How would you like to pay for.......

G

Gorgeous Bob Bradford

New member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
How would you like to pay for professional angling representation?

This topic is being debated by the main players in our sport, nothing has been finalised and I have heard of one or two suggestions, but in truth because of the thorny nature of the subject, it is proving very difficult to establish an acceptable formula,

How much would you consider reasonable and how would you choose to pay for it?
 
F

Fred Bonney

Guest
At least £50 a year out of my wallet,or monthly standing order of £8 a month direct to the Representative Body

But..................£1, will do/forum/smilies/crying_smiley.gif
 
G

Gorgeous Bob Bradford

New member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
Thank you Fred, for a minute I was developing a complex! I am not sure £50 per angler would be required, I would aim lower, at least to start with, given the proposals for unity and professional representation becoming a reality, total transparency of thefunds raisedis an absolute necessity, every penny accounted for, at any given time, in fact (no pun intended) the professional representatives should be the employees of the shareholders/anglers and wholly accountable to us! I do not know if this is a feasible /workable suggestion, but the money is "ours" so we should have a very big say .
 
P

Peter Jacobs (ACA, SAA, CA)

Guest
Bob,

"the professional representatives should be the employees of the shareholders/anglers and wholly accountable to us!"

I couldn't agree with you more.

But, how can you reconcile that statement with FACT who have not really shown any affinity with individual members, preferring the 'easy' option of 'affiliated' club membership?
 
G

Gorgeous Bob Bradford

New member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
Peter, as I understand things, and according to Mark Lloyd on here the other day, all the history will be swept away and a completely new start is proposed, so, there you have it.
 
S

Steve Spiller

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2005
Messages
15,191
Reaction score
4
Location
Bristol
Bob,

I think the question that needs to be asked is will it be a compulsory or voluntary payment?

If it is voluntary it will fail without a doubt! How much has been pledged on Freds £1 thread?

Apathy rules!

Sorry for the doom and gloom, but this is what I honestly believe.

My preffered choice would be direct debit.
 
P

Peter Jacobs (ACA, SAA, CA)

Guest
Bob,

I spent an informative 30 minutes talking to Mark Lloyd last week on the phone, and I am afraid that I remain unimpressed with this current proposal.

Personally, I see too many of 'yesterday's men' involved, no idea of how the funding will be sub divided and all at the risk of loosing the ACA (in its' current form) in the meantime.

As I said earlier, individual membership is nowhere near as important to this proposal as the 'tacit' approval of the membership of the groups and clubs up and down the Country.

It is so much easier to claim that one reprensents x anglers if they are all from existing clubs, societies and syndicates, and a lot easier to 'control' as opposed to an individual membership only body whose representatives are responsible to the members, and whose jobs depend on those individual members.
 
Q

Quiver man

Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
The only thing anglers have in common is a rod licence. Stick it on that. As we'd HAVE to pay for it - more would show a greater interest as its easy to say its all too much hassel - I know thats what I think. If I'm already paying for it I'm more likely to get involved or at least kow my additional £XX is doing something with it. Small handling fee to the EA, a large cheque to an Adam Crozier or his ilk (ie someone who problably knows sod all about fishing but will find out and more importantly tell the public in a professional manner) and bob (nudds) your uncle - we're organised.
 
P

Peter Jacobs (ACA, SAA, CA)

Guest
"The only thing anglers have in common is a rod licence."

Well, no, that is nowhere near strictly correct.

The main thing that we all have in common is that we live in a democracy and in a democracy we base our principles of a thing called the 'freedom of choice' which is, incidentally, granted to us all under the EU Charter of Human Rights.

And that in the final analysis is where any compulsory levy will fail!
 
Q

Quiver man

Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
True, there is a small but signifcant portion of anglers who dont pay for any rod licences. You and I pay for them, without question. My rod licence also gves me the right to fish free stretches of river - which I dont do (yet !). I fish a commerical complex pretty much exclusivly, never seen an EA balif so I cant see where my rod licence dosh is going. Very much like the "I've got SKY I dont watch the BBC why do I need a TVlicence" argument this could apply to angler like me, or at least a reduction in it to cover the "red tape" ( i dont want to use that phrase but I'm tired and cant think of another) that covers the checking of fish stocks as they move from breeder to commercial/club pond.

Mind you, that WILL be a banner the whole angling fraternity will get behind(which if most of the weeklies is concered, is slightlyright of centre) - EU Charter of Human Rights......

Anywho, thats my idea shot down in flames, any others ?
 
The Monk

The Monk

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 21, 2002
Messages
24,583
Reaction score
21
Location
on stage
what we need to do is examine how other interest groups organise national representation.
 
S

Steve Spiller

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2005
Messages
15,191
Reaction score
4
Location
Bristol
Peter,

Do you honestly believe anglers will voluntarily contribute enough to make it work?

I know FM's 40,000 members aren't all "active" members, but how many pledged to Freds £1 fund?

38 I believe and that was just a quid!

I believe itwill haveto be compulsory, but that's just my humble opinion.
 
P

Peter Jacobs (ACA, SAA, CA)

Guest
Steve,

I do believe that if the right group is constituted and proves itself worthy of support from ordinary anglers then, yes, they will get the funding they deserve.

None of these groups, organisations or bodies have any God given right to claim that they represent us, the ordinary angler in England and Wales.

Let them start with humble beginnings, prove their worth, and then, providing that we don't loose vitally important bodies like the ACA, they will get support.
 
Q

Quiver man

Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Most will grumble at compulsary donations but won't activley fight it. Not only are we tight, we are lazy too /forum/smilies/big_smile_smiley.gif. The only other way around it is to start a chain or online shop (just like that /forum/smilies/smile_smiley.gif) as a none profit organisation (like most small tackle shops I suppose) maybe even do a deal with argos, who are still britains biggest seller of fishing equipment by a mile, and make money via tackle ? I'm guessing the annual budget of £78 million *( a figure I got from here somewhere) isnt down to members just renewing membership - but buying stuff - and we like our stuff. And back to the argos thing, if the new "members" go fishing twice and then get rid of the tackle/membership - who is going to care ? Really. Not the rest of the membership and not argos I'd argue. Give a free go with said tackle or free bait or a lesson at a "superfishery" around the country and away you go.

*Be intrerested to know how much of it are members and how often they go to these reserves or just renew it and read the newsletter.
 
S

Steve Spiller

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2005
Messages
15,191
Reaction score
4
Location
Bristol
Peter,

I agree with what you are saying but where will the initial funding come from?

What sort of timescale would be required to prove their worth?

And no, the ACA should not be involved, they have a totally seperate job to perform.

Why not just stick a fiver on the E.A licence that goes directly to the new "body"?

Any donations above that can be made by generous anglers, similar to a contribution to the ACA.
 
F

Fred Bonney

Guest
Steve,the EA won't collect it,there's already been a number of voices giving the reasons why. Even if they did,what makes you think it will always be there for the Representative body.

Does our road tax all go on roads?
 
P

Phil Hackett The common Boastful Expert :-)

Guest
Perhaps Peter you could point me in the right direction of HRA that states you have the "freedom of choice" not to pay a tax, as I'm most interested in this.

Btw there's no particular Articlein HRA that states "freedom of choice."
 
P

Phil Hackett The common Boastful Expert :-)

Guest
Peter as some one who's been around a bit (a yesterdays man) perhaps you could give me the names of all the legions of young guns you think are out there to take over the running of a representative unified body?

As I'd really like to spend more time with my fishing, than having to travel the length of the country to attend yet another meeting on aSunday. Passing on the way, the hoards of fellow anglersfishing on the gravel pits, lakesand the River Trent.
 
P

Peter Jacobs (ACA, SAA, CA)

Guest
Phil,
You know only too well that it was Greg on another thread who referred to this ill-conceived levy as a 'tax' so you won't find any reference to not paying tax within the EU Human Rights Act.
Pity that as some people pay more income tax that others even earn.
Why don't these Euro politicians ever give us something useful?

I would imagine that you are also savvy enough to remember the 'yesterday's men' tag from a not so long ago general election.

You and I Phil are at least in agreement that we anglers do need a properly constituted and professionally organised Representative Body. Where we seem to disagree is on how, who and at what cost this is provided. I also think that the more we debate these details the better the eventual body will be and the more acceptable it will be to a greater number of anglers up and down the Country.


Steve,

"What sort of timescale would be required to prove their worth?"

That is for each individual to define for themselves. As I said on a different thread, no one has any God-given right to a position on this new body, and each should prove their worth.
As I understand things, the initial funding has already come from the participating bodies like the ACA, NFA et al.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top