From Green World (magazine of the Green Party), Spring 1995, author anonymous

 

BUAV - A Sick Society

 

Mayhem at the EGM

 

At an Extraordinary General Meeting on 5th November 1994, over a 1000 members witnessed mayhem as the controlling group of the BUAV (consisting of half of the Executive Committee and their friends), assisted by about 14 heavily built security guards, attempted to railroad through proposals to remove all their critics from the Executive Committee, and introduce a voting system which would secure their grip over the organisation forever. Before the meeting they used thousands of pounds of BUAV money on mailings to the membership - heavily biased propaganda full of distortions and lies about their critics and other matters.

 

On arriving a\the EGM they gave every member more one-sided literature as they registered, but had Ralph Cook physically dragged out of the hall for attempting to distribute leaflets giving the other side of the story. Using intimidation and control of the PA System, the controlling group used the meeting to further spread their propaganda, seeking to discredit the dissenters, and prevent them from communicating with the members. What followed at this meeting and after is described later. Unlike the controlling group, with access to the full resources of the BUAV and its membership mailing system, the dissenters have only been able to put their case to a small number of people, all at their own expense. This article will hopefully reach a few more, and start to redress the balance.

 

A promising start

 

The British Union for Abolition of Vivisection was founded in 1898 by Frances Power Cobbe, a Victorian journalist already bloodied by battles on behalf of women's and children's rights. It was founded in response to the failure that year of the National Anti-Vivisection Society (NAVS) adhering to its abolitionist principles by its adoption of 'Lesser Measures'. A direct result of this experience was that the new society's Constitution was drafted with the intention of precluding absolutely its corruption by either the weak willed, or those whose motives might be the destruction of the anti-vivisection movement.

 

The Union was supported by men of influence like Lord Shaftesbury and Cardinal Manning and soon attracted medical men like Dr Walter Hadwin (a noted opponent of the compulsory vaccination of children), and the eminent. surgeon Dr Lawson Tait; both men believed vivisection to be "brutal, degrading, useless and unscientific. Hadwin became BUAV's President and with his hand on the helm the Union spearheaded what was to become a world-wide movement, concentrating not only on mindless cruelty but the untold damage caused to human health as a result of animal experimentation.

 

Hadwin had immersed himself in the abolitionist cause, writing prolifically, and attending meetings in this country and abroad. It was only after his death and the loss of his strong and untainted leadership, that BUAV fell into a spiral of decline from which it has never truly recovered. The fear of those who would compromise, getting a foothold in the society was realised, for in the years that followed BUAV was indeed taken over by people who began to tamper with its constitution notably in the 1960s and 70s.

 

Rise and fall and rise and…

 

The advent of new blood in the late 1970s saw a resurgence of radicalism amongst many of the membership, and coincided with revelations of financial corruption. The 'old guard' sought to thwart their removal from power by seeking to introduce PROXY VOTING - the very system expressly forbidden by BUAV's Constitution! Naturally such a system favours those in power, having access as they do to a society's facilities and funds. Enough members that year (1980) saw through this move and the dangers it held for a vulnerable society; the resolution was defeated! Cobbe's BUAV was back on track, with strong uncompromising campaigns and a new fearless generation of campaigners - membership rose literally by the thousands.

 

By the mid 80s, however, the radical abolitionist stance had softened again. Government proposals for a new Act, appropriately dubbed 'the Vivisector's Charter', was being challenged by a joint campaign involving several animal welfare/rights societies - The Mobilisation for Laboratory Animals campaign. It was a compromise containing Lesser Measures. But even those backing a break with the Mobilisation campaign were seeking the inclusion of a 'pain clause' in the new Act (clearly a Lesser Measure). At an EGM in June 1985 several members of the Committee were removed.

 

A new dawn?

 

The take-over by radicals and activists in 1985 should have heralded a new dawn for laboratory animals. The enthusiasm greeting the new liberation leagues and the feeling that for the first time something practical could be done to quell the ever-present feeling of despair, energised every active member. Contact groups could be found in every village and town, setting up stalls and distributing leaflets. A feeling of hope beat in every campaigner's heart. These monstrous crimes could be abolished! Yet within 4 years, whether by outside design, clever manipulation, or sheer human greed and love of power, BUAV's new Committee slipped into miasmic campaigns designed to bring in 'loads of money' to fund the increasingly heavy staff bills. Mailshot campaigns with no substance were introduced; membership application on leaflets quietly dropped.

 

Lesser Measures were introduced - including a 10% reduction campaign, designed to end vivisection (if then) in 133 years(!) and incredibly, the dropping of BUAV's logo, 'Against All Animal Experiments'. Contact meetings were axed (divide and rule) and contacts concerned about the watering down of campaigns were dismissed. AGM amendments were refused on spurious grounds; and smear campaigns were conducted against candidates for the Committee. The shocker was the axing of the campaigning journal, Liberator, eliminating at a stroke all educational material which helped members spread the message and recruit new people - and of course the only forum for members' views.

 

In June 1990, Campaigns Director Steve McIvor betrayed the entire anti-vivisection movement. In a statement which was published nationally he claimed the BUAV "now accepted animal research in the past may have done some good". Despite intense pressure, neither he, nor his superiors would withdraw the statement, and soon the BUAV was being quoted by provivisection organisations like the Medical Research Defence (Research Defence Society actually meant - BAVA). It was unthinkable - BUAV was being run by people who didn't even believe in the central pillar of anti-vivisectionism - that all animal experiments are worthless at best, and often positively harmful to human and animal health.

 

Jobs for the boys

 

Leaked Committee documents in 1992 revealed a strategy to eliminate the BUAV's membership structure; drop medical campaigns; introduce postal voting and secret plans for the seizure of the NAVS and their assets. Rock bottom seemed to have been hit, when it transpired that those responsible for the above were rewarding themselves with 'jobs for the boys' on Committee and' massive pay rises all round.

 

In a year of recession when companies were cutting salaries and expenditure, Steve Mclvor and Peter Knowles' salaries rose by £5,000 to £25,000, whilst Director Chris Fisher's rose from under £19,000 to £31,000 in a period of 18 months, plus a new car every 3 years. It was speculated whether Fisher would want to bring about abolition in 5 years (as put forward by the Green Party) if a proposed pension plan being considered for him by the Committee were approved: Either - retiring at age 55 (Fisher was 32) with annual pension of £31,000. Or - £23,000 per year PLUS a tax free lump sum of £71, 000!

 

In this period, staff and Committee members showing dissent were intimidated and hounded in an atmosphere of secrecy and distrust. But information was leaked out to some members through anonymous mailings. In one it claimed that in May 92, having spent £85,000 on new offices, the Committee held a Strategy meeting in an hotel (costing approx £90 per head - a total cost of £1,200, when the new luxuriously appointed offices held 2 meeting rooms plus a conference room. The ultimate insult to those who donated, collected and walked for laboratory animals, was that the Chair, having had his overnight accommodation paid out of BUAV funds, was too drunk to get up to chair the second day's meeting! These allegations may have been the reason why, in early 1993, both the Chair and BUAV's Director resigned within months of each other.

 

No change

 

Hopes of a change in style were quickly dashed. Both newly appointed directors, Peter Knowles and Stew Mclvor, and the new Chair, Chris Deacon, were acolytes of the outgoing Fisher and Beggs. There would be no revival of the BUAV radical abolitionist traditions this time - the new leadership simply continued along the path set by their predecessors.

 

Animal experiments continued. The regional organisers and contacts were fighting for abolition with less and less meaningful help from the center. New 'managers' brought in under the 'jobs for the boys' scheme were being as unpleasant in the office as they had been on Committee. Dissent was growing. Under the mismanagement of both members of Committee and staff, a deficit of some £250,000 was revealed. Redundancies must be made, when, out of the blue, both co-directors suddenly announced that they were unhappy with their jobs and could no longer work at BUAV with the general dissent and its implications; they would take voluntary redundancy!

 

In spite of the fact that these posts were not being looked at, the Committee agreed to give a £10,000 'redundancy' payment to each. It transpired that Mclvor had already landed a highly paid job with the Body Shop which he was negotiating at the time. With money lining favoured pockets, the rage that had since sent ripples through the movement, erupted. Those responsible and those supporting the years of corruptive practices would have to go!

 

Quest for a fresh start - the 1994 AGM

 

Long suffering members checked and rechecked their memberships. A practice, established under the previous regime to get rid of 'awkward' members who opposed them, involved tampering with standing orders, cutting out renewal reminders, etc. Once their membership had lapsed, application to rejoin, which must be approved by the Committee, was of course, refused. (One reason why the author of this article wishes to remain anonymous). Oddly, most of these were 'respectable' older women. Odder still was that some of those they professed to despise, radical young men, sporting what one might cell 'sabber's gear', had no such problems. Then at the AGM they were given several opportunities to speak when the older women were denied the opportunity. CLEARLY THE STAGE WAS BEING SET TO CREATE AN IMAGE THAT WOULD RUBBISH THE OPPOSITION.

 

In spite of these careful plans and the recruitment of families and friends of those in power, enough real members turned up at the AGM, who were not hoodwinked. Motions submitted by the dissidents were passed, which included ousting the Chair (Chris Deacon) and Neil Fry (an ex policeman) from the Committee. However, Vice-Chair Dominic Johnson had introduced a new voting procedure for Committee elections, LON (Leave Open Nomination) a system the Electoral Reform Society warns, against for multi-place elections, and indeed helped prevent enough dissidents being elected to form a majority. In fact, the Committee that resulted from the 1994 AGM elections was spilt right down the middle, with 6 dissidents facing a half dozen headed by Dominic Johnson.

 

Dominic Dominates

 

The 'dissenting 6 Committee members attempted to reach a truce and find some common ground with the 'Johnson 6' at an 'extra' informal meeting. But they arrived to find the meeting had instead an agenda to elect a new Chair, and with the Committee spit 6 and 6, Dominic Johnson insisted he be awarded 2 votes in his old capacity as vice-chair. Then a refusal to discuss a resolution passed at the AGM regarding a legacy made it clear to the dissidents that there would be no compromising, and they had little choice but to walk out in protest, leaving the meeting inquorate. This, however, did not deter the 'Johnson 6'. Two new members of just a few weeks standing were co-opted and in this illegal action the inquorate Committee gave two fingers to BUAV's historical democratic process and constitution.

 

With unfinished business pending from the AGM and a split Committee, the dissidents decided to requisition an Emergency General Meeting. This involved considerable time and expense as they had to collect signatures from 100 paid up members. However, when the 100 signature members' requisition arrived at BUAV's offices, it was returned on a 'legal technicality'. A second requisition of 100 signatures met the same fate. The controlling group then arranged an EGM themselves, without bothering to collect signatures, and set the outrageous agenda to remove the dissenting 6 from Committee and introduce PROXY VOTING (sounds familiar).

 

The plan fails as police break up EGM

 

In an attempt to hold and consolidate their power through the EGM, approx. £20,000 of BUAV money was spent on malicious mailings, telephone and legal fees in an attempt to brand the dissents as 'terrorists', going so far as leaking to the press smears that would in fact reflect badly on BUAV's public image. This was resorting to the tactics of the anti-vivisectionist's opponents. Plans were set up to bus in supporters with instructions not to allow 'unauthorised' members on the buses - hundreds of these people turned up, all under the impression that they were there to save BUAV from 'petrol- bombing  terrorists'. Others were plainly not abolitionists - who were they?

 

On November 5th, 1994, for the first time in history, a General Meeting was started without the adoption of standing orders. Johnson, in the Chair, refused to put these to the meeting. They had been omitted from the agenda! This was in any case irrelevant and calls were being made for them to be put to and passed by the membership. A glance at the SOs also revealed that they had been changed, for the number of speakers was being limited and speakers were being asked to fill in slips with their questions.

 

This blatant breach of procedure lit a meeting specifically called to change the historic face of not only BUAV but the abolitionist cause, invoked fury in members. Protests were answered by the turning off of the microphone when newly elected Committee member RaIph Cook tried to ask that the standing orders be put to the membership. Cook eventually left the hall as Johnson refused to allow the meeting to continue in his presence. With encouragement from shocked members Cook returned to the hall, when he was attacked and wrestled to the floor by security guards.

 

When, in horror, shaking members, including at least a dozen elderly ladies ran to Cook's defence, the security guards began to realise that these people were not 'terrorist thugs' as they had (been) led to beIieve and held back. Then the unforgivable - police were called in to eject anti-vivisectionists. However it backfired, as the police arrived - and Instead closed the meeting! The attempt to change forever the face of the BUAV by the introduction of proxy voting had collapsed.

 

From bad to worse

 

The price of trying to put BUAV back on the rails has been appallingly high, especially for dissidents on Committee. None however, have paid as high a price as the 7 members of staff, including the 2 regional organisers left, who were suspended on Monday following the aborted EGM. Victims of an unbelievably nasty witch-hunt, their heads must have been measured for the block own before their alleged 'misconduct' at the EGM, since, for the first time ever, existing staff (ie themselves) had not been exclusively used for registration and other duties. New recruits had been drafted in. They had also been taken off their usual duties before the EGM, membership applications and replies to the malicious mailouts being handled by the same new recruit.

 

To date, six victims hew been sacked after disciplinary meetings. All will be appealing. Members are sickened that 2 of these people have been with BUAV for over 7 years with never a complaint against them (Jackie Webb and Robin Smith), the others too have unblemished work records. This must surely be the most shameful period in BUAV's history.

 

Fortress BUAV

 

After a brief vision of a BUAV liberated from careerists, it is once again led in circles by people whose intentions must be questionable. They have turned BUAV into a fortress. The locks have been changed, and a sophisticated electronic security system requiring secret code numbers to enter rooms has been introduced - just like a vivisection laboratory! All 6 dissident Committee members, Directors of BUAV under company law, have been illegally barred from entering BUAV's offices. There follows an excerpt from a mailout circulated in July 1991.

 

'By the late 1970s the animal rights movement had blossomed; any number of authors, public figures and campaigns fuelling the fight to liberate animals had captured the public imagination. By the early 80s young radicals had taken over the BUAV, which for years had been crippled by those put into place to take the teeth out of its campaigns. Overnight membership soared from a mere 2000 to 20,000. By this time vivisection interests (primarily drug companies) would have recognized the danger the renewal of the AV Societies posed to their profits and once again would have either placed 'plants' into position or made it their business to influence those already in position be it on staff or Committee. It would have become clear to them that if they did not strike quickly vivisection would be on the way out. We have had 100 years of campaigning with nothing to show for it. Anti-vivisectionists have always maintained that the public is 'blinded' by science. Do we now have to look upon the appalling spectacle of a once radical BUAV led by a Committee, most of whom appear to be in need of a white cane?'

 

With the watering down of campaigns, dismissal of experienced dedicated staff, the loss of BUAV's medical campaign leaflets, and the deportation of BUAV history (documentary evidence) to Hull, and the exclusion of the oldest members from the society. There will soon be no one and nothing to bear witness to what the BUAV once was. With the introduction of proxy voting still on the agenda, the BUAV will cease to exist.

 

Stop Press

 

The future of the BUAV is being placed in the hands of the courts, with a hearing imminent as this article is being completed. The controlling faction, it seems, will stop at nothing to maintain their grip on the organisation. They are asking the court to give them proxy/postal voting, without the consent of the membership, breaking the constitution, and eliminating the only chance members have of removing an undesirable leadership. They are also continuing the campaign to brand the six dissidents as animal rights extremists, presenting affidavits from people implying they are members of the ALF, with a record of violence and intimidation. All these, and other lies are being presented to the court in the attempt to discredit the evidence that will be presented against Dominic Johnson and his supporters.

 

FOOTNOTE:

 

Twelve years on, we would suggest that the BUAV's attempts at making the society worthless have been entirely successful: witness 2006's BUAV 'National Cruelty-Free Week: "BUAV's 4th annual National Cruelty Free Week promises to be our biggest public awareness campaign yet. Be part of a coordinated effort to end cosmetics and household product testing on animals. There are many, many easy ways to get involved."