RSPCA’s Ashleigh Brown: A Trustee in Title, Absent in Duty

Ashleigh Fiona Brown has been a trustee of the League Against Cruel Sports since 2020. In that time, the charity has lurched from controversy to crisis — yet when it comes to facing scrutiny, Brown is conspicuously absent.

Nowhere is this clearer than in the ongoing legal case brought by former CEO Andy Knott against the League. The charity’s witnesses have been named. Brown is not among them. Her absence is striking. She has been on the board for the entire period the case covers — the years when the alleged actions took place — yet is apparently not considered a relevant witness.

The Charity Commission’s Essential Trustee guidance is clear: trustees must act in their charity’s best interests, avoid conflicts, and give enough time, thought and energy to the role. If Brown has not been engaged enough to give evidence in a case of this magnitude, donors and members must ask — what exactly is she doing as a trustee?

The Brooke Departure

Brown was already a senior figure at Brooke, the horse and donkey charity, when she became a trustee of the League in 2020. At Brooke, she rose to the role of Global Animal Welfare Advisor during a tenure of around 14 years.

In summer 2023, she took a year’s sabbatical, travelling through the Middle East and South America, posting publicly about working with animals abroad.

When she returned in May or June 2024, she was told she was being made redundant. The circumstances, according to those close to Brooke, were unusual. She was reportedly the only one of around 1,200 employees to be made redundant. The explanation? The charity allegedly restructured her team so there were three people at her level, but only two roles.

It’s claimed her return was not welcomed by colleagues. Knowing her HR rights, she threatened to fight the decision — and, according to one insider, Brooke “got a huge payoff” to persuade her to go quietly.

If true, it’s an extraordinary exit for someone in a senior welfare role. It raises an obvious question: why was her return so unwelcome?

A Tale of Two Redundancies

Brown’s determination to resist her own redundancy stands in sharp contrast to her inaction when nearly a third of League staff were made redundant in 2022. These were not senior, highly paid staff, but low-paid animal welfare professionals — some with decades of service to the charity.

Unlike trustees in 2017, who personally met with staff facing redundancy, Brown never met a single one of them. She didn’t even give them a few minutes of her time. No reassurance, no thanks, no recognition of years of work.

The contrast could not be more stark: when her own livelihood was at risk, she fought hard; when the livelihoods of dozens of dedicated League employees were at risk, she was nowhere to be seen.

A Pattern of Absence

This is not an isolated lapse. Brown’s trusteeship has been marked by absences — physical and moral. She took a year’s sabbatical abroad while still on the board. She supported (or at least did not oppose) the scrapping of the League’s investigations team, once feared by hunters. She stayed silent during the mishandled reappointment of Dan Norris as Chair, despite his earlier unexplained resignation — and his later resignation after being arrested on suspicion of serious offences.

Brown has also failed to hold fellow trustee Astrid Clifford to account for her behaviour on social media. Clifford’s posts and reposts on X (formerly Twitter) have mocked Muslims, climate protesters, and conservation efforts, and even criticised blind people for receiving help when seeking medical attention — a clear breach of the League’s trustee code of conduct. Yet under Brown’s watch, no action has been taken. The Essential Trustee guidance states that safeguarding a charity’s reputation is a core duty. In this case, Brown has been silent.

As an employee of the RSPCA, reporting to Dr Sam Gaines, Brown’s conduct as a trustee inevitably reflects on that organisation’s own commitment to governance and ethical standards. The Essential Trustee guidance also states:

“You must avoid putting yourself in a position where your duty to your charity conflicts with your personal interests or loyalty to any other person or body.”

Her dual role, combined with repeated absences when leadership was needed, undermines the credibility of both organisations.

Trusteeship Is Not a LinkedIn Badge

Trusteeship is a duty, not a networking tool. It demands showing up, speaking up, and standing up for the organisation — not just for oneself. Brown’s record suggests the role has been far more useful for enhancing her CV than for advancing the League’s mission.

If Brown will not step aside voluntarily, then League members and donors must ask why a trustee who has failed to meet the most basic duties is still in post.

Her position is not only questionable. It is untenable.

Ashleigh Brown should resign.