Tonight, the Parramatta Leagues Club AGM takes place, and it looks like being another circus.
I've had it confirmed today that factionalism is absolutely certain to raise it's head tonight, with individuals phoning around trying to garner support to vote against all of the motions - mostly it seems, as a symbolic rejection of Steve Sharp and his board.
I cannot attend the AGM tonight, my three years tenure from my suspension doesn't tick over until next month, so I would appreciate anyone attending to give us a run-down. If you are a member, I would encourage you to attend. It is important that people with voting rights, exercise their rights to vote - not just at elections but at AGMs - or else motivated parties, know they can use the annual general meetings for their own purposes.
The resolutions to be passed are as follows:
1) The first ordinary resolution is that the NRL club is defined as a core property.
2) The first special resolution involves removing mention of special qualifications related to the now liquidated PDRL.
3) The second resolution prevents employees of the club for running for the board within three years of ending their employment.
All of these resolutions are administrative and I can't help but point out, that there is no genuine reform items here.
Even the first resolution, while I support it, has very little real effect - a board that wanted to privatise or jettison the NRL franchise, can always withhold funding, and push the NRL club into liquidation. I'd like to see the level of funding mandated in the constitution, but that's the subject of another blog.
There is also the issue of whether the franchise can even be considered a "core property" given it isn't actually a property, which was raised at the members information meeting and here by Chris Jurd. Based on the below link it doesn't appear it can be, so it will be interesting to see if the resolution has been ammended at all.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/rca1976173/s41j.html
The second resolution allows the club to actually operate, as the constitution describes, so there's no reason not for it to go through. Again, we're just putting a band aid over a wound that is gushing blood, rather than bothering to operate. According to the club "the second special resolution is to implement controls in the Leagues Club similar to those recommended by the NRL and Price Waterhouse Coopers". Again, it's a minor change that is just going to be part of the factional sparring.
I'm on record, as saying I'm deeply disappointed that the board didn't take the liquidation of the PDRL and the NRL's governance review recommendations, as the catalyst to start the process of genuine and meaningful constitution reform, which to my mind should have begun at this AGM.
More likely than not, though, the main topic at hand will be the NRL salary cap drama and whether directors should stand down. To the best of my understanding, and I believe this to also be the club's understanding, any no confidence motion or call for the director's heads would be purely symbolic. It would not surprise if, a someone attempts to raise a motion that if points are deducted than directors should step down, purely on the basis of applying pressure if that result comes down.
That's as much as I can do this year, so as mentioned, hopefully someone else can step up and provide us with a run-down of the actual AGM.
And like I said if are eligible to vote, do take the opportunity to get yourself there. It starts at 6pm at the Leagues Club Auditorium.
Replies
Frankly I'm sick of all the childish crap that's been going on for too too long.
Bunch of spoilt pricks!!!
You have answered my point on another thread Phil. Certainly if I was a member I would attend.
At least those here who are voting members can have a fair idea of how to vote.
Phil, they constantly ignore constitutional reform because it doesn't suit them. Its got to change and as you said it was the perfect time to start.
I am sure that tonight will be pretty much like the last AGM where security will stop you voicing your opinion.
this bloody place has turned into a dictatorship by Sharp, Issa and co.
I hope that very shortly we see the back of you imposters.
In going incognito . . .
Just to get one fact right. You don` t put forward a resolution at any meeting. You put forward a motion. The motion is voted on and then becomes the resolution of the meeting e.g. "The meeting resolved not to accept the motion."
Now if the administration is saying "The first ordinary resolution…" , "The first special resolution…" etc then the administration is wrong. I speculate that in law, anything voted on as a resolution, would be deemed invalid in law--you must vote on a motion not a resolution.
It is a common error--too common--. Might we be so lucky that the NRL in handing down the penalty to us makes the same error, rending the penalty invalid?.
You legal- eagles representing the Eels, keep your eye out for this blunder.
If the NRL and /or its legal eagles read this, well then, eat s--t!
It was 3 years from my "reinstatement" from yes, that trumped up suspension.
what picture?............
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 6 Next