Do you trust BASC

[Gordon R]

Quote

Fighting fund, 7 figures, reaming fighting fund is in the public accounts available to all.

Your post  - is it accurate?

[Jim Neal]

I'm sure reaming didn't used to be so expensive?

[Rewulf]

I might get in contact with this chap.

https://basc.org.uk/reigniting-the-arms-of-old/

See what plans he has for lead free muzzle loading firearms, or not as the case may be.

[Conor O'Gorman]

21 hours ago, Rewulf said:

My apologies, I've been very busy this week, work has been hectic, and what little time I've had to spend on PW, has been spent on defending myself against relentless attacks on my character. 

Thank you Conor, but I've already posted that information. 

Any chance of what has been spent from the fighting fund within those financial years, and what on? 

Forgive me, but £587, 656 doesn't appear to be 7 figures. 

The fighting fund was set up with £1,005,065 in 2020 and by end of 2021 had been used to help beat off legal challenges to hen harrier brood management, prescribed burning on moorland, general licences and gamebird release near protected sites. There will be an update on how the fighting fund was used in 2022 in the upcoming 2022 BASC annual review.

[Rewulf]

On 18/03/2023 at 19:48, Conor O'Gorman said:

The fighting fund was set up with £1,005,065 in 2020

Thank you Conor, it took a while but we got somewhere in the end, however ,I did ask how much was in the fighting fund, as in the present tense.
The 7 figure , ring fenced fighting fund was set up in July 2020, BY BASCs own accounts , by the end of that year, it had £708,000 , and by end of 2021 it had £587,000 in it , is there any chance whatsoever of you revealing exactly what that £400,000 was spent on up to the end of 2021 , as in how much was put into the hen harrier legal battle, I know you give NE £25,000 a year for 'support' but Im surprised that a government body , with a budget of hundreds of millions a year needs that money ?

How much was spent on the Humber wildfowlers ?

The legal challenge to the GLs, which again, DEFRA was perfectly capable of fighting on its own.

On 18/03/2023 at 19:48, Conor O'Gorman said:

by end of 2021 had been used to help beat off legal challenges to hen harrier brood management

This release from NE lists the partners involved in the brood management scheme, BASC isnt mentioned.

https://naturalengland.blog.gov.uk/2023/03/16/update-on-the-hen-harrier-brood-management-trial/

So why would you use the fighting fund, for a legal battle that BASC doesnt have an official interest in, and has a government funded entity to finance it ?
Im sure there are one or two members who are interested in protecting hen harriers, Im also sure there are a lot more who would happily see them gone from their grouse moors ?

Ill reiterate where Im going with this, BASC cancelled the legal cover , saved itself £1 mill a year, and promised to set up a 7 figure , 'ring fenced' fighting fund.
So far , there are a handful of grateful beneficiaries of the fighting fund, some Humber wildfowlers, and a couple of dozen rehomed hen harriers.

How is BASC going to fight against more stringent licence condition coming over the horizon, and the impending lead ban ?

There doesnt seem to be any stomach for fighting anything but game bird issues, is BASC the voice of all shooting , or just game shooting, just so we know where we are.

[Rewulf]

An afterthought , what happened to this fighting fund , theres no mention of it in BASC accounts for 2017/18/19 , there was over a million pounds in it at one point ?

[ehb102]

I have a different reason for not trusting BASC as I once did (blindly). 

Quite a few years ago I sought advice from the BASC legal helpline. The Police were accusing people who refused to say that a man in a dress was a woman of a hate crime. Then it was changed to a "non crime hate incident". It would be recorded against your name. The Police have since come under fire for both the recording of these incidents and the definition of these incidents - "1.A non-crime hate incident (NCHI) means an incident or alleged incident which involves or is alleged to involve an act by a person (‘the subject’) which is perceived by a person other than the subject to be motivated - wholly or partly - by hostility or prejudice towards persons with a particular characteristic" 

See the bit in italics? I don't think it needs spelling out how stupid it is, all about perception. The police have been roundly criticised, chastised and ordered to stop doing this. It was really quite scary with quite a lot of people losing their jobs (thank goodness I work for myself) because they refused to bow down to the new rules being put around by Stonewall, that any man who says they are a woman is a woman. At the time it was deeply worrying for any woman who dared to speak out, in real life or online. I've had trauma clients who have been targeted by the groups involved, it was nasty and it was all about stopping people from speaking up about women's rights and safeguarding. In prisons when a man wanted to escape the male estate he would say he was a woman (See: Karen White). There would be a risk assessment done before he was moved to the female estate, but that risk assessment would not include the risk to the women he would be put amongst.  There are lots of court cases now, you can see that Maya Forstarter won her case where she was dismissed because Stonewall said she was transphobic, you can see many vexatious cases by men who want us to call them women against women who stood up to them. Stalking and doxing are a very real risk. Fair Cop won court cases against the police on this very subject. Now the tide is turning, it has been clarified that the UK Equality Act 2010 stands and it is reasonable and proportional to exclude men from women's swimming sessions/changing rooms/prisons/rape crisis centres/hostels etc. And vice versa of course. We are still unpicking the damager done by Stonewall and their ilk who were trying to push that the law was as they wanted it to be, not as it is. 

Once the BASC legal team member had stopped laughing (okay, fair enough, this was new information to him) the advice was to not get into trouble in the first place. Not very helpful when your rights are on the line, but whatever. The issue of gender identity was new to them and this was the first time they've been alerted. So now they are aware. I've rung, in fear that if I speak the truth in public that the police will record a hate crime or a non crime hate incident against my name and use it as an excuse to declare me unfit to hold a gun. 

That brings us to October 2022. BASC issued a member survey. I'm a member. I go to take the survey. I stop taking the survey because it wants to know "What gender do you identify as?" Female, Male, Non-binary/third gender or Other. So we've gone from me being in fear of losing my licence because of actions by gender believers  to BASC deciding that they are in fact gender believers, that I have to have a gender. 

HECK NO.

(1) I don't believer there is a magic gender that each human has. Gender is a social construct, that is to say it is made up rhubarb. Asking a question like this is like saying "Are you Catholic, CofE or Methodist?" Does not apply. Bad question. Bad data. And bad taste given the national situation. 

(2) I've already alerted BASC to that people who believe in the gender woo are persecuting people who don't, and I fear for my licence. Now they are those people.

(3) When I raise this with BASC via Twitter they want me to give them my membership number. Triple heck no. Are they going to hand my details over to the police to record against my name with a non crime hate incident?  I say "Gender identity is hugely misogynistic and homophobic, and that's without the horrendous association with queer theory and paedophilia "queering boundaries". I expect an organisation that represents us to understand these issues when my licence is threatened."

(4) I want to discuss this publicly and with some anonymity to ensure my safety. BASC refused to discuss it publicly via Twitter.

TLDR: That's an example of BASC being unable or refusing to handle issues or respond effectively to genuine concerns and criticisms raised. It doesn't matter how much you support an organisation, it doesn't mean they get everything right. Supporters want things addressed and fixed. An organisation that doesn't acknowledge things, address them and fix them loses support.

 

 

 

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

@Rewulf as already explained - by the end of 2021 BASC's fighting fund had been used to help beat off legal challenges to hen harrier brood management, prescribed burning on moorland, general licences and gamebird release near protected sites. There will be an update on how the fighting fund was used in 2022 in the upcoming 2022 BASC annual review. 

Looking ahead BASC will keep fighting on all fronts and I hope you might encourage PW members to join that effort.

[ehb102]

Conor has already messaged me and we will speak after he has had a chance to do some background reading. 

[Rewulf]

1 hour ago, ehb102 said:

Conor has already messaged me and we will speak after he has had a chance to do some background reading. 

Good luck with that Liz, but as I've asked very simple questions, and got incredibly vague, or none answers, I can only believe that BASC policy is not to engage with ordinary people. 

I'm no longer a member, and won't return anytime soon, which is tragic, as BASC is the only real counter to further infringement on private firearms users. 

They have a particular section of field sports that is important to their business model, everyone else is flotsam. 

[Keith 66]

In the end BASC is a members organisation, If you are a member you get your member benefits such as insurance, access to their Firearms dept (I have had need to use them & they were bloody good) & everything else.                            If you are really committed you can stand for Council, In any case as a member you get to vote on who is standing for council!  Either way you have a say!

Continuous bashing of a members organisation you are not a member of is akin to objecting about a Golf or Yacht club's rules when you havent joined in the first place!

It is better to be in the tent ******* out than standing in the cold trying to **** in.

 

[Rewulf]

2 hours ago, Keith 66 said:

If you are really committed you can stand for Council, In any case as a member you get to vote on who is standing for council!  Either way you have a say!

So I keep being told  
Apparently its really easy to get on BASC council, anyone can get on it 😄 as long as you have  a title before your name , letters after your name, or own vast tracts of land , being very wealthy helps too.
Question , how many 'ordinary' working people are there on the council ?

2 hours ago, Keith 66 said:

Continuous bashing of a members organisation you are not a member of is akin to objecting about a Golf or Yacht club's rules when you havent joined in the first place!

What if those clubs rules directly affect your own pursuits ?
What if the golf club asks the government to phase out golf balls ?
What if the yacht club seeks a voluntary phase out of sails ?

[Gordon R]

Quote

 is there any chance whatsoever of you revealing exactly what that £400,000 was spent on up to the end of 2021 , as in how much was put into the hen harrier legal battle,

Rewulf has asked a specific question. I don't see a specific reply. Can BASC say whether they refuse to answer or answer the question?

[Genghis]

Deleted.

Edited March 21, 2023 by Genghis

[Pushandpull]

Rewulf, your allegations about the membership of Council are simply absurd, and if you followed the workings of BASC over the years you would know so. 

For a quick idea of who gets involved just take a look on the website at the candidates for this year's election. That's I repeat an election, where you get the post by persuading enough people to vote for you.

[Gordon R]

Rewulf may be right or wrong, but he referred to members of the Council, not candidates.

[Pushandpull]

"For a quick idea" - get it ? I try to deal with facts here and not arguments at playground level about imaginary toffs who bypass democratic processes. As far as I know, the only co-opted member of Council is Ian Coghill. Retired local government officer with a track record assisting BFSS and GWCT. He lives in an ordinary house with a number on the door.

If you go through the biographical details of successful candidates over the years you can check out all those who served on Council. I have enough archive material going back to WAGBI days to do that but life is too short. I mean : titled folk, members of the landed gentry.......even people with letters of their name, God forbid. Get real. My time is my own but I help pay Conor's salary (via multiple subs) and he has more important things to 

[Keith 66]

So you leave a members organisation & state that you will not be rejoining, that is your perogative. So now you are not a member, have no vote & now cannot influence how its run, whinging on a forum is hardly proactively saving the sport.

Did you join another organisation to help the cause if you thought Basc were not for you? If so good.

I just had another look at the Council candidates, most seem to be a quite ordinary bunch to me.  I have cast my votes. Good luck to them.

[Rewulf]

58 minutes ago, Pushandpull said:

For a quick idea of who gets involved just take a look on the website at the candidates for this year's election. That's I repeat an election, where you get the post by persuading enough people to vote for you.

Its an election where turkeys get to vote for Xmas, nothing more, and thats why very few people vote.
Perhaps Conor can supply some figures on % of members who vote, prove me wrong ?

16 minutes ago, Keith 66 said:

So you leave a members organisation & state that you will not be rejoining, that is your perogative. So now you are not a member, have no vote & now cannot influence how its run, whinging on a forum is hardly proactively saving the sport.

Does your vote influence how its run ?
Where was your vote on lead ? Did you vote for the voluntary phase out of lead shot for live quarry within 5 years, or did you vote to not support that ?
Oh , thats right , no one gave you a vote , silly me  

Tell me again how YOU have influenced BASC policy or expenditure ?

16 minutes ago, Keith 66 said:

Did you join another organisation to help the cause if you thought Basc were not for you? If so good.

I just had another look at the Council candidates, most seem to be a quite ordinary bunch to me.  I have cast my votes. Good luck to them.

Good luck to them too, theyre going to need it if they think they can do anything to change the way BASC is run.

Myself, Im very pro active in my defence of the sport, BASC is very pro active when it comes to game shooting , other disciplines, not so much...

21 minutes ago, Pushandpull said:

I mean : titled folk, members of the landed gentry.......even people with letters of their name

So there are none of those on council then ? 

[Pushandpull]

Please do not put words into my mouth to fit your ill-considered replies. If you are that bothered about who is currently on the Council of an organisation you do not belong to, then do your own research. If you want to know the voting figures they are in the public domain.

Earlier in this thread you asked about the timeline of WAGBI/BASC. I gave you a simple answer. Your response was rude and sarcastic for some reason. It seems that you are forever demanding "answers" but only accept the ones which fit your view of the world. I see no good reason to try and contribute more to this thread which is going nowhere.

[Rewulf]

4 minutes ago, Pushandpull said:

Your response was rude and sarcastic for some reason.

I dont believe it was rude at all, sarcastic maybe, but I took my 5 minute time out like a man 

As far as answers go , they are few and far between on this thread.

[welsh1]

7 hours ago, Keith 66 said:

In the end BASC is a members organisation, If you are a member you get your member benefits such as insurance, access to their Firearms dept (I have had need to use them & they were bloody good) & everything else.                            If you are really committed you can stand for Council, In any case as a member you get to vote on who is standing for council!  Either way you have a say!

Continuous bashing of a members organisation you are not a member of is akin to objecting about a Golf or Yacht club's rules when you havent joined in the first place!

It is better to be in the tent ******* out than standing in the cold trying to **** in.

 

I had to use them, they turned out to be as much use as a chocolate fireguard and the advice given was abysmal, the person who spoke to me was up his own posterior.
As you have probably guessed i did not renew my subscription.

[harkom]

2 hours ago, Keith 66 said:

just had another look at the Council candidates, most seem to be a quite ordinary bunch to me.

Yes,  ....  Very.....usual cv utterances.

[merseamal]

@Rewulf I think you started out on this thread with a few ok points put across in an average manner.

all your questions have been answered adequately both in here and via PM.

you still persist, twisting and changing your questions each time something is answered and are demanding answers in a private small forum that has at most a few BASC employees, and possibly not the right employees to answer your specific questions in the detail you are demanding. And these questions are for an organisation (that is our only hope in a future for shooting) that you do not even support, and not only do you not support them you appear to be in a one man (possibly a few vague supporters that appear to have disappeared) mission to destroy the reputation of BASC with wild, rude and unfounded allegations, you are acting like a spoilt toddler that is not getting his own way.

and what makes this worse is that you are a fellow Brother! Your attitude, behaviour and general language you have used in here is truly un-Masonic, now, the Freemason have had more than their fair share of unfounded “bashing” akin to this over the years and all the brothers I have met have been exemplary, just, upright and with strict morals and sound judgment ,something you seem to be sadly missing.

Shooting is currently facing its biggest challenges and greatest threats and anyone who is not supporting BASC is helping to put the nail in the coffin of shooting.

and it spears all of this (pretty sure you said you used to be a happy member) is because they stopped legal cover that wasn’t worth the paper it was written on, was not used and was totally superfluous. Do you now have legal cover with your current organisation? Have you read that or any of the policies you have purchased? Well if not a word to the wise, I would read them and see if you think you are actually covered for what you think you are.

I also forgot to add, several “bashers” offered to answer my questions but nobody has, you all expect a large organisation to answer question on your little forum but can’t be bothered to answer a few simple questions directly aimed at you?

[Gordon R]

Whether Rewulf is correct or not, I wish posters would stop saying his questions have been answered. They haven't and it is embarrassing to witness the comprehension of some.

Some complain about him, as if their own posts are beyond reproach. I have been on the end of a couple and, quite frankly, the attacks on Rewulf are disgraceful.