My articles are always written without fear or favour. In saying that, I’ve always been a positive person by disposition, and would much prefer to look for the good in a situation.
So let me say first up that it gives me no pleasure to “bash” auDA. But in the interests of auDA Members, I have to again today.
Why? Quite simply, the Board and/or CEO have not honoured some of their most important commitments and assurances to Members with regards communication and transparency. Let’s call it as it is – broken promises.
auDA Members Have Rights
Remember the most important factor when it comes to auDA – it is a membership based organisation. This is despite certain recent attempts by some to “spin it” otherwise.
.au DOMAIN ADMINISTRATION LTD – ACN 079 009 340 – A COMPANY LIMITED BY GUARANTEE (auDA)
So whilst this is a company that falls under the majority of regulations of the Corporations Act 2001, the one huge difference to a normal company is that there are no shareholders. There are Members – Supply Class and Demand Class. These Members elect 4 directors each to the Board; then the Board elects 3 independent directors. Total of 11. Refer to Section 9 of the Constitution (yes, this is one document that still exists on the auDA website!). So are we the tail wagging the dog; or the dog wagging the tail?
Members have rights under the Constitution and the Corporations Act.
Why I’m Speaking Up
One of the biggest bugbears that Members had last year was lack of communication and transparency. One prime example was that Board Minutes and Agendas were not published on time – we didn’t have a clue what was going on.
With the appointment of a new Chair (Stuart Benjamin) and new CEO (Cameron Boardman), I genuinely believed auDA Members had a bright future – in fact, this is part of what I wrote after the AGM in Sydney:
“The Chairman and CEO are a total breath of fresh air compared to what used to be. I believe that this augurs well for the future – particularly if they are genuine about wanting to consult and involve stakeholders along the way.”
Why was I so confident that communication and transparency were going to improve?
♦ Listen for yourself to the Chair (Stuart Benjamin), and the CEO (Cameron Boardman). This is a short audio recording from the AGM – “yours truly” asking the question.
In answer to my question, Stuart Benjamin said:
“So Cameron has actually given the Board that undertaking …”
And then Cameron started his answer with this:
“I never want to be in a situation in answering these questions with an apology, but I have to do that …”
And for those that want to hear the CEO’s preamble and introduction to the AGM, have a listen here (it’s 7 minutes long, but it does contain some important assurances to Members).
But alas, it has all changed for the worse since the AGM. The auDA website has been stripped of all previous Minutes and Agendas – you can’t even access a copy of the latest Annual Report or Cameron Ralph Report.
Shame auDA, shame.
Come on Independent and Demand Class Directors – please insist that auDA becomes the transparent organisation that we were promised by the CEO and Chairman. It’s never too late to do the right thing.
Ned O’Meara – 2nd May 2017
Disclaimer
Some questions for AUDA:
Whose idea was it to remove the minutes?
Whose idea was the code of conduct which directly conflicts with AUDA’s constitution?
Why is board branch stacking of membership still continuing?
Is it the board holding AUDA back or the CEO?
Some good questions there Paul, but I doubt if we’ll ever get an answer. Perhaps Erhan will tell you at DNT drinks next week? 😉
The board appointed the CEO. Do you seriously think he was going to push any other barrow?
Is that a rhetorical question David? 😉
David, I can’t really tell on this myself. I kind of suspect the CEO is ok whilst the board is pushing all these bad decisions, I could be wrong but that is just how it seems.
The difference between the board and the CEO is the Canberra factor in my view, it has already been noted that the CEO has been travelling to Canberra because of concern from government on .au, I’d guess (and hope) that he has different priorities to the board.
The CEO and all “independents” directors have been appointed by the cabal in control. They all owe their positions to them.
Which helps explain the recent unanimous board resolutions.
That and having NFI what they are about to impose on Australia with the direct registration debacle.
Agree but the true master is the Australian Government, that seems even more apparent from last weeks events.
I do not support auDA’s removal of past and current minutes of auDA board meetings. There had been a long standing process which allowed confidential items to me removed from the public version of board minutes. Therefore why has auDA now decided to delete all the minutes? It smells of a lack of accountability and transparency.
Exactly – two sets of Minutes have seemed to work well for many years.
I wonder if Ned will be frisked at this years AGM?
It would seem they asked a lot of questions and then filed them, seems like same rubbish, just different names.
@Brendan – very funny. 🙂
But in all seriousness, the AGM should be recorded by auDA itself (audiovisual). And then posted on their website for all Members to see. Just like they did for the auIGF.
I have requested the Australian Government (an observer on the auDA board) for copies of all the previous and future auDA board agendas, minutes and reports.
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/au_domain_administration_ltd_boa/
Josh, Someone tried that before when they noted the very close relationships between Cameron Boardman , Stuart Benjamin and Erhan Karabardak…
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/au_domain_administration_ltd_aud
auDA refuses to be transparent and refuses to follow good governance. The Communications Department should take over both administration and wholesale registry. Problem solved.
auDA and the auDA Board has now lost all credibility. It was stacked by politically linked friends just like some of the jobs and contracts have been to auDA staff.
Under the new CEO and new/ old board things have gotten worse. They need to all resign or they will be investigated and that could mean a worse situation for them… as it could for past people.
Something stinks and now everyone is smelling it. Perfume won’t cover up the stench.
It might be time for some legal ” discovery”… now that would be worth posting to all members.
I have been told this is just the tip of the iceberg…. the auDA Foundation and why the previous CEO was so hastily terminated has not been discussed in detail as yet….
auDA is spending a fortune on legal fees again apparently.. why.. for what matters.. should members be made aware of these?
auDA Board Member Erhan Karabardak ( lawyer) complained of the huge auDA legal costs and asked why previously. Has the tender for auDA legal services been put on the auDA website and made open and public.. No of course it has not! In the past it was many $millions spent a year!
All aboard the auDA gravy train…. next stop wholesale registry builder contract and staff to run it….then next stop additional money making .au extension…happy times ahead again if you are on the auDA gravy train.
Nothing has changed.. it has gotten worse.
If they won’t put them back on the website for the benefit of all Members, then there is no other option but FOI.
Ned, we owe you gratitude for “trying to keep the bastards honest”. I for one thank you for your efforts.
Jeff
Thanks mate.
I’m glad AusRegistry have been given the boot but also don’t want the government to take over our beloved Domain Name industry on their own. I think this would send policy rules backwards. This direct .au registration mess is a whole different conversation. Lately I’m trying to find positives in auDA moving forward and now becoming it’s own Registry. However, now that “The auDA website has been stripped of all previous Minutes and Agendas” has been raised, I too would like to know why these have been removed?
I want to be part of a virtual country that has pride in its brand.
I want supply and demand working better together towards one goal.
I want our ccTLD to be the envy of the world.
I want to be proud to be associated with auDA.
I want auDA to be great.
Can you find a grain of greatness in yourselves to make my dream come true?
Please……
Well said Scott. I concur.
Good to see that my post to LinkedIn of this article was viewed by auDA! And ICANN.
For what it’s worth, below is a recent email exchange with auDA:
Begin message:
Thanks for this Ian.
This particular snip concerns me more than anything (bolding is mine):
I can’t believe that every single Director agreed not to publish Minutes / Agendas etc?
I have contacted a number of past Directors of auDA about this topic (not just the ones who have publicly commented on Domainer), and they were aghast at this total lack of transparency.
Shame, shame, shame.
Hello Ned and others
It’s not just about transparency, which is important of course. But it’s also about accountability of auDA and its Board to its stakeholders – international and national. Australian stakeholders include: members of auDA and non-members including end-users/registrants/holders of domain name licences, registrars, ACCC, ACMA, Minister for Communications, the Federal Government and its Cabinet and, ultimately, the Federal Parliament (House of Representative Members and Senators).
If there’s one thing fifty plus years of involvement and interest in public policy taught me, it is that accountability and transparency are fundamentally important for good governance; and, essential pre-conditions for stakeholder trust and confidence in public institutions. Failure to consistently meet high standards of governance, accountability and transparency to stakeholders, invites government intervention.
I have seen many examples of ministerial and government intervention to ensure high standards of governance, transparency and accountability to stakeholders. The iron fist of government in a velvet glove remarkably is effective, as is moral suasion. Moral suasion appears to have been relatively ineffective when it comes to auDA.
In my view the time has come for auDA – or another entity performing like functions – to be subject to a legislative framework that provides for more effective governance and greater accountability and transparency.
Ian Johnston
Observer of auDA (2000-2017). Member of auDA’s Names Policy and Competition Model Advisory Panels (2000-2001).
Advocate for and consultant to national small business consumer and industry associations on telecommunications and ecommerce (1998-2006).
Policy advisor in Federal Departments and their Ministers, mainly Communications, Treasury, Finance and Defence (1962 to 1996).
Thank you for your excellent contribution Ian.
I loved this snip:
“As part of auDA’s ongoing commitment to reforming and improving its governance, the auDA Board unanimously resolved to improve its accountability processes by adhering to best practice principles.
“I can’t believe that every single Director agreed not to publish Minutes / Agendas etc?”
////////////////////////
I guess the question is what exactly was the vote wording? Voting to “improve its accountability processes by adhering to best practice principles” sounds wishy washy, what did directors actually agree to?
I believe demand side elected representative Tim has been ordered by AUDA supply side puppet masters not to speak on anything genuine (just like happened with previous directors?) so we may not get a decent answer on this.
AUDA Board Meeting Transcript,
Tim here is a list of things you may speak about,
1. Plugins
2. Web development
3. Rogue One the Movie
Here is a list of things you may not speak about,
1. AUDA