CPSA Articles of Association - details now published

[** Pending Removal **]

Maybe it would be better to say 'duck it'......do what you want.....get all the independent directors in and amalgamate with British Shooting......clear out the aged and start again with bright young city things......and all in the shooting world will be better......we will see shooting as a subject in schools, massive government funding now that we are all one organisation, hand gun shooting back in the UK, vast new government backed shooting grounds with academy's in each of the 5 regions just like abroad with a minimum of 8 layouts, restaurant, showers and lounges.......ok, our membership is now £1000 per year...but we have caught up with the golf style life....

Competitions are all fair ....no cheating, brilliant accurate refs.....prize money is now over £50k each major....and televised .....!! BBC breakfast interviews a shooter each week........Digweed is made a Lord......Fauld is made a Knight if the realm...........I won the ZZ World and had to drive the enormous cup home through Europe in a Ferrari .................

Oh bugger..........wake up.....................!!!!!!.........it is a bloody dream isn't it..............?????

Oh bugger.........it seemed so real :laugh:

 

[maddmatt]

1) when it went Ltd it was for the limited liability of those who stood as directors. It was never done to give away the members assets. There was no mention al the time that member no longer owned or had a say in what happens to their assets.

2) there is no mortgage . It is a charge to protect the credit card payment facility.

NIc - no chance the charge is to protect the credit card payment facility, I have worked in payment processing and the security is held with the bank that cards are acquired through. Any charge levied against a company must be for a debt.

 

[** Pending Removal **]

I assure you it is to do with the facility we have for taking membership by credit card........I was a director of the association and specifically asked the question about debt. We have no debt. If you pull out the last accounts in Pull mag you will see and explanation for it there.

 

[maddmatt]

Well looks like another example of HQ not having a clue, I could go in to details but it would take the thread off topic rather quickly.

Currently as it stands the members have asset rights, ownership or even governance rights as I see it, yes the current articles allow for individual voting rights for appointments, but for everything else it comes down to a board decision. But I can't help but think the changes will be introduced regardless of what the Regions, Counties or members say, may take a couple of goes but in the end it will happen, not being defeatist just a realistic.

In its current state the CPSA is almost not fit for purpose, lots of initiatives seem to be dreamt up, lots spent on salaries and lots spent on legal fees! Of course this is just my personal opinion...

 

[** Pending Removal **]

You are quite right.....very soon we will have no vote at all.....when the non-elected independent directors take over the whole job.....

Mark my word people......2-5 years down the road.....your rights are history...!!

 

[** Pending Removal **]

Oh dear..... It seems that although we made it clear at both our SER meeting and in our comments document to HQ after the consultation meeting ....the document sent to all the regions showing each regions responses did not reflect the detailed document sent to HQ. Instead it suggested a split in our region .....I will post this document later today so that you can all see how 'your' region spoke for 'you'....whether you knew they had or not.

What a great consultation this is turning out to be....spin ...spin...spin...

 

[NedFlanders]

I have started my examination of the proposed new articles and immediately struck by the following clauses

Part 3 5.1( B) "of resonnable and proper out of pocket expenses........." who decides what is reasonnable and proper, where is the definition of this term?

This is then linked to Part 5 31.3 and 31.4. The directors decide who can see the books and under what conditions, and "No member who is not a director has a right to inspect any account or book or document ....."

Are these clauses standard for this type of association which in essence belongs to the members?? If not then members are being denied the right to examine the expense records of the directors and staff.

Can anybody with more detailed knowledge of the CPSA than me tell me if this has always ben the case?

 

[RobertBeard]

I have not looked at the current Articles but the key words missing here IMHO as a Chartered Accountant are:-

"wholly, necessarily and exclusively incurred out of pocket expenses that have been AUTHORISED"

In the case of a director then one would expect the Board to sanction a trip abroad in advance and the reasons for it and set a budget for the cost.  A director could not just decide to go on a jolly and claim the cost unless previously authorised and the costs incurred were wholly, necessarily and exclusively incurred for the benefit of the CPSA.

 

[NedFlanders]

I have not looked at the current Articles but the key words missing here IMHO as a Chartered Accountant are:-

"wholly, necessarily and exclusively incurred out of pocket expenses that have been AUTHORISED"

In the case of a director then one would expect the Board to sanction a trip abroad in advance and the reasons for it and set a budget for the cost.  A director could not just decide to go on a jolly and claim the cost unless previously authorised and the costs incurred were wholly, necessarily and exclusively incurred for the benefit of the CPSA.

Thanks Robert, good point in am going to include something like your wording in my comments on the review form which is on the CPSA web site now. I am ploughing through it but have to stop from time to time to do some proper work :nyam:

 

[** Pending Removal **]

The important ones to deal with are the articles that take away the current rights of the members.....lets look at them.

Firstly.........the vote to elect the Chairman and Vice Chairman....!

this vote is being taken off 'us' the members and is giving the vote to the board directors only.

Apparently it is being spun .....that we do not know enough about the Directors of the Board....to know who to vote for...!

But hang on.........we are the ones who vote for the directors....!

This I find is a very very strange thing to say because......'we' the membership 'elect' the directors.......so why does the CEO say in his notes....that we not know enough about them now.........??

It does not make sense.....

Oh......wait a minute....... :laugh: we must remember.......that at the moment.....the 'membership' have not elected any of the current directors..........ALL the current directors have 'walked on to the board unopposed'......!! Not one has gone through a ballot for their current 3 year tenure.....because no one else stood against them.....!

Ah.......so 'this' is the reason that they want to remove our right to elect our own National Chairman.....?

A decision taken by 'directors that have not been actually elected by the membership'......who want to take our vote away and have a closed shop, pass the parcel system.

If you were to explain this to any of your current employers peeps.......they would laugh.....and say you are having a laugh.....they would not believe that any one would vote for this article.....unless they were really....really....and I mean really 'stupid'.....!!

 

[** Pending Removal **]

Secondly......

And this is a compound problem so pay attention :smile: those of you who are interested enough about your association.

This involves several articles that make up the danger.

1) The new minimum number of elected directors as 5 and

2) The new independent directors who are un elected by the membership....BUT....they have a vote.

3) And the article that allows the board to change rules without coming back to an AGM for approval of the membership.

4) the article that allows the directors to vote to remove a director -citing now in the 2nd draft....the code of conduct.....but who operates the code of conduct.......THE DIRECTORS......so in other words......they can gang together to remove someone they do not want.

Add these together and you get the start point.....8 elected Directors plus 2 independent non elected directors plus (taken out at the minute....but will reappear as soon as the new draft is passed....because of the 'we can alter the rules as we see fit' new article :laugh: ) 2 co-opted 'people/director' all with a vote.

How soon do you think it would be before it was decided that the board was too big. After all the SRA (Sports Recreational Alliance - the sports governance body that the directors have signed an agreement with) state a preferable board of 7 with an independent Chairman.

So over a short time.....we could see 5 regional directors disappearing as being unnecessary (after all......the poor regions and counties are struggling to keep their committees going.....so why not look at other ways of doing it :laugh: ) Bye bye regional directors...! (Phew ...glad we had that voting off article put in :laugh: )

That leaves 3 national directors and 2 independent directors and maybe the 2 co-opts = 7 (as recommended by SRA)......

Ooooooh now hang on here.......3 elected to 4 non elected......we can now never get rid of the non elected because they are now the majority vote on the Board......and even if they retire each 2 years.....they can vote on another independent 'elect' before they retire.

Bye bye Cpsa.......!!!

Our members now have totally lost any control of their association AND assets. (Remember we only turned into a limited company to protect the volunteer directors....and not to say bye bye to our money in the bank or asset)....HELLO 'new single body organisation' ......British Shooting or 'similar'......here take all our assets and money......and do the best you can with it :wink:

(Point of fact here -Cpsa are the most successful NGB ...they are the ones with the experienced staff and huge amounts of assets. Quangos (like British Shooting) are always on their uppers.....with a last farthing in the bank and dependant on the government handouts to survive. What a gem the Cpsa must look like.....plus....catch the Cpsa....and you then catch the Welsh, the Scottish and the N Irish).

Hmmmmmmm we do have a lot of potential Bye Bye's when you add a few of these new articles together don't we??

And because of the ambiguity........the article does not say that the above cannot be done.

Very cosy...... This has been a plan in existence for a long time.

If you go back a few years to my old threads on the subjects of governance.....you will see that everything I warned could happen....HAS happened in these new draft articles.

Read it and weap folks......the end is nigh.......and you brought it on yourselves thanks to apathy.....

This totally unelected 'by anyone' Board now knows that it can do what it wants.......and no matter what it is........you will do nothing...!

:laugh:

I really do not know why I am taking the time.....like a few others are.....to point out the obvious..!

Think I will also join the 'I do not care' brigade.......I just want to shoot .

 

[Les53]

Secondly......

And this is a compound problem so pay attention :smile: those of you who are interested enough about your association.

This involves several articles that make up the danger.

1) The new minimum number of elected directors as 5 and

2) The new independent directors who are un elected by the membership....BUT....they have a vote.

3) And the article that allows the board to change rules without coming back to an AGM for approval of the membership.

4) the article that allows the directors to vote to remove a director -citing now in the 2nd draft....the code of conduct.....but who operates the code of conduct.......THE DIRECTORS......so in other words......they can gang together to remove someone they do not want.

Add these together and you get the start point.....8 elected Directors plus 2 independent non elected directors plus (taken out at the minute....but will reappear as soon as the new draft is passed....because of the 'we can alter the rules as we see fit' new article :laugh: ) 2 co-opted 'people/director' all with a vote.

How soon do you think it would be before it was decided that the board was too big. After all the SRA (Sports Recreational Alliance - the sports governance body that the directors have signed an agreement with) state a preferable board of 7 with an independent Chairman.

So over a short time.....we could see 5 regional directors disappearing as being unnecessary (after all......the poor regions and counties are struggling to keep their committees going.....so why not look at other ways of doing it :laugh: ) Bye bye regional directors...! (Phew ...glad we had that voting off article put in :laugh: )

That leaves 3 national directors and 2 independent directors and maybe the 2 co-opts = 7 (as recommended by SRA)......

Ooooooh now hang on here.......3 elected to 4 non elected......we can now never get rid of the non elected because they are now the majority vote on the Board......and even if they retire each 2 years.....they can vote on another independent 'elect' before they retire.

Bye bye Cpsa.......!!!

Our members now have totally lost any control of their association AND assets. (Remember we only turned into a limited company to protect the volunteer directors....and not to say bye bye to our money in the bank or asset)....HELLO 'new single body organisation' ......British Shooting or 'similar'......here take all our assets and money......and do the best you can with it :wink:

(Point of fact here -Cpsa are the most successful NGB ...they are the ones with the experienced staff and huge amounts of assets. Quangos (like British Shooting) are always on their uppers.....with a last farthing in the bank and dependant on the government handouts to survive. What a gem the Cpsa must look like.....plus....catch the Cpsa....and you then catch the Welsh, the Scottish and the N Irish).

Hmmmmmmm we do have a lot of potential Bye Bye's when you add a few of these new articles together don't we??

And because of the ambiguity........the article does not say that the above cannot be done.

Very cosy...... This has been a plan in existence for a long time.

If you go back a few years to my old threads on the subjects of governance.....you will see that everything I warned could happen....HAS happened in these new draft articles.

Read it and weap folks......the end is nigh.......and you brought it on yourselves thanks to apathy.....

This totally unelected 'by anyone' Board now knows that it can do what it wants.......and no matter what it is........you will do nothing...!

:laugh:

I really do not know why I am taking the time.....like a few others are.....to point out the obvious..!

Think I will also join the 'I do not care' brigade.......I just want to shoot .

Nic I fear you are correct, I doubt if I will renew my membership. I can get cheap insurance from various sources, which is what I will probably do!

 

[smallbore]

So here is the $64,000 question........why don't we propose an alternate Articles of Association at the EGM?

The other thing that might be useful, is if we put up some candidates to stand against the un-elected Directors who are currently in post. If you make the Chairman (and of course the Independent non-voting Directors) a separately membership-elected post, that also has some merit and should give the members more trust in the board.

REMEMBER: THE ONE REAL ISSUE IS THAT NOBODY TRUSTS THE BOARD. If we had trust, the issues in the Articles would be pretty much irrelevant.

I, for one, have already responded to both consultations and contributed to both my region's responses (East Midlands).

All I want is a trustworthy board that represents the members interests in an open, ethical, legal and transparent way.

Best regards

Bob Meadows

 

[** Pending Removal **]

The Articles are the key. One will not know what sort of Board we will have in the future. 10 years from now if the Cpsa still exists it may be a good board or a bad board...who knows.....BUT ....robust articles that are clear and transparent are the mechanism that will run and protect the members asset.

At an EGM you cannot offer up alternatives......and EGM is for a specific vote (see Artices).

I could not care less 'who' runs the Cpsa .....so long as the members rights are not affected and they keep within the Articles.

These new changes make us ripe for an amalgamation into another body....as I keep saying.

When these Artices get through.....the next thing will be a reduction of the quantity on the Board plus an attempt to make us into a Charity.....because it is impossible to amalgamate 2 charities with a limited company. (NRA and NSRA are charities).

Any county committee secretary who has recieved the email today from British Shootings representative asking for details of our counties......and the form to be filled in.......will appreciate that 'this' is the start....!!

What business is it of British Shooting to gain detailed information about all our counties??

Take over here we come......thanks for your money folks.........boy this was easy......glad that apathy made it possible.......(said an unidentified member of a sports body....some time soon).

Well I have been warning of this day for at least 3 years now.......HERE IT IS....!!

Enjoy :laugh:

 

[Hotshot100]

And now with the questionnaire that's being sent to all of the regions and counties it's pretty obvious what they're up to. Couldn't even wait until the articles are in place until they start the ball rolling.

Funny how they ignore the regions and counties until they need information that they don't have. They state that it will take 10-15 minutes to complete. Having seen some of the questions ,which no one will be able to answer accurately, I think it would take months.

 

[** Pending Removal **]

NATSS........by the back door.

 

[Angelfire]

NATSS........by the back door.

I thought NATSS had been put to death.

Phil*

 

[RobertBeard]

It was the CPSA who apparently pulled out of NATSS which caused NATSS to fail - well that was the story given to NSRA members!

If we were a charity we could take advantage of gift aid on subscriptions etc which would increase funds - the Board seem to have missed a trick here!  Certainly the NSRA benefits from gift aid.

The CPSA is already treated by HM Revenue and Customs as a mutual trading association so does not pay corporation tax on trading income, only investment income.  Thus the members funds are already statute barred from ever being returned to members under tax law as a quid pro quo for tax free status on trading income!  I ask again who seriously believes that they will ever get any money back from the CPSA?  If it goes bust there won't be any money left in any event!

I have no faith in the current board or the articles or the rationale for them but you have to realise the above - the principal reason is to comply with Sport England and the doling out of funding and for the directors to secure their positions and to reduce members influence.

Think about the NRA of America - they are all in it together and they all stick together and they are such a force that the government cannot impose legislation as it gets turned down.  We will never get that but we must reduce the number of shooting organisations to get more influence and an important part of that is for us all to stick together.  Not like when pistols were banned.  The government likes to divide and conquer!  Next they will pick on shotgunners by banning lead!

There are way more interpretations on what could happen or why this is being done that has so far been said!

 

[** Pending Removal **]

1. Cpsa did not pull out of Natss. They stood back whilst NRA and NSRA were having a bitchfest.. And when the facilitators money ran out after a year...and they wanted members money to carry on...we said 'no thanks we are not wasting our own' ......true story..! I was on board at the time.

2. We are a 'not for profit' organisation. We can only earn money from our members and spend it back on our members....true story .....our accountant presented same at the Board meetings....true story....I was there...!

3. No one is saying that Cpsa will go bust....we are talking about giving the money away in an amalgamation....just saying...! Why do you think that the comment about giving to charity etc has been put in.

Lots of ways to sell a sows ear as a silk purse..!

 

[Salopian]

Come on Members wake up ! For those of you who say " I am not really bothered, I just want to shoot and have my scores recorded." Or anything similar, please realise that if Our association continues on this path you will have no say or influence in your own future.

Because of the poor performance of the current Board, I have proposed that they resign or are dismissed, and a new Board is elected by the membership after candidates have submitted applications that could be scrutinised by the membership and duly balloted and elected.

That, I am informed is not practical and illegal???????

Could someone explain why?

Because the only thing I can see that is illegal, is the current conduct of the Board, and that is a Criminal waste of time, money and energy.

Ask yourself this simple question, if your association is on a collision course to disaster, driven by a non-compliant board, should the culprits not be removed before it is too late? What on Earth is illegal about that?