NARGC

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.

MrTom1

What I've gotton from this whole cluster f@ck is the below
Employee vs employer dispute
Nargc asked members not to talk online as advised by their solicitors as it would interfere with above dispute
Member of the nargc body was leaking and info to said employee above
"Distant 5" counties didn't act own their own they where puppets being used to stir **** and pull a coup
I'd say we are at least on 600K for legal fees if not double that

berettaman

Interesting First Post Mannlicher.

You start with the words “To be honest” and finish with “Facts”. Well let’s see:
The people enjoying their sport have lost none of their dignity and honesty and are still enjoying their sport. No one wants legal hassle but you cannot stick your head in the sand when it comes to the politics of the Association. If it is time to take a stand against what was happening then so be it.

You state

mannlicher666 wrote:

that the cost and prevalence of legal battles have drained the coffers.

Agreed. This Executive and the one before it have changed that. They have had to fight to change it but they called a stop to the seemingly continuous run of cases.

As well as that, in my personal opinion we as an organisation were getting a little set in our ways and needed change.

Change came. A core group that was there a long time did not like that. Hence the hassle this year.

We need to provide good value to the ordinary member and to attract new members to both our sport and our organisation.

Couldn’t agree more and this Chairman and Executive have worked extremely hard in this regard, witness Birr Game Fair, Proficiency courses etc.

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.

Only one member of the Executive resigned: The Hon Treasurer for “personal reasons”. Let’s leave it at that, shall we?

The Hon Secretary stopped coming to meetings as members of the Executive had some questions relative to his position. Anyone in attendance on the 6th August knows why these officers removed themselves from the picture.

Letters emerged suggesting strange goings on.

Indeed. Apparently if someone was going to ask you questions that you did not want to answer you stop going to meetings and claim that you are being bullied. That is “strange”.

Several counties became concerned at the lack of financial information being given, the rumours concerning same and the potential legal cases being bandied about.

This is misleading as this Executive has done more to rectify the finance of the Association than any previously.

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

There would have been a General Meeting in June that would have supplied the Financial Information sought but this was prevented by the legal action of the National Director.

The EGM was held, no financial information was provided and the governing body overwhelmingly endorsed the executive.

This is a misleading statement. The former solicitor of the Association threatened the Chairman with legal action if the Governing Body meeting was held, (because of 12 days’ notice instead of 14).(Why bother I wonder?) Finance would have been presented and discussed at the Governing Body Meeting. Instead just an EGM was held and Finance was not discussed at the EGM. In any event we had no Treasurer at the time.(Finance duties were being shared by Comp Fund administrator and former Treasurer in a caretaking capacity.)

Thus there was no authority given to take a legal case.

The Executive have the power to act for the Association between Governing Body Meetings. The Executive granted authority to the Litigation Committee due to “confidentiality” issues. Anyone in attendance on the 6th of August will know why.

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.

Likewise the Executive did what they did based on legal advice to protect the interests of the Association.They too also acted, always properly, within the constitution, they did their job.

The costs to date are likely to be in the order of 200 to 400 thousand in my estimation

Your estimation. We shall see. Way out I think.

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.

Again there is context here to what was happening to the recordings of meetings.
as per presentation 6th August.

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?

Seriously? The Governing Body voted on the day NOT to record the meeting so members could speak without fear. It was their decision not to record their own meeting!

Also at that EGM the first and most important point was the financial report.

This Executive has worked very hard along with the Finance Committee to bring order to the Associations finances. There was no Treasurer in situ. If the Governing Body meeting had gone ahead a financial report would have been issued.

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)

Can you imagine what the five counties would have said/done if the EGM that they fought for in court was deferred pending appointment of a Treasurer? Seriously? We would be in court the following day? More money, more waste!

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.

See above why the meeting had to be cancelled

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.

Incorrect. Independent Investigator appointed and worked steadily on the task in hand. The time frame offered was based on her initial estimation of delivery date. Due to work load/summer holidays the delivery date has been pushed back. Not the fault of the Chairman or Executive but used as a stick to beat them with anyway.

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.

As a former officer of the Association you should know how the Association works. Financial Reports distributed at the last Governing Body meeting prior to the AGM. (The various RGC took away their boxes on Saturday).The detailed financial report is given at the AGM by the Treasurer and is confidential to members. This was the way it was done when the last Treasurer was there.

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.

Bang on. Rumours. I heard rumours that many costs are down on prior years. Rumours. Audited accounts at the AGM. Full financial disclosure.

However the lack of proper financial information has led us to where we are I believe.

Exactly!This has been the case up until this year. Current regime changed that.

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?

Ask the new Treasurer at the AGM. These would be issues inherited from past decisions but again this Executive and Chairman are working to rectify that.

I would be surprised to get a full comprehensive financial report but we need one.

In fairness there is a comprehensive financial report given every year at the AGM. Audited by a reputable firm of Chartered Accountants.

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?

Interesting, are you talking about the guys that derailed the gravy train, cried stop to some of the unnecessary spending and shone a light where there was none or are you talking about the members of the Executive that had their antics detailed in the presentation on the 6th of August? I know which way I am voting.

cavan shooter

Went to a clay shoot today and found out that DC is sick in Hospital. Hope he gets well soon as there is a process he is involved in and I'm sure the independent investigator still needs to chat with him.

Actually I what I really want to say is does it not strike you strange that on the weeks coming up to him having to be interviewed by the idependant investigator he is sick.........and yes I am a conspiracy theorist.

homerhop

Will chip in towards a get well soon card.

p28559

cavan shooter wrote: »

Went to a clay shoot today and found out that DC is sick in Hospital. Hope he gets well soon as there is a process he is involved in and I'm sure the independent investigator still needs to chat with him.

Actually I what I really want to say is does it not strike you strange that on the weeks coming up to him having to be interviewed by the idependant investigator he is sick.........and yes I am a conspiracy theorist.

No i think that his being in a medically induced coma is usually as bad as it sounds........

Backbarrel

Ok..

I missed Saturday. Any Craic?

How did the new Treasurer get on? Did any one make a serious pitch for election?

Did anyone make a show of themselves? No names just vague ish descriptions will do..:D

mannlicher666

Just to post a reply to Bettermans posting , sorry about the delay was off stalking and glad to say filled the freezer for this year. Also to highlight the latest incident in the making. Looks like more dosch down the tubes. Cannot figure out how to highlight my reply or show it in a different font to make it easier to read, sorry

Berettaman wrote:

This is misleading as this Executive has done more to rectify the finance of the Association than any previously

I completely disagree with you here, the writing above tells what happened at the time, and nothing has changed up until the meeting last weekend when some information was provided. The new executive may have tackled the finances as you claim but without solid and cohesive information coming out to the general membership in a timely manner then the vacuum will exist. I cannot remember any executive who within a year of taking over actually LOST Potentially the NARGC such an amount of money. The potential legal cases are mounting together with the attendant costs. Take the most recent incident created last weekend. I am given to understand that the annual report apparently contains a grave accusation against William Egan which he considers defamatory. All annual reports issued are asked by him to remain unissued and any issued are to be returned. Failure to do so will result in legal action.
Another probable case which will drain our coffers. it further cements what I regard as the unsuitability of the present executive to remain. You have heard of penny wise and pound foolish. I think personally that describes the present executives approach to our finances and I am not happy with that. It is one episode after another so yes I am pi---d off. If this is what is called managing our finances then we have had enough of it.

This is a misleading statement. The former solicitor of the Association threatened the Chairman with legal action if the Governing Body meeting was held, (because of 12 days’ notice instead of 14).(Why bother I wonder?) Finance would have been presented and discussed at the Governing Body Meeting. Instead just an EGM was held and Finance was not discussed at the EGM. In any event we had no Treasurer at the time.(Finance duties were being shared by Comp Fund administrator and former Treasurer in a caretaking capacity.)

I do not believe what I wrote is misleading

1. The EGM was held
2. No financial information was provided
3. The Governing body did endorse the Executive

Nothing untrue or misleading at all there.
I agree with you when you suggest it was daft to stop the Governing body meeting going ahead, have not a clue why either.

But lets return to point 2 No financial info was provided at the EGM. When asked the Chairman’s first response was “ you are not entitled to a financial statement” What a thing to say to the governing body, says a lot about what is thought of the governing body does it not. After a bit of back and forward chat that was moderated to none could be presented due to the lack of a treasurer at the time.. Now please Think on what you have just written, You have just said that the financial information could have been presented to the governing body meeting if it took place on that day but was withheld from the EGM. Read your post

The Executive have the power to act for the Association between Governing Body Meetings. The Executive granted authority to the Litigation Committee due to “confidentiality” issues. Anyone in attendance on the 6th of August will know why.

Again completely Incorrect. The motion that was passed by the governing body ensures that any legal case being considered has first to be given approval by that body. There are no confidentially issues around that at all. The Executive or part of the Executive did not have authority to give a go ahead over the express wishes of the governing body.

Likewise the Executive did what they did based on legal advice to protect the interests of the Association They too also acted, always properly, within the constitution, they did their job

Incorrect, they exceeded their authority, see previous point.
I have raised valid questions about the legal advise given. As can be seen from the court findings that advise has cost someone dearly and has resulted I suggest in further widening a rift within the Association.
Look at the court decision. While I cannot post the exact wording here is the jist of just 2 paragraphs.
The court was of the view that the injunction application and proceedings were completely FLAWED. The application was so poor it would not even get to the stage where the courts could apply even the standard test for the granting of an injunction.
The suggestion that a discussion on legal cases a group were party could either constitute contempt of court or could not be discussed by the governing body was daft and incorrect.
If the executive are taking poor legal advice then it is incumbent on the organisation to change that. Yes I do believe that the NARGC solicitors should and must attend the AGM to answer questions on their performance or lack of it. Obviously the executive are not doing it.

Your estimation. We shall see. Way out I think.

I hope for someone’s sake that you are correct, As another post suggests it may be much higher. We really do not know. NARGC does know their costs to date and it would be easy for them to get the other sides estimation so someone could put together a ball park figure. As the next court date is the 6th Oct on costs the data should be available for the EGM. I expect an estimate anyway. That is if the AGM happens given the recent incident.

Again there is context here to what was happening to the recordings of meetings.
as per presentation 6th August.

I agree with you however there is also the fact to consider that at many meetings the minutes are queried as to accuracy and that is why the recording by only one person was decided on with the recording being destroyed after the minutes were adapted.
In any event it is not relevant anyway as the motion was passed to allow recording by one person by the governing body at a previous meeting and that instruction can only be altered at a similar meeting. It cannot be altered at an EGM.

Also at that EGM the first and most important point was the financial report. This Executive has worked very hard along with the Finance Committee to bring order to the Associations finances. There was no Treasurer in situ. If the Governing Body meeting had gone ahead a financial report would have been issued.

Again conflicting statement that suggests wrongdoing in my estimate. You are saying that the financial report could not be given to one meeting but could and would be given to one about an hour later.

Can you imagine what the five counties would have said/done if the EGM that they fought for in court was deferred pending appointment of a Treasurer? Seriously? We would be in court the following day? More money, more waste!

I agree with you on more money, more waste, you have I think given the five counties something to ponder on though given that they fought through the courts to get the EGM and its main point of getting proper financial information was denied at the EGM. My personal opinion stands though that without the financial info the EGM was a waste of time.

Incorrect. Independent Investigator appointed and worked steadily on the task in hand. The time frame offered was based on her initial estimation of delivery date. Due to work load/summer holidays the delivery date has been pushed back. Not the fault of the Chairman or Executive but used as a stick to beat them with anyway.

Completely disagree with you
Actually the original is a correct statement. If the correct information was provided to the members and correct updates on progress then there would not be any issue. The process is required and must go on but members must be kept informed. Not sure what you mean by someone using it as a stick to beat the Officers with but if you mean that I personally think that accurate information flow to members is not happening then yes I am guilty of that.

As a former officer of the Association you should know how the Association works. Financial Reports distributed at the last Governing Body meeting prior to the AGM. (The various RGC took away their boxes on Saturday).The detailed financial report is given at the AGM by the Treasurer and is confidential to members. This was the way it was done when the last Treasurer was there.

Lets not make assumptions, a former officer of the association I am not. Neither am I taking one side or the other.

Bang on. Rumours. I heard rumours that many costs are down on prior years. Rumours. Audited accounts at the AGM. Full financial disclosure.

Look forward to it, warts and all. Great to know exactly where we stand finally.

Interesting, are you talking about the guys that derailed the gravy train, cried stop to some of the unnecessary spending and shone a light where there was none or are you talking about the members of the Executive that had their antics detailed in the presentation on the 6th of August? I know which way I am voting.

Actually everyone at executive level that breaks the Association rules and does not abide by the constitution full stop. Executive members and Officers should give best example and show best practice and need to be competent at their job..

Sparks

mannlicher, that's extremely hard to read. Can I suggest you edit it to clearly mark out what you're saying and what you're replying to? The

tags are how that's usually done.

Sparks

Also, folks, believe me when I say I understand the cynicism being expressed sotto voce and otherwise about an individual's health, but knock it off please. The specific infectious disease being cited (and that gossip is doing the rounds about someone's specific healthcare details is pretty ****ty by the way) is actually out there at the moment, a member of my family has just been hospitalised recently with it (happily now fully recovered) and it's not a laughing matter, it really is a life-threatening illness.

berettaman

mannlicher666 wrote: »

I have been a long term NARGC member and have held many officer posts. .

Lets not make assumptions, a former officer of the association I am not. Neither am I taking one side or the other.

I am sorry if you think I pulled that I thought you were previously an officer from thin air i was going by your first statement above.

I will go through the rest of your post when I have time. You are very well versed on a "breaking" situation.

A person feels that they have been defamed. I would say that one would be hard to prove. Is it not just more of the same tactics?

You are laying heavy blame on this Executive for being in court twice doing what they felt was best for the Association. Did you similarly cry foul when there was a succession of cases in previous years?

cavan shooter

mannlicher666 wrote:

That is if the AGM happens given the recent incident.

Go on ye good thing....after the EGM in August I put a E50 bet on with one of our County Delegates that there will be no AGM that a rabitt would be pulled from someone's arse and an injunction sought on some spurious reason.....drinks on me!!!.....get in there..

cavan shooter

Backbarrel wrote: »

Ok..

I missed Saturday. Any Craic?

How did the new Treasurer get on? Did any one make a serious pitch for election?

Did anyone make a show of themselves? No names just vague ish descriptions will do..:D

From what I hear it was predictable and yes the usual ones made a show of themselves..cue face palms and cringes

Backbarrel

cavan shooter wrote: »

From what I hear it was predictable and yes the usual ones made a show of themselves..cue face palms and cringes

Had a chat today with an offaly lad that was at the meeting last Saturday.. he said he wanted the ground to open up and swallow him. He was mortified at the antics of you know who.
He said he won't go again until a couple of the rgcs change delegates..

The abuse the executive and. Chairman got was awful disrespectful..

cavan shooter

Backbarrel wrote:

Had a chat today with an offaly lad that was at the meeting last Saturday.. he said he wanted the ground to open up and swallow him. He was mortified at the antics of you know who. He said he won't go again until a couple of the rgcs change delegates..

God no...please tell him to help change the delegates.Tell him to go to every meeting so he can see the messing.

berettaman

Backbarrel wrote: »

Had a chat today with an offaly lad that was at the meeting last Saturday.. he said he wanted the ground to open up and swallow him. He was mortified at the antics of you know who.
He said he won't go again until a couple of the rgcs change delegates..

The abuse the executive and. Chairman got was awful disrespectful..

Was there a complete lack of respect shown to the Chairman before the meeting yes.
Was there a small minority that had nothing good to say. Yes.

But it is vital that as many members go to meetings and ask questions. If your delegates don't know get the contacts off the website and ring some of the lads on there.

The abuse is because this group know the game is up..end of story..

richiedel123

mannlicher666 wrote: »

"[Take the most recent incident created last weekend. I am given to understand that the annual report apparently contains a grave accusation against William Egan which he considers defamatory. All annual reports issued are asked by him to remain unissued and any issued are to be returned. Failure to do so will result in legal action.
Another probable case which will drain our coffers. it further cements what I regard as the unsuitability of the present executive to remain"

What I would like to know here is how mannlicher has this information before anybody else gets it?
Also I was talking to my county secretary today when I seen this come up today and he said he received a letter this morning with no name on it just a post mark. In it was photocopied private e mails between 2 parties. i don't want to know how they got a copy of these private e mails but surely there is some sort of informer out there leaking them
To me in my opinion it looks like somebody is trying to stop the agm and derail the organisation by causing a huge split in it

I agree with you on more money, more waste, you have I think given the five counties something to ponder on though given that they fought through the courts to get the EGM and its main point of getting proper financial information was denied at the EGM. My personal opinion stands though that without the financial info the EGM was a waste of time

I was at that egm and in my opinion from what I seen the main point was not to get financial information. The main point was the vote of confidence in the standing executive. When the governing body gave a overwhelming vote of confidence in the executive all the remaining points of the egm were dismissed by the 5 counties and the egm was over.

MrTom1

Just a question here lads, god forbid happens Mr Crofton and I mean that I wouldn't want to see anyone go through what's happening to him now but if he doesn't make what happens to the reports / judgments etc etc . A bit morbid but it was brought up tonight and thought never crossed my mind

cavan shooter

MrTom1 wrote: »

Just a question here lads, god forbid happens Mr Crofton and I mean that I wouldn't want to see anyone go through what's happening to him now but if he doesn't make what happens to the reports / judgments etc etc . A bit morbid but it was brought up tonight and thought never crossed my mind

Lets be honest and I know things get hot tempered and we all say things in haste, but nobody wants to see him ill. I am minded of Othello's speech "I have done the state some service......."

mannlicher666

richiedel123 wrote:

What I would like to know here is how mannlicher has this information before anybody else gets it?

I got my information from my delegate who received the mail/letter.I understand all County Bodies got a letter. I did not post until i had seen same with the attendant delays before posting. I may have been the first to post but certainly was not the first person who posts on this forum to know about it so suggesting i got my info before anyone else is ridiculous. Incedentally the Executive has still to the best of my knowledge not issued instructions as to what to do with all the Annual Reports, Something like that needs to have controls put in place right away not days later.

Also I was talking to my county secretary today when I seen this come up today and he said he received a letter this morning with no name on it just a post mark. In it was photocopied private e mails between 2 parties. i don't want to know how they got a copy of these private e mails but surely there is some sort of informer out there leaking them

Perhaps you might let us know the gist of what the the other letters were, there are rumblings that all counties again got them but cannot comment until i see them.

To me in my opinion it looks like somebody is trying to stop the agm and derail the organisation by causing a huge split in it

I think that your opinion about someone trying to de-rail the AGM is incorrect. Nothing to be gained i believe and stupid to do. if you are talking about the snafu regarding the daft insertion of a potential defamatory item in the Annual Report i would think that it was picked up on immediately and nothing more than that. Something like that should never pass an Executive review. If you are talking about other events i have no present knowledge of same so please enlighten us.

On a different matter, the Injunction Costs, i seem to remember that the decision as to who was to pay was scheduled to be up for mention today, anyone know what happened?

cavan shooter

Mute point annual reports are normally issued to Club secretaries at the county meeting after the AGM. In Cavan that will be towards backend of week since we had ours last week. I put bets on the boxes of annual reports are in the house of our Secretary and secretaries of other counties.

mannlicher666

Just checked the court services web site.

The following info appears
05/10/2016 ADV MS JUSTICE MURPHY 0035 Order

Looks like an order was made assigning costs, anyone have details?

cavan shooter

mannlicher666 wrote:

The following info appears 05/10/2016 ADV MS JUSTICE MURPHY 0035 Order

mannlicher666 wrote:

Just checked the court services web site.

mannlicher666 wrote:

Looks like an order was made assigning costs, anyone have details?

Since you have it post it. But Let me guess

1. As the NARGC are suing themselves costs for the 5 disident counties assigned to the NARGC. Has not the argument being from day one from them "They are representing the fears of their own Counties"

2. As Director is an Employee of same NARGC and a lay litigant costs awarded.

<mod snip>

berettaman

mannlicher666 wrote: »

Just checked the court services web site.

The following info appears
05/10/2016 ADV MS JUSTICE MURPHY 0035 Order

Looks like an order was made assigning costs, anyone have details?

Given that it is so recent how can we hope to have any details yet?

I am sanguine about this. Those 5 counties, misguided or not thought they were doing the right thing. The Executive thought the same. It is only right that the costs will be picked up by the Association-as the judge remarked- you appear to be suing yourselves..

Two thoughts:
1. Any costs incurred will be heavily scrutinised by an independent cost accountant no doubt.
2. If the case had gone the other way do you the 5 counties would have been left hanging? I do not believe that would have been allowed.

All change is difficult. This Association has gone through major changes in the last 18months and is all the better for it. There has been much dialogue with members of the 5 counties..a lot of good is coming from that.

As an Association we are getting there-and some don't like it!;)

cavan shooter

berettaman wrote:

As an Association we are getting there-and some don't like it!

Dats rite...every few years you spend a small fortune on Skips cleaning **** out of the attic and garage. I suppose it's the legal equivalent for the NARGC

mannlicher666

Cavan Shooter you are correct on spending a small fortune

I believe that the most recent NARGC High Court Case is over. That is the one where William Egan believed that a defamatory article was contained within the Annual Report. I understand that he personally took a case against the Chairman of the NARGC. The outcome appears to be that William Egan won once again [mod snip on the grounds that this information seems to have been inaccurate and therefore some of the post could be considered defamatory]

I also understand that at the general meeting on the 6th Oct members of the committee and of the governing body were working from at least 3 different iterations of the NARGC’s constitution. That then resulted in up to date copies being issued by post afterwards. In this instance I would have expected that they would have been told that the constitution on the web site was the most recent one and they could download it from there. A saving on both the print and the postage. Ridiculous anyway that at that level of our management a snafu of that sort should arise. I would call this depletion of our finances rather than minding and reducing them.
Another motion that was adapted I understand at the general meeting on the 06th Oct is related to disciplinary action. A suggestion was made that should several members who are going for election be successful in that election of officers then they would be disciplined. What sort of dangerous politics are we playing at, that sort of crap is what leads us to the High Court. If a member or officer has committed an offense that requires a disciplinary procedure to be brought under our constitution then they should be disciplined and the process started immediately. Threats like that based on a what if inevitably lead to Court and once again NARGC would be on the back foot given that history I would expect.
I notice that no one has posted on what the letters posted anonymously to a large group of NARGC members were about. I also understand that this was mentioned at the meeting on the 6th Oct where one of the letters was produced but the Chairman ruled it out of order and it was not discussed. The e mails or letters contained in that mailing seem to be about differences of opinion between the NARGC Chairman and our Director’s solicitor about whether additional access is given to our Directors files and offices. My understanding is that on one hand our Chairman wishes access which is understandable if files are contained within, that concern ongoing and urgent NARGC business. On the other hand our Director is very sick and in an induced coma thus not capable of giving direction and his solicitor has already asked for a list of the cases that our Chairman requires access to but has received no information back. My personal view is that the present situation not be aggravated further at all. I believe that it would both be in bad taste and a decision that could have large legal ramifications. These e mails originated prior to the last general meeting and should have been discussed under correspondence.
Interestingly I understand that the Governing body at the last meeting gave the Chairman and Executive full permission to handle this as they deemed fit. Over a year ago that same Governing Body was going hell for leather about the Executive having too much power and now they are increasing their powers.
Hopefully today at the AGM we will get a full financial disclosure and update. It is a pity that one could not have gotten a preview of the financials to study beforehand and formulate questions.

cavan shooter

He lost.

Judged refused to give him what he wanted as a good will gesture and as was offered on last week on a without prejudice basis the motion put in by wicklow was pulled....awful waste of money your right but looking at things here today at the AGM. There is light at the end of the Tunnel.

Hope DC gets better soon. There is an independent investigation stalled at the minute and it's only fair he gets to have his say.

And The hon. Treasurer is in the middle of the financial report now. Hard to hear from the back but the gravy boat is over.

Sparks

mannlicher, you appear to be posting about several items which took place at a meeting which was not public. If you are speculating on what transpired, then those comments are probably over the line of what would be considered defamatory. Can you either remove them or confirm you actually have copies of minutes or transcripts of this meeting or were present. I normally would not ask, and I'm not asking you to identify yourself, but the environment at the moment is exceptionally litigious, even by the standards of Irish sport and that has to be kept in mind when reading posts like that.

cavan shooter

And the results from the NARGC AGM and forgive me if I'm mistaken as it's hard to hear.

Michael Fenlon - Chairman 36/20
Dan Curley - Vice Chair 35/21
Paul Doran -Treasurer - 41/14
Seamus O Brien- Secretary
Ray Devine- Dep fund admin 36/20
John Flannery - Safety Officer 35/20
Ger Burns- Game Development 34/20
Seamus Heraty Vermin officer.
Padraig breen- youth development

Another overwhelming endorsement of the Executive. Tom O Donnell and Margaret Neill all gone.

Executive is
John Toal, Paddy Flynn, Pat Donlon, John Butler didn't catch the last

MrTom1

Where is the agm this year

cavan shooter

MrTom1 wrote:

Where is the agm this year

Tullamore Court. ..I'm in the bar

Backbarrel

mannlicher666 wrote: »

Hopefully today at the AGM we will get a full financial disclosure and update. It is a pity that one could not have gotten a preview of the financials to study beforehand and formulate questions.

The financials were in a separate booklet to the annual report so there was no problem giving them out. Did your county not distribute them?

We looked at the accounts . Audited by Grant Thornton. Looks in order but we were mandated to ask a few questions anyway.

Went to the AGM.

The New National Treasurer presented the accounts slide show presentation on the lot. He was on his feet for about an hour I would say. He went through the financials in great detail answering most of the queries that we had as part of his presentation. He has been the Hon Treasurer since August 6th mind and the speculation before hand was that he would say" that was before my time i don't know anything about that."

Well i can tell you this: I have never seen a more informative a detailed presentation on finance ever. He didn't talk from on high, he spoke in laymans language and laid out the entire year with detailed information as to why an expense was up or down on previous year. For the first time I can say hand on heart that I know how our finances work.

The auditor was there and he only had to answer one question as the Hon. Treasurer completely and openly detailed everything that had gone through the books.

The delegates beside me were not from counties that would traditionally vote for this guy but even they said "F@$k me he knows his stuff.." I said "Lads, He's a Chartered Accountant..and he is up for this"


Some delegates threw some questions at him for the sake of form but he gave detailed answers to all. He was a force.

Delighted for him because he was knocking on the door for many years. very decent guy.

Backbarrel

cavan shooter wrote: »

Tullamore Court. ..I'm in the bar

Tell you one thing.. this Association is fueled on strong whiskey and tall tales!!

I heard more stories about dogs, guns, pheasants ducks etc but do you know what, it was better on Saturday than on Friday. I was a bit of a divided camp thing on the Friday night! Bad vibe, lotsa tension..

cavan shooter

Hopefully that's the end of all the legal ****. I was chatting to lads Saturday night from the other counties but not players one lad said it was personal at this stage and it has to stop.

That if the Chair says white someone will counter just to be a cnut. There not ogres and it's time for the olive branch. One way or the other time moves on and there is work to be done...

p28559

cavan shooter wrote: »

Hopefully that's the end of all the legal ****. I was chatting to lads Saturday night from the other counties but not players one lad said it was personal at this stage and it has to stop.

That if the Chair says white someone will counter just to be a cnut. There not ogres and it's time for the olive branch. One way or the other time moves on and there is work to be done...

players and cnuts does not equal olive branch language.

cavan shooter

p28559 wrote: »

cavan shooter wrote: »

Hopefully that's the end of all the legal ****. I was chatting to lads Saturday night from the other counties but not players one lad said it was personal at this stage and it has to stop.

That if the Chair says white someone will counter just to be a cnut. There not ogres and it's time for the olive branch. One way or the other time moves on and there is work to be done...

players and cnuts does not equal olive branch language.

terms of endearment,

p28559

cavan shooter wrote: »

terms of endearment,

I miss understood you so...lot of that going around these days....

grassroot1

Maybe its time to inject a bit of positivity into this thread.
What areas or issues should the NARGC be working at on the behalf of their shooting members.

berettaman

grassroot1 wrote: »

Maybe its time to inject a bit of positivity into this thread.
What areas or issues should the NARGC be working at on the behalf of their shooting members.

Couldn't agree more. This Executive is after being backed by the Governing Body in a big way. Now hopefully they will have a year without too much drama to get stuck into the work that needs to be done.

A properly run Game meat handling course needs to be out back up and running thats for one thing..
Any other ideas? Items on a wish list?(Within Reason):p

Vegeta

Use of callers for foxes
Relax the derogations for magpies and grey crows

That's two off the top of my head in 5 seconds of thought

cavan shooter

Vegeta wrote: »

Use of callers for foxes
Relax the derogations for magpies and grey crows

That's two off the top of my head in 5 seconds of thought

AND WERE OFF.........lets keep it to a max 5 each to start
1. better support/lobbying with the PTB fighting to stop the wanton destruction of good habitat which is happening.
2. A more "substitution" friendly firearms licensing system...a Firearm is a firearm.
3. A more open approach to membership......"can I join the gun club...no Fek orf" Gun Clubs will be gone in another 20 years....unless you can hold a seance. Need a more National structure.
4. Promotion of the sport and hunting in general.....the last time the NARGC representative was on the Telly, (Prime time) he was embarrassingly ill prepared ganged up on and pistol whipped by a politician and MOC.
5. More help to Clubs from the NARGC Game keeper Grouse or not, most of us are pheasant hunters can we actually focus on that for a while.
As far as the Leitrim site is concerned a couple of lads from that country reckons the only grouse to be found up there is on a scotch bottle on the shelf of Supervalue or the rainbow ballroom