The outcome of the recent mail vote instigated by the South Queensland Division that overturned a significant number of decisions taken by members of the National Control Council at the 1986 AGM (Annual General Meeting) brings into doubt the future viability of ANDRA.

In voting on these matters, the Victorian Division was faced with the difficult decision of whether or not to veto the vote and thereby re-open the rift that existed between the ANDRA administration of South Queensland and that in Victoria, or allowing the vote to take place thereby having faith in the members of the NCC (National Control Council) to enforce rules that they created.

As members are aware, some of these decisions were rules on major safety items while others were planning for the future. For these to be overturned after nearly six months advance notice and after being published in the 1987 Rule Book highlights the instability and inherent weakness of ANDRA. Further, ANDRA has not progressed beyond a rules making and sanctioning organization since its inception.

Whilst there will always be disagreement about whether rules relating to racing are good or bad, the deletion of the word "Pro" from Group Four shows a lack of foresight to the emergence of a new category of racing, particularly as no alternate title for the category was proposed. Currently Group Four competitors do not have a name for their chosen category of racing. This can only be considered amateurish and once again the racer must wonder about the quality of the leadership of ANDRA.

Within drag racing there are two schools of thought as to the future direction of ANDRA. The current situation means that we are heading for more of the same, ie., mediocrity. Alternatively for drag racing to progress and to fully capitalize on the growing interest shown by potential competitors and spectators (ie., the paying cutomer) then a major restructuring of ANDRA or the formation of a new organization that places a greater emphasis on marketing must take place.

At present the ANDRA officials of the Victorian Division to whom I have spoken have indicated their total dissatisfaction with this mail vote and consequently the current structure of ANDRA. As the people who were enforcing these rules changes with the Victorian racers they can see little purpose in continuing to devote the voluntary labour and out of pocket expenses of ANDRA.

Drag racing will continue to grow in both competitor and spectator numbers whether or not ANDRA exists. To the people who support the concept to market drag racing professionally, for example the Adelaide proposal, I suggest that they should address themselves to the inherent problems of ANDRA and question whether ANDRA and its personnel are capable of achieving these goals.

John Taverna
Deputy National Director