are outright using foul language, defamatory, or accusation against a named person (outside of Boards.ie).

    However as said above if you have a problem with it or any other post use the report post function.
    and my name is posted on this thread as I have identified myself already.
    That is your prerogative, but asking for others identity is not allowed. Rather than leave your name on thread, and remove the asking for others names bit, i removed it all in case you changed your mind, but i can restore it if you wish?
    Forum Charter - Useful Information - Photo thread: Hardware - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads - Upcoming Events - RFDs by County

    If you see a problem post use the report post function. Click on the three dots on the post, select "FLAG" & let a Moderator deal with it.

    Moderators - Cass otmmyboy2 , CatMod - Shamboc , Admins - Beasty , mickeroo



  • #567
    Valhalla18
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 66 ✭✭Valhalla18


    So now the nasrpc have sent out an email saying anyone attempting to disrupt the team selection , preparation , performance will get a one year ban from national events and a 2 year ban from team selection .
    So basically anyone who has anything to say , as long as it is deemed acceptable by the nasrpc committee , can have their say , but , heaven forbid , if anyone says something they dont like , or they perceive to be against the party , will be banned .
    I believe thats whats called a dictatorship .
    There is other stuff in their email where they use the word" anecdotally" and " alluded "to describe some issues .
    Why,instead of these veiled threats and accusations , dont they either write to the people they percieve to be involved , or publish their names.
    If they have proof of people asking others to not shoot for them then name and shame or shut up .
    This , i presume , is a follow up email from last week where they withdrew ths CRSO and RO status of certain individuals citing lack of participation . Just another way of trying to remove anybody who does not tow the party line .
    It will be interesting to see what happens at the next AGM , whenever that may be. I fully expect the committee to be voted back in as i presume all those who turned up last year to support them will do the same again .
    Will they have the new constitution that Willie Egan is writing for them ready , will we all get a chance to put in any submissions we have or will they say that because the existing constitution is very vague that they will just make it up as they go along .
    Time will tell .


  • #568
    clivej
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,242 ✭✭✭clivej


    Valhalla18 wrote: »
    So now the nasrpc have sent out an email saying anyone attempting to disrupt the team selection , preparation , performance will get a one year ban from national events and a 2 year ban from team selection .
    So basically anyone who has anything to say , as long as it is deemed acceptable by the nasrpc committee , can have their say , but , heaven forbid , if anyone says something they dont like , or they perceive to be against the party , will be banned .
    I believe thats whats called a dictatorship .
    There is other stuff in their email where they use the word" anecdotally" and " alluded "to describe some issues .
    Why,instead of these veiled threats and accusations , dont they either write to the people they percieve to be involved , or publish their names.
    If they have proof of people asking others to not shoot for them then name and shame or shut up .
    This , i presume , is a follow up email from last week where they withdrew ths CRSO and RO status of certain individuals citing lack of participation . Just another way of trying to remove anybody who does not tow the party line .
    It will be interesting to see what happens at the next AGM , whenever that may be. I fully expect the committee to be voted back in as i presume all those who turned up last year to support them will do the same again .
    Will they have the new constitution that Willie Egan is writing for them ready , will we all get a chance to put in any submissions we have or will they say that because the existing constitution is very vague that they will just make it up as they go along .
    Time will tell .

    Well that's a one year ban for you now


  • #569
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,867 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    Valhalla18 wrote: »
    This , i presume , is a follow up email from last week where they withdrew ths CRSO and RO status of certain individuals citing lack of participation . Just another way of trying to remove anybody who does not tow the party line .

    Have other people who haven't RO'd in a long time also had their CRSO and RO status removed or is it only members of the GRPAI?
    It will be interesting to see what happens at the next AGM , whenever that may be. I fully expect the committee to be voted back in as i presume all those who turned up last year to support them will do the same again .
    Will they have the new constitution that Willie Egan is writing for them ready , will we all get a chance to put in any submissions we have or will they say that because the existing constitution is very vague that they will just make it up as they go along .
    Time will tell .
    A new Constitution can't be used at the AGM. The old Constitution is the only one in effect at the moment. I'm assuming that the version published on the NASRPC website is the current one.

    Any changes to the Constitution whether it is a small change or a complete rewrite needs to be voted on at an AGM and it must have the backing of 2/3 of all voting members present at that AGM.

    So if a new Constitution is/has been written, it can't be used at the AGM as it hasn't been voted on and received a 2/3 majority.


  • #570
    clivej
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,242 ✭✭✭clivej


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    Have other people who haven't RO'd in a long time also had their CRSO and RO status removed or is it only members of the GRPAI?

    A new Constitution can't be used at the AGM. The old Constitution is the only one in effect at the moment. I'm assuming that the version published on the NASRPC website is the current one.

    Any changes to the Constitution whether it is a small change or a complete rewrite needs to be voted on at an AGM and it must have the backing of 2/3 of all voting members present at that AGM.

    So if a new Constitution is/has been written, it can't be used at the AGM as it hasn't been voted on and received a 2/3 majority.

    Looks like the committee can do as they please.


  • Advertisement
  • #571
    BillBen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 358 ✭✭BillBen


    I'm just saddened to see the Nasrpc have turned into what looks like a dictatorship where you will be banned for having an opinion.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement