|
Robert Blake's Legacy to Britain’s Modern-day International Partnerships When Queen Elizabeth I commenced her reign of England in 1558, the realm was near to bankrupt, and she envied the wealth acquired by Habsburg Spain, Portugal and the Dutch States from their overseas territories. The maritime trade enjoyed by the Iberian Union and the Dutch in 16th Century financed their development as military forces and economic powers. It was not until 1649 that Council of State of the newly declared republic of the ‘Commonwealth of England’ directed its Commonwealth ships to add force to a new policy of empire building, but the Council’s dilemma was ‘who should be appointed as the Fleet’s Admirals?’
In February 1649, Colonel Robert Blake accepted his commission as General-at-Sea. After only six years, Admiral Blake demonstrated that his new Commonwealth Navy could successfully enforce Cromwell’s new foreign policy based on imperialistic, mercantile principles in both the Caribbean and Mediterranean Seas. The Navy had exercised command of the seas in order to allow Commonwealth merchant ships to trade from colonies acquired by force from other European powers. The British Empire was free to come of age.
Today, there is some public enthusiasm for closer political co-operation within European Union, and the Government of the United Kingdom is willing to commit more sovereignty to the European Commission. This is particularly true when it comes to foreign and security policy where the United Kingdom is a strong supporter of the common European Security and Defence Policy. The Reform Treaty, replacing the Constitution as the Union’s means of coping with enlargement, is the catalyst for further developing the common political and security arrangements in a climate of continuous economic growth. The European Union should provide the strategic partners that allow Britain to help promote economic wealth, liberty, democracy, tolerance and justice.
The attached paper will explore a notion of the contribution of Admiral Robert Blake's Navy to the growth of the British Empire and a notion of his legacy to the Royal Navy in the context of today’s international relationships. A systems approach will be used to make sense of some affairs that existed in mid-17th Century and then also to make sense of the even more complex political, social, economic and technological relationships of the 21st Century’s new commonwealths. SAHNS operates in compliance with the standards of the Charity Commission who usefully define governance as ‘the systems and processes concerned with ensuring the overall direction, effectiveness, supervision and accountability.’ As such, it might be useful to think of governance in terms of organisational structure, stakeholder authority and the regulatory arrangements necessary for a society to deliver purpose effectively. Notions for the continuing improvement of a society are commonly derived from its objects and stated constitution, which, for the SAHNS, were last amended by members at Annual General Meeting in 2006. Organisational Structure. The 2006 Constitution defines the purpose of the Society broadly as ‘to promote the study of archaeology, natural history and history ...’ as decided appropriate by the Board of Trustees. As a charitable organisation, the stakeholders of the Society should include the wider community. In controlling the affairs of the Society, the Board of Trustees should take cognisance of the advice of an Advisory Council, who also advises members of the Society, alongside that of its other appointed advisers. The constitution usefully indicates at least five groups of formal stakeholders; the Board of Trustees, Advisory Council, members, the community, and the Charity Commission (see attached diagram).
Stakeholder Authority. Members of the Society delegate full authority to the Board of Trustees at each Annual General Meeting, the conduct of which should be laid out in a set of rules, and they hold the Board of Trustees to account for the proper administration of the business of the Society. As the Board has the ultimate responsibility to direct the affairs of the Society during the year, it should maintain and regularly review its own internal controls, reporting, policies and procedures so that it can mitigate risks and take advantage of opportunities. This should ensure that the Society remains solvent, well-run and delivers its purpose thereby empowering and benefitting all stakeholders, including the Advisory Council, committees, members and the community. The Society should produce timely records of meetings and outcomes of decisions that are available to all stakeholders.
Regulatory Arrangements. Charity law will have a significant impact on the external regulation of the Society, which should also comply with employment, health and safety, and anti-discrimination law. The Charity Commission recommends its ‘hallmarks of an effective charity’ as a general benchmark for best practice. A voluntary and community sector partnership, endorsed by the Charity Commission, produced a code of good governance to help organisations apply principles making up this benchmark, and the National Council for Voluntary Organisations has published a tool kit to help organisations develop best practice.
Way Forward. Issues, recently aired at a special general meeting of the Society, have highlighted the need for the Board of Trustees to review its internal control, reporting, policies and procedures on a regular basis. Evidence of the successful leadership of the Society might assure stakeholders that the Board is properly exercising the authority delegated annually to it. The Charity Commission’s ‘hallmarks’ and the ‘tool kit’ published by the National Council for Voluntary Organisations might be helpful to the Society in producing evidence of continuous improvement in governance.
EurIng W H J KellyCEng FIMarEST
|