Emma Slawinski Can’t Save the League While These Trustees Remain
When Dan Norris was arrested on suspicion of rape and child sex offences, the League Against Cruel Sports moved quickly — to delete him from its website. One day, he was the face of its campaigns. The next, he had vanished into thin air, with not a whisper of explanation offered to supporters or the public. But for those watching closely, the real scandal is not the arrest itself — which, to be clear, has not resulted in charges — but what came before it: a litany of governance failures, secrecy, and apparent conflicts of interest that now demand urgent answers.
Let’s begin with the basics. Norris quit the League’s board on May 29, 2024, only to be quietly co-opted as a trustee weeks later — and then re-elevated to Chair. Why? On whose authority? And what did the League’s Deputy CEO, Chris Luffingham, and the trustees know at the time?
Because here’s what’s indisputable: by December 2024, multiple journalists had been sniffing around the Norris story. Rumours of serious allegations were doing the rounds in political and charity circles alike. Yet the League’s leadership ploughed ahead with Norris as their frontman — featuring him prominently in national Boxing Day press coverage and on social media posts just 24 hours before his arrest. That’s not just poor judgement; it’s reckless indifference.
The Reappointment That Reeked of Cronyism
So let’s ask the obvious:
When did the League’s leadership first hear rumours of these allegations — and why did they ignore them?
If there were red flags (and there were), they chose to look the other way.
What’s more, Chris Luffingham didn’t just sit back and let this happen — he facilitated it. In a letter to League members ahead of the 2024 AGM, Luffingham informed them that Norris had already been co-opted back onto the board as Chair, and provided instructions on how to cast a vote to formalise that appointment — without once acknowledging the controversy or his own conflict of interest.
Luffingham is Chair of Trustees at Trinity Bristol. Dan Norris, as Metro Mayor, is responsible for the West of England Combined Authority (WECA), which funds Citizens for Culture — a project in which Trinity is a key partner. WECA has delegated grant decisions to its CEO, meaning the same Mayor whose reappointment was endorsed by Luffingham also held influence over the funding pipeline of Luffingham’s other organisation. That is a textbook conflict of interest. Why wasn’t it declared?
Who Really Runs the League?
During his first stint as Chair, Norris reportedly delegated many of his responsibilities to his Mayoral Special Adviser, Alex Mayer, a person who was not even officially appointed to the League. This was no secret: Private Eye exposed it in black and white. And yet, when members were asked to rubber-stamp Norris’s return, this wasn’t disclosed. Why not?
Then there’s the thorny issue of the League’s 2024 AGM — or rather, the restricted AGM. In the run-up, the League quietly blocked new members from joining. Why? Longstanding supporters believe this was done to head off potential opposition to Norris’s reappointment. If that’s true, it was a cynical and calculated move — an act of suppression dressed up as procedure.
Because here’s the truth: this isn’t just about one man. It’s about a culture. A culture that treats transparency as optional, governance as a nuisance, and members as irrelevant. It’s about a charity that once prided itself on accountability, now reduced to scrambling for cover while hoping no one looks too closely.
The Questions That Won’t Go Away
Supporters — who give their time, money and trust to the League — deserve answers. Among them:
- When did trustees and senior staff first hear of the allegations now under police investigation?
- Why did the League continue to promote Norris in media appearances after those rumours were widely known?
- Why wasn’t Luffingham’s relationship with Norris, through the WECA–Trinity funding link, declared?
- Who authorised Dan Norris’s reappointment just weeks after his resignation, and why?
- Why was new membership restricted ahead of the 2024 AGM — and who made that decision?
- Why were League members kept in the dark about Norris’s prior failure to perform his duties properly?
- Why didn’t the League immediately suspend Norris following news of his arrest, rather than waiting for him to resign?
These are not abstract questions. They speak directly to whether the League Against Cruel Sports has any commitment left to transparency or good governance. Because while the charity may want to delete its mistakes from the website, the rest of us remember.
Time for Accountability
Whether Dan Norris is charged or not, whether he is convicted or not, is for the courts. But the decisions made by Luffingham and the three trustees — Astrid Clifford, Ashleigh Fiona Brown and Viktoria Petrova — are already indefensible.
This is not hindsight. These issues were raised at the time. Whistleblowers warned about Norris’s absentee leadership. Campaigners flagged governance concerns. Members asked questions and were met with silence, spin, or outright contempt.
It is time — long past time — for those responsible to be held to account.
Chris Luffingham, Astrid Clifford, Ashleigh Fiona Brown and Viktoria Petrova must resign immediately.
Not because they couldn’t have predicted an arrest. But because they ignored serious warnings, failed in their duties, and treated League supporters with utter disdain. Their continued presence is not just an insult to those who care about animals — it is a danger to the League’s future.
The League cannot rebuild its reputation while those who undermined it remain in post.
CEO Emma Slawinski cannot begin the work of restoring credibility until they are gone. It’s time for change.
