NRA Journal - Summer 2003 - National Rifle Association

Jeremy Staples will be supported by Martin Farnan asDirector of Shooting and Sarah Bunch as Director ofClays as well as the Trustees’ representative nonexecutivedirectors.NSC will also have an Estate Committee in an advisoryand supporting role, drawn mainly from members ofCouncil to provide advice to the Managing Director andto take up with him issues of concern to members.We intend that a much closer working relationship isestablished with the users and tenants at Bisley andespecially with the resident clubs and associations formutual benefit and development of activities.We also intend to open up Bisley. The Council hasagreed that we should promote the name, Bisley,National Shooting Centre. We have made enquiries overthe use of ‘Brown’ notices on the nearby major roads. Itis feasible and we have begun discussion with other usersof Bisley, such as the NSRA, towards organising it andfinancing it, if we can. We have received permission touse the Sports Council logo which will also help ourimage and marketing as a leisure centre.”The Charity Commission“The Charity Commission is, essentially, our governanceregulator in this increasingly regulated world. Ipromised to let you know where we are. I can say thatwe have a much better relationship than before and wehave been encouraged in the changes which we havemade and propose today. Their inquiry into our affairshas closed, but we have not yet received their draftreport.I spoke to the enquiry officer earlier this week to try toobtain an indicator for you. The central issue, whichthe Charity Commission decided to look into, was theabsence of professional advice taken on board before theNRA headed into debt and the exposure of charitymonies to risk by passing it to NSC to pay the bills forexpenditure committed by the NRA before the SportsCouncil had approved and funded it. This covers theperiod from 1999 to 2001. Beyond this I would beguessing and that would not be helpful.Their Report will be published.”In response to the Chairman’s request for questionsQuestion: Mr A Lowe said that his club had reduced itsbookings because of increased prices; he asked whetherreducing prices might increase usage (as most clubscould not afford the prices) and what was being done toencourage range use.Answer: The Chairman emphasised that Councilrecognised the burden of cost on shooters and reportedthat there had been a change in the pattern of use, butwhere some clubs had reduced their activity others hadtaken up the slack so that rifle range use had remainedconstant. Pistol range use was up, but Gallery andWinans use was slightly down. Martin Farnan alsoreported on new competitions that had been introducedand reminded the meeting that range fees for 2003 hadbeen held at 2002 levels.Question: Mr P Molyneux asked what was being done topromote Heritage Pistol Shooting (Section 7(3)) and whythe Phoenix Club were not asked to bid for the use ofMelville Range this year.Answer: Martin Farnan replied that the NRA’sresponsibility was to allocate ranges and all interestedgroups had been invited to the Pistol Bids Meeting.However, bids for Heritage Arms were complicated bythe requirement to allocate unused bays on either side.The Historical Breechloading Shooters Association(HBSA) was discussing this with the Surrey Police andthe Home Office. If they allowed the use of HeritageArms without the blank bays on either side, it would bepossible to allocate more weekends to Heritage Arms.However, as Heritage Arms were classified as Section 5firearms, only designated persons could use them.Therefore, although Bisley was a suitable site, guestswere not permitted to use Heritage Arms during OpenDays.The Special Resolutions“Shortly after I became Chairman I received a letter froma member of Council, who I do not know well. Heargued that the main reason why we had experienceddifficulties in recent years was the size of Council. Itwas not uppermost in my own mind among the possiblereasons, but it was a remarkable and accurate analysis.In this complex and fast moving world it is difficult, ifnot impossible, to govern and manage with amanagement board of 60 members. It cannot beaccountable. It is too easy for one person to leave it toanother and to avoid the effort of taking up points ofconcern. As a result, direction tends to centralise.I have been asked what I mean in my latest letter by“checks and balances”. The proposed Council or boardof Trustees will all be accountable, all appointed by theelected General Council and bring particular expertise.No officer or member will have complete power. It isinconceivable that such a body of people would exposethemselves to incautious actions by colleagues for whichthey would be directly responsible, in law, personally.From my own enquiries I am convinced that had weput the proposed structure in place since shortly afterthe passing of the Charities Act in 1993, and followedthe Codes of Conduct set out by the Charity Commission(but which were becoming the general rule and basisfor corporate governance generally), the difficulties wenow face would not have occurred.Lastly, we need candidates and volunteers for our workon Council and Committees. Please do not hesitate tocome forward or to put forward others who havesomething to give. I am sure that we would welcomemore younger members.We have tried to ensure that all the proposed changeshave been explained for those who want to take a closeinterest and that the reasons we have for rejecting theAmendments proposed are well understood. As I havesaid, we can re-visit any matter in later years in the lightof experience.”45