Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
As indicated in this article, there are issues which are out of the ordinary.
Firstly, the reduction of board members from seven to five, including two ex-officios from the AH and P, does not appear to be a sensible decision by the minister.
The last board had seven members plus one ex-officio from the AH and P.
The new configuration has three members plus two ex-officios from the AH and P, thus reducing community participation on the board by four.
The role of ex-officios is to inform the board of issues which affect their organisation, therefore having two ex-officios from the AH and P on the new board is unnecessary.
Bathurst Showground is a large business with many events spread right across the whole community spectrum over the calendar year.
A larger community representation on the board would be of considerable benefit.
Instead, the minister has decided on a reduction.
Secondly, a quorum for a board meeting with five members would require three to attend.
Any issue on the business paper involving the AH and P would require both ex-officios to declare a conflict of interest and they therefore would be unable to vote on that issue.
If one of the remaining three board members is absent, then the vote could not be taken because of a lack of quorum.
Experience tells me that very few board meetings actually have 100 per cent attendance, and therefore I believe the reduction in board members to five will prove to be unworkable.
The question needs to be asked: why would the minister entertain a situation which is unlikely to work?
Thirdly, the retraction of acceptance within an hour, by the minister's office, to Mr Fletcher, Mr Cooper and Mr Grant, thereby going against longstanding Crown Land interview and selection protocols, indicates either incompetence or something else.
I hope Mr Fletcher, Mr Cooper and Mr Grant receive valid answers to their queries from the minister.
