The meter is red-lining again.
How can any member ever trust any communication that comes from the new auDA?
The CEO and Chairman have already been exposed as promising members one thing at the AGM – and then reneging.
And now we’ve just caught auDA out in another “porky”. This is part of their member newsletter on Tuesday:
Here’s The Truth!
auDA are being forced to put them back by the Freedom of Information (FOI) process. No mention of that in their newsletter!
Thanks to Josh Rowe (former Director of auDA), and a number of financial contributors, a successful FOI application was made, and approximately 115 historical documents are being released.
auDA fought the release of these documents “tooth and nail”. It really makes you wonder why. Have a look at the highlighted sections of the FOI decision – Clauses 62 through to 75 on Page 7 below.
PDF: Notice of Access Decision
Future Board Minutes
Given auDA’s stated stance on “future Minutes”, this is just another reason that Resolution 1 of the S249D Members Request must proceed to a vote.
“That all historical Board Minutes, Agendas and Reports (public versions) are restored to the auDA website; and that future Board Minutes, Agendas and Reports (public versions) are published in a timely manner.”
Ned O’Meara – 6th July 2017
Disclaimer
I think many members would vote a Loss of Confidence in auDA’s current management and the current auDA Board?
Perhaps it is time for this to go a member vote and The Commonwealth to really step in?
That Legal Director response hints as as wake up call to auDA to stop their games and stop the false claims of “best practice” and “legal advice” excuses.
With advice like this is it time for auDA to find new lawyers again?
As ever, great analytical work Ned.
You’ve clarified one of the question marks I raised in my reply yesterday, with a confirmation that auDA actively attempted to have the FoI dismissed and is only taking action now because it has to.
Crystal-ball gazing now: auDA still refuses to publish future Minutes, Agendas and Reports. Given that the Government’s lawyers (Clause 65) placed significant weight upon the fact auDA had already published historical documents, will the Board oppose subsequent FoI’s on the grounds that post-2016 documents have never been seen?
That wouldn’t be a good look for auDA but an argument I bet their lawyers tell them they can win.
One of the things that came across for me was that the FOI decision was also based on that the minutes were factual documents.
Members want the truth and not spin and the minutes is/was the only way of getting this information from auDA which is why Resolution 1 should be passed.
Josh Rowe and David Goldstein have both previously been on the inside of auDA and have continued to use best endeavours to keep them accountable. Full credit to them both.
However it would appear that even getting rid of Stewart Benjamin (with a strong resemblance to Kyle MacLachlan circa 1990) will not be enough to clear the rot, when the rot appears to be caused by political alliances. Maybe its time the entire board was called for re-election.