---

Apparently only one person did not understand the egregious nature of the posting of August 20, so let it be spelt out clearly here –  the slur cast upon John Ward was the President’s insinuation of nefarious intent in the following paragraphs of that post:

 

So let us all be clear on the motivation behind this; it is a cynical attempt to disqualify the vote of those members who have appointed me as their proxy.

You need to see who would profit by the passing of these Special Resolutions and make your own judgement.

These statements have nothing to do with losing an email, and it is incredulous that one could not see the offensive nature of those comments.

Further, whilst I have the utmost respect for Ken – and his work with the Sir John Monash Foundation – I am nothing if not thorough and near enough is not good enough when representing our members.

I did not rely upon the advice of, with respect, a long retired lawyer, but in fact went to the source and contacted Consumer Affairs directly.

There is no attempt to prevent any member voting – but to stop any one person (from spending 6 weeks soliciting votes from all and sundry) attempting to hijack the club to fulfill their own agenda.

This proposal is to actually protect the member’s votes – to ensure that each individuals vote counts.

What is proposed to be put to our members, is both legal and well within the scope of the Act.

Any attempt to deny our members the chance to have a say; including by misdirection, subversion or intimidation, is in fact illegal.

Whether the Registrar subsequently accepts the premise of the Rule changes is a matter for them, not you, nor anyone else, and we are not the first to raise concerns of individuals hijacking clubs and associations through proxy farming.

The Members have the right to choose.

The bottom line is, if one person had not spent the last 6-8 weeks campaigning and soliciting votes, none of these emails, or web posts would have arisen – because it would have been the members that would have voted – one person, one vote – not one person, 50 votes!

I do not think it is ethical, or morally righteous, to attempt to take the high ground, when the clear intention of one person is to wield a fistful of Proxy votes, (quite a few from people who don’t even know the name of the person they gave them to) to steer the vote the way he chooses.

As for Committee nominations, they have not yet closed, and do not close right up until the vote is called for – so I for one will not be so presumptuous as to assume that there will not be any further input from concerned Members who want to see the Club succeed.

 

Stuart Thompson

Vic President

← Back to previous page