2012 Financials

[turboplanner]

I nominate you Alfa

 

 

[AlfaRomeo]

I wasn't asking the questions . . . perhaps because I already know the answer? It is important that people find out for themselves from the source not get it second-hand from an anonymous writer on a public forum. And it is important that the Treasurer finds out for himself so he can answer an intelligent question or two from the members. I'd be prepared to put a couple of bucks on him not having a clue. It took him 3 months after the accounts were signed off to publish them so, on that basis, don't expect a quick response to your questions.

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Question:

 

What government body other than CASA is the RAAus answerable too?

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

As we are an incoporated association in the A.C.T we have responsibilities to the office of regulatory services (ORS). They have a website and a section on incoporated associations under "community" on the main page

 

Andy

 

 

[68volksy]

I suppose if we're going down that line there's also ASIC as the Association is a Regulated Body. Not that either body has any real interest in small associations like RA-Aus...

 

 

[turboplanner]

Well it is certainly approaching the interest stage and once the tap is turned on the investigations will go back some years.

 

 

[shags_j]

Sorry I should have posted here: http://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/new-ra-aus-accounting-issue.53410/page-3#post-261257

 

 

[dodo]

At least, by putting the full statements on the website, we are now compliant with our obligations. I don't understand what wally could think saying "ring the office if you want eight pages of technical detail" counts as publication. Putting it on the website, with a note in "latest news" is simple, clear, and everything is now published. (And low cost!)

 

I still have serious concerns about how we needed three attempts to meet a very standard and very well understood regulatory requirement (1 meeting - no notes, 2 with the magazine - no note 1, no auditors statement, 3 website - complete!).

 

dodo

 

 

[AlfaRomeo]

Of course, putting it on the website does not meet the requirements of the Act to have copies available to all before and during the AGM.

 

Also there is, incredibly, a substantial minority of members who do not have access to the RAA website for a number of reasons.

 

 

[Powerin]

Thanks for posting that Andy,If this was all, indeed, signed by Steve & Eugene on 30th August 2012, why wasn't all of this available before and at the AGM, including the notes and Auditor's comments?

 

That looks a strange set of circumstances to me.

 

.

Having again perused the financials today, I was again a little annoyed by the quality....such that it was difficult to read some figures. I know I'm probably being unfair...but I'm trying to think of the chain of events which would lead members being presented with a copy of the financials, three months after they were dated, that appear to be a scanned copy of a FAX....

At very least it looks unprofessional....but if one were being uncharitable, one could say it looks like a rushed job

 

 

[Guest SAJabiruflyer]

P

 

Hey guys, the "I'm only a volunteer" is an excuse you can use only once and a sentence before "I hereby resign" . It is an admission you have the best intentions (hopefully) but no F...... ability.Clearly most of the board including all of the Exec are out of their depth and should respectfully admit their ambitions did not match their abilities and leave a gap for those more able.

An analogy I have used recently for the RAA problems at the highest level is if I have a big opinion of my abilities, but if someone needed open heart surgery and I was the only one who came forward and said I had the ability (which I don't) they would die, regardless of my best intentions.

 

It's time for a change and members with ability please to come to front and center. We need you.

 

cheers

 

Peter

When are you going to volunteer then?

 

 

[turboplanner]

Having again perused the financials today, I was again a little annoyed by the quality....such that it was difficult to read some figures. I know I'm probably being unfair...but I'm trying to think of the chain of events which would lead members being presented with a copy of the financials, three months after they were dated, that appear to be a scanned copy of a FAX....At very least it looks unprofessional....but if one were being uncharitable, one could say it looks like a rushed job

And as I keep repeating, if you go back over the last four years, it looks even more enlightening.

 

 

[Bandit12]

It is best for everyone to source primary documents themselves, and that way no one can be accused of modifying anything to suit their own purposes. That said, maybe you could post some excerpts Turbo? You have alluded to them on many occasions and yet it seems that no one else is following through in requesting the docs, reading, and then joining in the discussion.

 

Make it simple and more people may take it up. Post a couple of excerpts to whet the appetite, and some easy to follow links for how to get an original, and maybe more will follow through.

 

 

[turboplanner]

That said, maybe you could post some excerpts Turbo? You have alluded to them on many occasions and yet it seems that no one else is following through in requesting the docs, reading, and then joining in the discussion.

I did post some excerpts of a progressive increase in staff/office expenses of nearly 600% above CPI increases, but not one person was interested, so there was no point in getting involved in the more controversial stuff staring out at you like a forlorn skeleton - that's up to the members themselves to live or die on.

 

 

[Bandit12]

I must have missed that post somewhere Turbs....although I still think that if you lead a few of these horses to water, some may drink. But if you suggest to the horses that they need to talk to a government department about water, they would rather go thirsty.

 

You have a background in dealing with organisations and legislative bodies and it is second nature to you to dig a little. For a lot of people, it seems way out of their depth. The irony of having this discussion with you is that neither of us are current RA-Aus members, and therefore at present neither of us are at risk....!!!

 

 

[turboplanner]

Exactly B12, so we wouldn't like to be the ones digging up a live bomb with jackhammers, would we.

 

 

[Bandit12]

Exactly B12, so we wouldn't like to be the ones digging up a live bomb with jackhammers, would we.

Touche....

 

 

[Captain]

Come on Tubb,

 

As requested by the 12 incher, please help us to see the light.

 

After all, we are just what some on the Board thinks are the great unwashed membership, that are "unthinking, unenlightened and uninformed minority with personal issues to pursue."

 

Help, oh please help us to be thoughtful, enlightened, informed and washed, so that we will be qualified to speak to our NSW Board Members from just below their level.

 

Lead us through a couple of examples.

 

Regards Geoff

 

 

[ahlocks]

..After all, we are the just what some on the the Board thinks are the great unwashed membership...

You been nibbling on the rat bait again Ratso

 

 

[Admin]

After all, we are the just what some on the the Board thinks are the great unwashed membership, that are

WTF...the the Cap't...have you been taking it to Warp factor 9 or something

 

 

[Captain]

You been nibbling on the rat bait again Ratso

Sorry AHsoxinhisjocks. My darling slipped some into the Xmas pudding (again).

 

Geeeez .......... picked on by Eeeeen and AhChoo, when post # 68 reads fine to me.

 

 

[ahlocks]

No no no no no wuckers...

 

Geeeez .......... picked on by Eeeeen and AhChoo, when post # 68 reads fine to me.

Good on you Mr I'll change the post after I've been sprung with a stutter and appear to be innocent Rat....

 

 

[Bandit12]

Hmm....moderators must have merged NES to this thread at some point!!!

 

 

[Admin]

After all, we are just what some on the Board thinks are the great unwashed membership, that are

Geeeez .......... picked on by Eeeeen and AhChoo, when post # 68 reads fine to me.

YOU "think" or YOU "thinks"...that is the question

we're watching you

 

 

[ahlocks]

Hmm....moderators must have merged NES to this thread at some point!!!

Ooops...