Jump to content

Lead Ammmunition Group


wymberley
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 510
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

John Swift was CEO of BASC and therefore employed and paid by BASC in 2010 when DEFRA 'Invited' him to chair the LAG, a little research also shows John Harradine represented BASC on the LAG at least once! But generally it appears no one representing BASC or the members of BASC was present or had input into any meetings of the LAG.......or at least I can't find anyone!

 

 

It just occurred to me....DEFRA 'invited' John Swift to chair the LAG in 2010 when he was still the CEO of BASC (the UK's largest shooting organisation with some 140,000 members)............ but strangely there appears to have been no objections to his chairmanship from Messrs Pain (WWT) and Avery (RSPB) et al from the protectionist members of the LAG.........

Edited by panoma1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember this for BASC research advisory committee, "they knew" And its no good saying John Swift no longer works for BASC, John Swift is still under contact to finish the work as chairman of the LAG by BASC. [see LAG minutes]

 

 

“I also take this opportunity to confirm that John Swift, Chairman of the LAG is not employed by BASC, nor is he a member.”

 

 

http://www.shootinguk.co.uk/news/foi-email-suggests-lead-ammo-group-report-will-back-lead-shot-ban-42532

 

 

Is he still under contract, or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not going to get engaged with the ex BASC members on here who seem to enjoy taking any and every opportunity to try and take a swipe at BASC, there is no point what so ever. You have chosen to take your support elsewhere, so please concentrate your efforts with your chosen organisations, who I am sure would not support your attacks on BASC and would not welcome you doing so.

 

 

I am afraid you fail to see and understand that attacking BASC is going to do far more harm than good.

 

 

But please all see here our latest on this issue - and please remember that despite what some may say BASC's position on lead has remained the same for decades, and there is no prospect of this changing

 

http://basc.org.uk/blog/press-releases/latest-news/basc-statement-on-lead-ammunition-ban-report/

 

So please read this and understand that this is BASC's position.

 

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://basc.org.uk/blog/press-releases/latest-news/basc-statement-on-lead-ammunition-ban-report/

 

So please read this and understand that this is BASC's position.

 

David

 

David,

 

Speaking as a current BASC member - happy to confirm details via PM if this is an issue - it's welcome to see that statement.

 

I am struggling to follow this thread now as it seems to be full of claim and counter-claim.

 

If you could answer a few questions, that would be helpful:

 

1. What membership of or influence in the LAG does BASC currently have? Are there any members of BASC actually on the group, or are they represented through other organisations?

 

2. If BASC is represented via other organisations, how does BASC ensure that its views as stated above, are represented?

 

3. Whilst I realise you may not wish to name names, are BASC aware of / have reasonable suspicion of the identities behind the people in the FOI emails? What I'm really asking here is - are we

a) being skewered by a bunch of activist ornithologists, which I would reasonably expect, or

b) witnessing cracks appearing between the various positions of the shooting organisations leading to some saying "we could support a ban" and others saying "we're opposed"?

 

This issue ought to be important enough that any shooting organisation should be fighting tooth and nail against further restrictions. Indeed, we / they should be fighting for the relaxation or revocation of the current rules which - as everyone is aware - are somewhat muddled.

 

Many thanks for any response you can give,

 

Adam.

Edited by neutron619
Link to comment
Share on other sites

David,

Since you are aiming this at me. I will reply directly to it.

Are the e-mails false ?

Did or did not Mr Harriman concede that lead shot would probably be phased out at an intenational conference in 2004?

Is John Swift paid 'expenses' by BASC.

I'm afraid that there are two faces apparent and since BASC was the lead on this, my criticism is not intended as BASC bashing - its just a sense of complete betrayal.

Since I am no longer a member you have no obligation or reason to comment.

It would seem pointless to deny this line of e-mails but better to rubbish a non BASC member than admit BASC has failed us all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

David,

Since you are aiming this at me. I will reply directly to it.

Are the e-mails false ?

Did or did not Mr Harriman concede that lead shot would probably be phased out at an intenational conference in 2004?

Is John Swift paid 'expenses' by BASC.

I'm afraid that there are two faces apparent and since BASC was the lead on this, my criticism is not intended as BASC bashing - its just a sense of complete betrayal.

Since I am no longer a member you have no obligation or reason to comment.

It would seem pointless to deny this line of e-mails but better to rubbish a non BASC member than admit BASC has failed us all.

 

Kes did you mean Dr Harradine?

 

From the minutes of the LAG 8th meeting 22 Oct 2013:

1.2. The Chairman reported that he had now retired from BASC. Although BASC continue to cover his costs he is now acting independently, and he has stressed this point with BASC. No other conflicts of interest were declared.

 

John Swift is still Director of BASC ltd and also BASC Direct Ltd.

 

I think you will find he is still paid by BASC for his work on FACE UK and Face EU.

 

Is John Swift's passion has chairman of the LAG now untenable?

 

If John Swift is acting independently [ROUGE] BASC have no voice on the LAG.

Edited by gunsmoke
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Kes did you mean Dr Harradine?

 

From the minutes of the LAG 8th meeting 22 Oct 2013:

1.2. The Chairman reported that he had now retired from BASC. Although BASC continue to cover his costs he is now acting independently, and he has stressed this point with BASC. No other conflicts of interest were declared.

 

John Swift is still Director of BASC ltd and also BASC Direct Ltd.

 

I think you will find he is still paid by BASC for his work on FACE UK and Face EU.

 

Is John Swift's passion has chairman of the LAG is now untenable?

 

If John Swift is acting independently [ROUGE] BASC have no voice on the LAG.

Thanks for the correction - appreciated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adam,

 

BASC were never on the main group, it as agreed very early on that the organisations representing shooting would be GWCT, CA, and GTA

 

Our director of research was engaged in some of the sub groups, our position on lead has always been clear, but the LAG were reviewing lead as per their terms of reference - ie reviewing scientific evidence

 

I don't know who are behind the individual emails, but the fact remains as we said on our web site, no one person or group can overturn the groups terms of reference

 

And we will keep fighting to keep lead shot, that's what our members want

 

David

Edited by David BASC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh god helps us if we have been relying on GTA John Batley, I think in the LAG minutes he has never made a comment or statement that has been recorded within the minutes.

 

Why was the largest organisation representing shooting i.e. BASC not part of the LAG?

Edited by rbrowning2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets get something straight, the LAG was waiting for the Harris report for the FSA to finish its work.

The FSA bye-pasted the LAG and came out with its own recommendations.

 

At the next LAG meeting they decided they were still fit for purpose.

 

They then added the compliance report for the WWT and BASC which was never apart of their remit.

 

Now they are review the Norwegian and Swedish report on lead in game meat and blood.

 

I was asked by one of the LAG member to send it my article on 'Lead Shot-gate' to the LAG, I got a reply for John Swift telling me their where only review peer review papers. If that is the case why are they reviewing the WWT/BASC report on compliance, it was never peer reviewed.

 

How can we ever believe anything that BASC says, "BASC speaks with forked tongue"

Edited by gunsmoke
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gunsmoke, you are totally wrong about who you claim is director of BASC or BASC Direct, by making such silly comments that are totally incorrect you undermine the validity of your posts

 

Kes, BASC has never been disloyal or unfaithful to its members.

 

I can only reiterate that our position on lead is, and has always been clearly started on our website and in our magazine.

 

How or why some of you think attacking BASC at this time is going to help the lead issue or indeed shooting in general is totally beyond me

 

May i respectfully ask that those of you who support BASC continue to do so, we genuinely have your best interests at heart and we will do all we can to help and support you and safeguard the future of shooting.

 

Those who support other organisations please understand that at this time we are all standing together on this issue, and as I have said, if you ask your association representatives if they think its a good idea to start casting unfounded accusations at other organisations they will tell you no its not!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BASC’s Council has been shocked and angered by the unattributed email released by Defra under Freedom of Information rules

 

Yeah I bet they were shocked and angered...the cat's out of the bag at last.

 

The same old tripe thrown out from head office, as it has been over the last few years, just to calm down the source of revenue members.

 

I'd like to say I'm surprised...but I'm not. It's been quite clear what's been going on for a long time.

 

Swift and Harradine should hang their heads in shame. Though I doubt they have much of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BASC’s Council has been shocked and angered by the unattributed email released by Defra under Freedom of Information rules

 

Yeah I bet they were shocked and angered...the cat's out of the bag at last.

 

The same old tripe thrown out from head office, as it has been over the last few years, just to calm down the source of revenue members.

 

I'd like to say I'm surprised...but I'm not. It's been quite clear what's been going on for a long time.

 

Swift and Harradine should hang their heads in shame. Though I doubt they have much of that.

 

I think smokescreens and deflection come to mind.

All in all,its been underhand for a long long time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gunsmoke, you are totally wrong about who you claim is director of BASC or BASC Direct, by making such silly comments that are totally incorrect you undermine the validity of your posts

 

Kes, BASC has never been disloyal or unfaithful to its members.

 

I can only reiterate that our position on lead is, and has always been clearly started on our website and in our magazine.

 

How or why some of you think attacking BASC at this time is going to help the lead issue or indeed shooting in general is totally beyond me

 

May i respectfully ask that those of you who support BASC continue to do so, we genuinely have your best interests at heart and we will do all we can to help and support you and safeguard the future of shooting.

 

Those who support other organisations please understand that at this time we are all standing together on this issue, and as I have said, if you ask your association representatives if they think its a good idea to start casting unfounded accusations at other organisations they will tell you no its not!

What do you expect us to do David? we have watched as shooting has agreed to take part in an investigation on the continued use of lead shot based on a biased, misleading report written by our enemies, we have watched as a former employee of BASC who it seems few have got a good word to say about (and apparently who fewer trust?) is put into an influential position on deciding the future use of lead shot for shooting, we are aware that BASC has abdicated its responsibility to input into the LAG the interests of shooters by not taking up their place on the LAG, we have seen emails to DEFRA allegedly from the LAG chair (and former BASC employee!) apparently supporting a total ban on lead shot, we have seen BASC try to distance itself from its former employee and chairman of the LAG.....and on and on all negatives!....where are the positives?

 

I and others are concerned that if BASC continue this apparent lack of engagement and involvement, it may soon be too late and lead ammunition will be banned! not on scientific evidence but on misinformation by and in order to placate and pacify the anti shooting factions that initiated this LAG investigation in the first place.

 

What have BASC done to protect the interests of its members on this issue? a few words of rhetoric is all I have seen......where have BASC challenged the emotional exaggerated and misleading claims of the protectionist element on the LAG.....because to the layman they have been given the upper hand unchallenged.....when does the fight back start?

Edited by panoma1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

What have BASC done to protect the interests of its members on this issue? a few words of rhetoric is all I have seen......where have BASC challenged the emotional exaggerated and misleading claims of the protectionist element on the LAG.....because to the layman they have been given the upper hand unchallenged.....when does the fight back start?

 

They haven't challenged it because they haven't been represented on the LAG.

 

The self styled 'voice of shooting' have deliberately had NO voice on probably one of the most important issues for shooting in a generation.

 

You really couldn't make it up could you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No cats, no bags,no smoke screen or deflection, on the contrary we have been open and honest on the lead issue for over 20 years, its been fully and openly reported at conferences, in our mag on on our website.

 

We have persistently alerted on the need for compliance, and that others who are against lead will be checking on compliance

 

No one person on LAG has power or influence, look at the terms of reference.

 

Nor does LAG have the power or authority to make law or change law

 

We have challenged the attacks by others that have hit the media who have called for further restrictions or an outright ban, and will continue to do so.

 

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess BASC considered that they were in a good place when John Swift was elected chairman and never expected a leopard to change its spots. Otherwise why have no BASC rep on the LAG.

 

We all know logic will play no part in what happens after the LAG reports, history has shown us that be it fox hunting or the pistol ban etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No cats, no bags,no smoke screen or deflection, on the contrary we have been open and honest on the lead issue for over 20 years, its been fully and openly reported at conferences, in our mag on on our website.

 

We have persistently alerted on the need for compliance, and that others who are against lead will be checking on compliance

 

No one person on LAG has power or influence, look at the terms of reference.

 

Nor does LAG have the power or authority to make law or change law

 

We have challenged the attacks by others that have hit the media who have called for further restrictions or an outright ban, and will continue to do so.

 

David

In response to the above....

 

1) The LAG has nothing to do with compliance!... that is a matter for the law.

2) No one person on the LAG has power over others but the chair has control and influence.

3) The LAG may not have the power or authority to make or change law but it has the power to make recommendations to the government who do make law.

4) You say BASC has challenged the attacks of others? were these 'challenges' in writing and will the points made in these 'challenges' be included in the LAG's final report?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

David, the word I used was 'betrayed'.

It seems to me, on the evidence available, that some people who work(ed) for BASC or on behalf of BASC (or both) have accepted (with and without a public comment to this effect) that the banning of lead shot is inevitable, despite the org they work for saying there is no evidence to justify a ban.

The making of that information publicly available by FOI or whatever means, regrettable though it may be for shooting as a whole, clearly constitutes a betrayal of the stance that BASC has taken, assuming always that the science is there and not as suggested, yet to be proven - worse still if the latter.

I actually believe it is 'yet to be proven' and feel at home with the policy of my new org on that.

 

Voicing concerns, especially over an issue like this is neither unreasonable nor anti-shooting - its my legitimate right. I'd like to think I am honest and passionate about shooting, not complacent about its future. If my new org thinks I should keep quiet about this and not voice concerns - let them tell me - I suggest you ask them to censure my comments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have only just seen this , and I must say I feel a bit sick ! :sad1:

 

 

not read it all yet , but working my way through it , however im starting to get the feeling we have had our pants pulled down :mad:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now I am no accountant and I am sure there may be a simple explanation but if John Swift told the LAG at the 8th meeting 22 Oct 2013 see post #284 that he had resigned from BASC why is he shown as director and signed the BASC ltd accounts at 29 August 2014?

http://www.datalog.co.uk/docs/Prod223_1168_04955096_20131231.pdf

And is still listed on google results as BASC Ltd director - does it take that long to become "resigned"

http://www.endole.co.uk/company/04955096/basc-limited

?

P.S David.BASC I am a BASC member you I would welcome your answer.

 

 

BASC LIMITED Number 04955096

Balance Sheet as at 31 December 2013

2013 2012

£ £

Called up share capital not paid 4 4

Net assets 4 4

Issued share capital

4 Ordinary Shares of £1 each 4 4

Total Shareholder funds 4 4

STATEMENTS

a. For the year ending 31 December 2013 the company was entitled to exemption under section 480 of the

Companies Act 2006 relating to dormant companies.

b. The members have not required the company to obtain an audit in accordance with section 476 of the

Companies Act 2006.

c. The directors acknowledge their responsibilities for complying with the requirements of the Act with

respect to accounting records and the preparation of accounts.

d. These accounts have been prepared in accordance with the provisions applicable to companies subject to

the small companies regime.

Approved by the Board on 29 August 2014

And signed on their behalf by:

John Anthony Swift, Director

Edited by rbrowning2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...