Re: NATIONAL INCORPORATION

[gavanvet]

He has lost a couple of brownie points Michael, but that's no big deal.

[Michael Andrews]

Gavan, I hope you and other 3 Cav Viet members do not tar us all with the same brush. One man's comments do not speak for us all.

[gavanvet]

With comments like this Hans; Since when did you mob of bastards have a mortgage on our ex-service woes you bunch of self over endulgement pricks!!!! you wont make a lot of friends with the 3 cav blokes.

[rip rile]

To correct a mistake in the previous posts last para, I should have said non serving "possible" members. There are two informal armoured organisations here in Qld; The Black Hats and the Persons of Like Mind who meet and enjoy good times and is probably the best way to go in this laid back state.
B Sqn in T'ville and 2/14 LH (QMI) at Enoggera, both fulltime regular units, have their own domestic clubs which cater more than adequately for their purposes, and of course there is RAACA Qld Branch.
The 3RD AND 4TH CAVALRY REGIMENTS ASSOCIATION INC possessed truly lofty ideals at the beginning which included incorporating nationally, and we had the necessary finances for this, but rightfully started out small. I do believe that we wanted too much too soon and paid a dreadful penalty.
It is hoped that the "other" cavalry association down south enjoys better success than what we did and does not allow itself to become bogged down in acrimonious debate over technicalities and legalities.
Regards,
Ripa.

[rip rile]

Trevor to answer a couple of your questions honestly.
Because of the rejection of the request for post Vietnam armoured soldiers from cavalry units to become members of the 3 Cav Regt (Vietnam) Assoc, which occured at the Townsville reunion AGM, a need was recognised for a Cavalry based ESO, essentially to give any and all post Vietnam cavalry type persons somwhere to refer to if in need of assistence or to congregate for camarardrie; and so was formed, at Nambour in Queensland, the 3RD AND 4TH Cavalry Regiments Association INC which was the registered title submitted to and approved by the Qld Office of Fair Trading.
At the foundation meeting there was discussion relating to calling the new organisation The Australian Cavalry Regiments Association (ACRA) but this was defeated in favour of the present title.
With hindsight perhaps we got it wrong but that is past history.
Our greatest error was expecting serving members to rush to our banner which did not happen; why?? Why does a serving soldier need an ESO nowadays when he has everything he needs in place in his unit; and what the non serving members were more interested in was an informal, unstructred organisation whose only RULE is that there are no RULES.
Regards,
Ripa.

[Trev h.]

Having read some of the comments on this board and Sitrep ref 4 & 3 Cav Assoc I would like to get a clarification on what is the actual name. As i understand it this was started up as an assoc to involve those who were with 4 Cav and when it was disbanded went to 3 Cav and they became 3/4 Cav Regt. So is the name of this assoc 3 & 4 Cav, 4 & 3 Cav or 3/4 Cav

I think there is a 3/4 Cav Assoc already in T/ville but i could be wrong.

Without starting ww3, getting up any bodies nostril or running down any assoc these are my thoughts which hopefully will be conjusive to good discussion.

Firstly I wasn't at the reunion in T/ville where the vote was taken to see if amalgamation would be effected but i was saddened to hear that it was defeated. Admittedly there was lots of talk about it and just maybe if it had of been passed, in hindsite things may have been a little better within the Cav areas today ie 3/4 Cav, 3 & 4 Cav, 2 Cav and all the other Ares cav units as well.
What a unit of power to be reckoned with to get things done within the Cav enviroment and more importantly EVERYONE not just one group are involved.

.........And just by chance 1 Armd Regt Assoc joins in as well, then we could honestly say that this power group could be called the Royal Australian Armoured Corps of Australia. Wow such power to force our RAAC leaders at present to have a rethink about Nev Modystacks idea of Crewman badges at the next RAAC conference.

But this will never happen in my lifetime - why?

1. Amalgamation will never happen within 1 Armd Regt Assoc or the 3/4 Cav (Viet) Assoc as many members of those assoc's won't, can't, or even acknowledge that there are other members of Tank & Cav fighting/monitoring in different parts of the world today. These soldiers should not have to put up with being snubbed as they presently are.

2. Its apparent that most Viet Vets still want to live in the past and not wish to hear stories of today's soldiers or even involve them and i include ALL soldiers of RAAC not just the Veterans.

3. 1 Armd Regt Assoc has tried to heal the initial rift by only having ex Viet veterans and now are doing a good job in involving ALL tankies.

4. This would also alleviate the big problem of filling the key appointments within each assoc.

5. RAACA - NSW would be the logical choice to start with as they would most likely have the manpower and know-how to handle such a large group.



As you are now aware, I do agree with amalgamating assoc's as there is also strength in numbers.

I also agree that we should involve all our new young soldiers within the RAAC into the assoc's as they are our future.

We complain bitterly when the polies make barstard type decisions on our behalf, nows the time to have a rethink and do the best thing -- join as one assoc.

TrevOr H

[hans]

I wish to stand corrected and amend my previous thread which was meant to read quote " ESO's began springing up everywhere." If my family as in the 3/4 cavalry regts association folds" I have no where to go. By virtue of my service I have been disowned by my own family. Bill Kearney knows that and if I knew then what I have come to realise now this association has been borne on the disappointment of being rejected as a result of the 40th anniversary held at Townsville on 2006 reunion. I wished now Bill you would have said something and I would have said something like we did not disappoint those that did not go ,though it would have been amended because of the expletives that I wished to have added would be like "F%&K them".

Not were we only excluded but so were our cavalry's finest that have served overseas in the years since and still backing for seconds ,thirds and more from being accepted in that association discreetly mentioned in other circles. Since when did you mob of bastards have a mortgage on our exservice woes you bunch of self over endulgement pricks!!!!

May I add that not long ago I encountered a former member of my spiritual family being 3 Cav Regiment ,whom happens to live in the caboolture region ,the same badge that I had came to love and is entrenched on my Black beret that still stands on my hat stand, had refused to converse with me because of the fact to have a conversation with him I had to have been in action . What does that tell you?.
Oh diddums I am acting like a fool here aint I ? I do not care if my beloved association is reduced to a mere handful of mates standing around with a jaffle iron around a fire with a "six pack" whether it be in sydney ,Melbourne or anywhere I DONT CARE because even though we're the post 1972 B sqn 3 Cav regiment we're and just as good as any and we will still fondly talk about our mates returned or otherwise
and to those that class us as rejects Thanks "xxxxxxx" at least I have come to understand by virtue of your email today that in the very least we are not "Gilligan's or robinson crusoe's". Thanks mate you and your mates are welcome around my campfire with a beer handed and a camp oven stew any time Just look for an outdated toyota with a 3/4 Cav Sticker on my beloved truck when I am out and about.

[hans]

Ian,thank you have put forward your case with clarity and dispells a concern that by affialiating with the RAACA in no way diminishes a particular association, nor it's identity.

I do agree wholeheartedly with the fact too that it is rather perilous to remain fragmented. And unfortunately this is our lot with our veteran community in that ESO's have bring springing up everywhere and seldomly with little or no accord with each other .

This disunity has certainly been taken advantage by governments both past and present and by having us in this state of dysfunction, they are winning. Thus we witness attempts to errode our "hard won" service entitlements and benefits with monotonous
regularity.

I hope our community and our nation's finest do read this and take on board the points you have raised Ian. I hate resorting to old cliche's but in this case an appropriate one in that, "United we stand , divided we fall"

Again thank you.

[Ian Brya]

G'Day Hans,
You make some key points which deserve answers. I shall try to do so. Firstly, it was the RAACA that provided the lobbying know-how and contacts to enable the non-infantry combat badge to get up (for the RAAC, it is a first step to a RAAC Crewmans badge, as we know). Without the RAACA, our Corps would not have got a look-in, no matter how much we wished/shouted for one. Secondly, the RAACA provides a forum for we RAAC old & bold (through their regimental associations, if affiliated) to influence the RAAC Head of Corps and the Corps Conferences for particular requirements. (Remember that Corps/regimental associations are like icebergs - and the vast bulk of the whole is invisible as "old comrades" and only 10% in uniform). Thirdly, it is the RAACA that is leading the charge on the Boer War memorial, recognising that if the RAAC/ALH don't claim the honours then the Infantry will - as the recent dudding of 3 APC Tp honours shows! We remain fragmented at our peril! Lastly, the RAACA can provide an umbrella organisation and lobbying advice for regimental associations and the RAAC as a whole WITHOUT the need to be concerned with personal details - that would and should remain the prerogative of the regimental association of the regiment concerned. Hans, its a bit long winded I'm afraid, but I hope that I have answered the points you yiou raised - even a little bit! Cheers, Ian Bryant

[hans1]

Ian, It interests me to read on this forum and the others and in particular a Gentleman named Craig ,whom is a serving member of our cavalry. And a rarity it is with men like Craig to come out and speak up, There seems to be an increasing call for unit associations to come under one umbrella the RAACA. So Just what benefits can be gained from affiliating with the RAACA and quite frankly sometimes I think why should we bother.

From my point of view all I can see from the issue of the national RAACA magazine from time to time is a mob of "fuddie duddies" in mess dress probably flogging themselves off with their array of baubles on their chests at functions that are by and large cost prohibitive and very out of the way for most members.

I would bet London to a Brick that no down to earth cavalryman or Tankman will ever make it to the heights of National President will they? Because it's top heavy with "stuffy old Brass".

Also one sometimes gets to see RAACA members of ex officer stock that [u][b]we[/b][/u] have served with and do know that we are there but never even once dropped in a line on our forums to offer encouragement nor say g'day ,let alone wanting to join us. [i]{I would wonder if there are any ex officers in the 3 Cav {Vietnam} Association too?.}[/i]
Why would you bother that in the post vietnam years of the 3rd cav regt there were many difficulities amongst our returned servicemen and not to ignore the hostility of the general public with their attitudes towards service personel. People that needlessly suffered Where was the RAACA then?, Probably like the RSL they buried their heads in the sand too.

In my tenures as a committeeman of the 3 and 4 Cavalry regts association never had I seen either in archive form or any form of formal communications acknowledging the association's arrival from the RAACA let alone any invitations to their functions in the short years of our existence.

Ian I am not afraid to stand up and ask the questions, But I think I would rather expend my energies and meagre fianances to a [u][b]group of mates [/b][/u]that I can readily identify with, rather than Joining an association that probably couldn't give two stuffs whether I lived or died.

[Ian Brya]

G'Day Noel,

Thanks for the thought. I hope that your health is on the mend; I guess that the stresses of operation and Assn concerns don't help either! My belief is that there are enough of us to keep our Assn going, incorporated as it is in Qld, so that we can all grow it again. In due course, without the need for amalgamation, we can I am sure gain/offer mutual support to/from the RAACA for the benefit of all concerned. Were all of the RAAC Regimental Assns to view the RAACA as a peak body and umbrella lead lobby group, we would be streets ahead. We do not need to fight each other: battling the government and AWM should take all of our time! Best wishes to you, Ian B

[Noel Mc Laughlin]

G'day Ian,

I agree with your contention. I don't know whether you saw one of my posts on the other freq, but I also addressed the issue of amalgamation and had this to say on that subject:

According to Sievers (Associations & Clubs Law in Australia and New Zealand, 2nd edn, 2008, Federation Press), except for the NT and WA, "the Australian Acts provide that two or more incorporated associations may apply to be registered as an amalgamated association without first winding up the individual associations concerned" (p.126.)**
(**Footnote: In Qld ss 43F -43O of the Act apply. Note that s43J provides an administrative discretion to order that notice of a proposed amalgamation be given to an association's creditors and if a creditor objects, a certificate of incorporation will only be given to the amalgamated association with the leave of the court). That means the Qld Supreme Court. To me, if that is a preferred course of action, then amalgamation with either ACRA or RAACA (Qld) could be the only possible alternatives.


Ian, I guess basically what I have attempted to do, is to endeavour to cut through the fog of shock at the sudden and near-fatal effect the recent changes have had on the Assn. I'm tapped out as to what other policy issue needs to be addressed but I'm very confident John Coe has the issue in hand. I guess its up to John and his Continuing C'ttee to take what they consider to be the most appropriate course of action. I have been in touch with John quite regularly b/c and he is confident the Assn can be rehabilitated.

Hopefully more wise words of advice and encouragement from luminaries such as yourself will be forthcoming to point him in the right direction. You have a world of corporate experience that John needs to have regard to.
I'm deeply grateful to you for you advice and input - it's invaluable. I look forward to hearing more.

Cheers,

Noel

[Ian Brya]

On the other hand, the Assn could (and should) remain incorporated in Qld but affiliate with the RAAC national association - the RAACA - along with every other RAAC Regimental Assn, to enable the RAAC voice to be heard NATIONALLY. This would also support the RAAC head of Corps as he attempts to ensure that the capabilities of the RAAC are understood outside of the black beret fraternity. The current division between the 3 Cav Regt (Vietnam) Assn and the later two generations of 3rd Regiment cavalrymen could thereby be partially bridged. The RAACA affiliation at national level has a lot to recommend it. Cheers, Ian Bryant

[Noel Mc Laughlin]

Hans has asked on the 3 cav site if the Assn should consider national incorporation. It’s an idea that is worth some serious thought. I’ve done just that.

At present I do not believe the Assn is in any way healthy enough to even consider that proposal.

In looking at the idea of national incorporation, I would argue that the short answer is no.

My argument is based on the following:

1. I looked at my Assns Law text again and went through the section on incorporated associations which is covered in some detail by Sievers.

2. Each State and Territory has a specific Govt authority empowered to administer incorporated associations in their respective State/Territory.

3. Put simply, there is legislation enacted in every State /Territory to allow for the creation of Incorporated Associations.

4. There is no Federal legislation.

5. This is a States’ rights issue – thanks to Federation.

6. A classic example is the RSL. Its National HQ is incorporated in the ACT.

7. Every state Branch is incorporated in the relevant State/territory.

8. The 3/4 Assn is incorporated in Qld.

If national incorporation is considered this is what would need to happen:

1. Each State would be required to set up its own State Branch and apply to become an Incorporated Assn under the relevant state legislation – with the relevant Constitution and By-laws created.

2. Each State would then need to have a management committee and minimum membership to comply with the law. Each state has different minimum membership limits.

3. From that, one can then assume that each state Branch of the Assn will want to retain the membership fees for its state members to assist in the running of the State branch.

4. That then would force head Office (the Qld-based Management C’ttee) to demand capitation fees from each State to enable it to function also.

5. Each State would then have to agree on a percentage of membership fees collected to be remitted to the Assn’s national body. That creates an almighty bunfight because State Branches hate handing what they see as their money over to Head Office.

The contention therefore is that national incorporation would be completely unworkable.

The choices facing the Assn at this point in time need to be reinforced. No matter which way I look at things, the priority is to resuscitate the Assn in its current form or consider amalgamating or winding up.

I know these choices are stark, but from where I sit, I can see no other option.

Regards,

Noel