New constitution to sweep ARU board

Wayne Smith | September 29, 2009

Article from: The Australian

THE Australian Rugby Union board could be swept away almost entirely under a new constitution now being finalised by the states.

What started out earlier this year as a long overdue overhaul of the antiquated 1949 ARU constitution that heavily favoured the two major rugby states, NSW and Queensland, is now being seen by the states as their only means of reining in an ARU administration they believe is out of control.
The draft constitution, drawn up by sports constitution specialist John Mullins, would, if endorsed by an extraordinary meeting of the ARU, remove the effective veto that rested with NSW if it employed its five votes in a bloc.
But, more importantly, it would change the current arrangement of ARU directors being appointed and force them instead to stand for election.
Given the level of angst over the performance of the ARU board, especially over its failure to properly oversee the process of allocating the expected fifth Australian Super rugby licence to Melbourne, there could be carnage when and if all directors positions are declared vacant at the annual meeting in March.
The states are independently reviewing the constitution before forwarding it to the ARU "for comment".
But, irrespective of the ARU's reaction, it is understood the states will push for an extraordinary meeting to be held as soon as possible to endorse the new document.
The proposed new voting arrangement will continue to reflect the dominant positions of NSW and Queensland. Each state and territory automatically will receive one vote, while those with a Super rugby franchise within their boundaries -- namely NSW, Queensland, ACT and Western Australia -- will be allocated a second vote. But only the two major states will qualify for the third vote available to those states boasting more than 25,000 registered players.
Once the ARU Council is elected, five directors positions will be voted on. These five directors then would be empowered to appoint two independents to the board. A player-nominated director and the ARU chief executive officer would fill the remaining board positions.
"Hopefully we will get more talent, more diversity and more creativity on the board," said Peter Lewis, who, before resigning from his former position as Queensland Rugby Union chairman was one of the main driving forces behind the constitutional overhaul.
"There definitely needed to be an updated constitution. The preamble to the old one read almost like a colonial document issued by the Governor of NSW in 1850," he said.
Although the immediate impact of the constitutional review might well be to restore community faith in the leadership of Australian rugby, the new, fairer and more representative voting structure should open up the possibility of the ARU receiving a significant boost in funding from the Australian Sports Commission.
Meanwhile, there has been a dramatic development in the ongoing Melbourne Super 15 franchise saga with the announcement that the two fiercest rivals for the licence, the Victorian Rugby Union-backed Rebels group and VicSuper15, have agreed to join forces.
It is understood two key figures in the VicSuper15 group, Ray Evans and former VRU director Glenn Fowles, will join a merged board under the chairmanship of Rebels leader Harold Mitchell to form what is being described in Melbourne as "a compelling bid".
The newly merged consortium will meet later this week with John Wylie, the man charged by the ARU and the Victorian Government with the task of forming the new Melbourne team -- assuming SANZAR awards the 15th Super rugby licence to the city and not to the South African candidate, the Southern Kings.
The VRU and, more recently, VicSuper15 both have grown disenchanted with the ARU's handling of the bidding process.
But given that the ARU management last month recommended to the board that the VicSuper15 team be approved as Australia's candidate for the licence, it is difficult following the merger to see how the ARU could continue to argue that infighting in Victoria has forced it to look for other owners.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...015651,00.html

Does anyone know what the constitution is at the moment, i cant excatly remember, but i think QLD has 3 votes, NSW has 5 votes and WA and ACT have 1 vote each...


Its means the ARU is inelegible for Australian Sports Commision grants because its basically unconstintutional because one member(NSW) has the ability to vetoe any vote regardless of the other members votes.

I thought that WA only shared a vote with SA

Does anyone know how many registered players are in WA - not expecting anything near 25,000 but...

That has to be the major factor in favour of the review TOCC. I can't imagine the NSWRU giving up their control over the ARU for any reason other than federal funding.

Let's face it, they exercise their control consistently through such things as the Lote re-contracting process, the purchase of any number of leaguies, the extra funding for being Australia's 'Wallaby Nursery' the money they get that makes the Shute Shield a virtually professional comp........these sorts of initiatives are hugely unpopular in other states, and would be dismantled piece by piece by a more representative structure.

I think NSW believe the whole package will be better with the support of ASC, the other states will be better off and they won't lose anything due to a greater influx of cash.

Hope it all goes through, RugbyWA needs to get 25,000 registered players ASAP.

I heard something about this earlier this year. The idea waqs to remove the ability of both NSW and cQueensland being able to roadblock the board with the 5 and 3 vote split. Under the reformed constitution I had heard of veach member state and territory would all only have 1 vote each.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Working Class

I had heard of veach member state and territory would all only have 1 vote each.

---

That probably wouldn't be entirely fair either...

It's all Nike to me - Just do it!

i understand people from other states might feel cheated, but at the end of the day QLD and NSW do deserve to have more votes then Vic or WA. There are more players in QLD and NSW and therefore deserve a larger representation at the ARU.

In saying that, i would like to see the voting power of NSW reduced

They do deserve more but I also want free government money. Can't we have both?

I thought the model mentioned in the article was a happy medium...

Only 25,000 registered players? What does it take to be a registered player? Could the entire Force membership enrole as non-playing registered players (eg, members of the Bowlo Rugby Club) so we get an extra vote on the board?

Even better if the Bowlo Rugby Club got the extra vote, but they'll never give votes to fans - thin end of the wedge, don't you know.