The AGM

[** Pending Removal **]

Yes agreed ......You and Michael did not charge anything....but I have no idea if any charges will be made by the Honarary Solicitor or her husband apart from no doubt the accommodation in the Hilton if they stayed for either of the two nights.

I was absolutely gobsmacked to find out in the meeting that the Board had spent up to now a total of £32,000 on taking the EMR complaint to arbitration when the EMRC on the other side did not employ any legal team, they only had the common sense of their committee members involved to put all statement of claim and skeleton arguments and witness statements which the arbitrator praised as being well put together.

The ERMC had always only asked for an apology.....the Sports Resolution arbitration was put forward by the Board when the EMRC only asked for an independant panel of members picked from the regions to look at the complaint. They were sent down the arbitration route by the board, when in fact in the end their case only 'technically' failed because it was not possible in the arbitration rules to offer an apology. All this came out at the meeting.

The board have also spent money on the preparation of a proxy that has now been accepted as being unsafe ....plus the printing and postage to send it back....!!

UNBLOODYBELIEVABLE ......!!!!

 

[Angelfire]

Mmmm, or it could be seen as an unsatisfactory end for both sides maybe. Seems like someone threw a blanket over the proceedings and contained the hellfire and brimstone that was expected at the meeting.

 

[** Pending Removal **]

Not so Angel.

Both Sara and myself have stated what happened.

 

[sarachambers]

Let's look forward now... We have the prospect of consultation to members and regional committees culminating in new improved articles to be (hopefully) adopted at an AGM! This should be seen as a freah start and a democratic CPSA going forwards!

 

[sarachambers]

Mmmm, or it could be seen as an unsatisfactory end for both sides maybe. Seems like someone threw a blanket over the proceedings and contained the hellfire and brimstone that was expected at the meeting.

There was plenty of hellfire before a consensus was reached!

 

[** Pending Removal **]

There was plenty of hellfire before a consensus was reached!

........true story..!!

 

[Hotshot100]

Seems like a good result as long as it is now capitalised on. I would think that the board now knows that they can only push so far before the members (well those that are interested) turn on them.

Let's hope that this is the beginnings of a better CPSA.

 

[Hotshot100]

This is a copy of an e mail that I sent to the CPSA via my County Chairman. A reply has been sent to him by Nick Fellows which does not fully answer my questions.
He appears to be hiding behind the fact that if the accountants have accepted it ,then so should the membership.
I have replied saying that the accountants only concern is that the accounts have been kept properly and that no fraud has taken place. This does not mean that the money has been spent wisely or in accordance with the memberships wishes.
I have so far received no further answer but in the light of what has happened today hope that this matter will come to a acceptable conclusion.
 
'I would appreciate it if you would bring up the following at the CPSA AGM.
Having read the accounts for 2012 I am amazed at the very substantial increases in expenditure especially in some of the none specific categories.
 
Why are there now an average of 2 extra head office staff at a cost of an extra £29,733 p.a. As membership has fallen and I can see no tangible benefits of employing more staff an explanation would be appreciated.
 
Staff Training costs have risen by £1,625 p.a. Why? what are these staff being trained to do?
 
There is a new category of consultancy with a cost of £3,500. What are these consultants consulting on?
 
Property repairs and maintenance costs are up by £1,985. As over £18,000 has been spent in the last two years this appears rather high.
 
Telephone and fax costs have risen by a massive £12,697 .Why?
 
General Office Expenses have risen by £14,202. Why is this and what items are covered under this category? £670 per week is a massive amount of money and the make up of this needs to be more detailed.
 
I.T. and development costs, Another massive increase of £14,449, why is this?
 
Website and internet costs. Another big increase of £10,797,  Why is this?
 
AGM and election costs. An increase of 57%  equal to £3,375. Why?
 
Membership costs. What items are included in this? Another increase of £6,384.
 
Subs to shooting organisations. Once again an increase of £2,180. This seems an awful lot of money to be paying to other organisations and needs to specify what is being paid and to who.
 
Legal and professional. An increase of £16,296 ,why is the CPSA paying out so much in legal costs. Specific details please.
 
Commercial an increase of £3,875 to £92,947. What is specifically included in this category?
 
This represents an increase of expenditure in these categories of £121,098. I know that there have been reductions in other areas but these only amount to £62,216 a difference of £58,882.
 
As an ordinary member of the CPSA I would appreciate an explanation as to where this money has been spent as I have certainly seen no benefit from it.'

 

[Jonathan Sargent]

Low votes, low turnout... why?

I'm a CPSA member and don't have a clue about anything you're talking about? Why - becuase I turn up and shoot on a Sunday when I choose to, get a score recorded, get a classification, monitor results over time and compete for fun - that's why I pays my fees and joins CPSA.

So - if you feel engagement on this should be higher - in simple terms can someone please explain why, what's occured and what's going on going forward?

Five letter words and smaller for me please, no acronyms and assume I know nothing?

 

[** Pending Removal **]

Could I suggest that for starters you could read the Pull magazine and the Board minutes published on the Cpsa website.

 

[Jonathan Sargent]

Hence the issue for most people - I don't "see" a problem and so I don't invest the time to go reading and following up where I believe no issue exists.

I would imagine I'm the same as 80% of CPSA members - Pull magazine is flicked through and put in the recycling bin!

 

[Hotshot100]

I smell a troll!!

 

[Fuzrat]

I smell a troll!!

 Why? 99% of CPSA members are of the same opinion, as shown by the voter turnout.

Edit, poor grammar

 

[Hotshot100]

Hence the issue for most people - I don't "see" a problem and so I don't invest the time to go reading and following up where I believe no issue exists.

I would imagine I'm the same as 80% of CPSA members - Pull magazine is flicked through and put in the recycling bin!

May be the CPSA should ask members if they want to receive Pull magazine. If only 20% read it that would save a lot of money over the course of a year.

 

[Jonathan Sargent]

No troll, just the reality for most people.

There where posts on here asking why the low voting and how critical this was - I don't believe most peoples perception is the same as yours and people aren't even aware of whatever it is - to most people this post would seem like a conspiracy theory because we really haven't got a clue what it going on!?!

And yes - if CPSA wanted to give me a discount not to get Pull magazine I'd gladly take it. I'd ask BASC to keep sending theirs though.

 

[RobertBeard]

This is a copy of an e mail that I sent to the CPSA via my County Chairman. A reply has been sent to him by Nick Fellows which does not fully answer my questions.
He appears to be hiding behind the fact that if the accountants have accepted it ,then so should the membership.
I have replied saying that the accountants only concern is that the accounts have been kept properly and that no fraud has taken place. This does not mean that the money has been spent wisely or in accordance with the memberships wishes.
I have so far received no further answer but in the light of what has happened today hope that this matter will come to a acceptable conclusion.
 
'I would appreciate it if you would bring up the following at the CPSA AGM.
Having read the accounts for 2012 I am amazed at the very substantial increases in expenditure especially in some of the none specific categories.
 
Why are there now an average of 2 extra head office staff at a cost of an extra £29,733 p.a. As membership has fallen and I can see no tangible benefits of employing more staff an explanation would be appreciated.
 
Staff Training costs have risen by £1,625 p.a. Why? what are these staff being trained to do?
 
There is a new category of consultancy with a cost of £3,500. What are these consultants consulting on?
 
Property repairs and maintenance costs are up by £1,985. As over £18,000 has been spent in the last two years this appears rather high.
 
Telephone and fax costs have risen by a massive £12,697 .Why?
 
General Office Expenses have risen by £14,202. Why is this and what items are covered under this category? £670 per week is a massive amount of money and the make up of this needs to be more detailed.
 
I.T. and development costs, Another massive increase of £14,449, why is this?
 
Website and internet costs. Another big increase of £10,797,  Why is this?
 
AGM and election costs. An increase of 57%  equal to £3,375. Why?
 
Membership costs. What items are included in this? Another increase of £6,384.
 
Subs to shooting organisations. Once again an increase of £2,180. This seems an awful lot of money to be paying to other organisations and needs to specify what is being paid and to who.
 
Legal and professional. An increase of £16,296 ,why is the CPSA paying out so much in legal costs. Specific details please.
 
Commercial an increase of £3,875 to £92,947. What is specifically included in this category?
 
This represents an increase of expenditure in these categories of £121,098. I know that there have been reductions in other areas but these only amount to £62,216 a difference of £58,882.
 
As an ordinary member of the CPSA I would appreciate an explanation as to where this money has been spent as I have certainly seen no benefit from it.'

These are all excellent questions quite properly raised at an AGM and to which answers should be given. Raised other than at an AGM and you will get fobbed off. They have to take questions once a year at the AGM but not otherwise. You have voted the board in and they will spend as they see fit which is unlikely to be the same way that you would spend it.

 

[RobertBeard]

I have no expertise on magazines but the adverts that are sold therein to reduce the cost of it to members are on the basis of the number of members. Reduce the number of magazines produced and you reduce your advertising revenue.

 

[sarachambers]

That's my understanding Robert. They need to distribute magazines to get decent advertising revue use!

 

[Angelfire]

Where will the EGM be held, anyone know - or has no venue been decided on.

 

[sarachambers]

A venue was not discussed. Whilst the AGM locations rotate around the regions, I'd hope that they'd choose a location easily accessible for all members for the EGM itself.