When drafting a constitution are rules written 'if the model rules allow' or if the Associations Act 1964 allows . I feel it's very important to clarify this because there seems to be a lot of confusion out there about this question including myself. As far as I understand it, the model rules do not 'allow' anything. They are a guide and a default set of rules if the constitution of an association is silent on a matter. The Associations Act 1964 states in Section 16 :
(2) An association that is proposed to be incorporated under this Act, or that is incorporated thereunder, may, by special resolution, adopt as its rules all or any of the model rules or may so adopt the model rules subject to such modifications as are specified in the resolution.
(3) Where an association is incorporated under this Act, in so far as any rules lodged, pursuant to section 7 , with its application for incorporation are not inconsistent with or do not exclude or modify the model rules as then in force, the model rules shall be deemed to form part of the rules of the association in the same manner and to the same extent as if they were contained in the rules so lodged.
Therefore, as I read it, an association can write a constitution that suits them as long as it complies with the Act and not necessarily the model rules. But I may be under a misconception. After reading the Associations Act, which is heavily commercially focused, there is nonetheless remarkable room for creativity within it for associations to tailor make constitutions according to the communities need. I suspect it may have been written that way for precisely that reason. I am in no way implying criticism it's just something to keep front and centre in our thoughts as we go forward but I'm not sure why we seem to be so closely sticking to the MR's if we are free to amend them as we see fit as long as the amended rules are consistent with the Act. If the Act is silent on a matter then we are free to create what suits us. This is important in seeing the bigger picture of how we approach all this drawing up a constitution and leads to the question regarding the MRs: Does the community wag the tail or does the tail wag the community? I would hope for the former. Roses are red and green leaves are green there is no way to see them any other way than the way they always have been seen. But I see all the colours of the rainbow...
Difficult to decide where to start a response.
The terms of reference given to the working party are available of the website. I essence they were to review the existing constitution in conjunction with the model rules and come up with recommendations for change.. This we have done.
The working party consulted with the committee during the process and it was agreed that a new set of rules based on the model rules and incorporating essential elements of the existing DSRA constitution should be developed for consideration by members.
The supporting document also available on the website gives further background to this project.
You will note that a number of the model rules have been struck out or amended t on the basis that the working party believes they are not suitable or applicable to DSRA.
An association can develop a set of rules of its own from the ground up if it deems it appropriate and has the resources, skill and energy to do so. The alternative is to use the model rules as the starting point and amend those rules to suit the needs of an association. Hopefully what is out there for consideration goes close to meeting that objective.
Thanks Yon, an interesting question. An Act is legal and Model Rules are not, to my very amateur way of thinking. Words again! A model is just that, a model.....one size doesn't fit all?