2015 Parramatta Leagues Club Election thread

[emjaycee]

Wonder if Smith has been the ultimate puppet in all this.
DF used the Reg. Clubs act and the Constitution to kill 2 special motions at the last AGM. Now he has a means of publically lambasting the incumbents before the election for getting it wrong.

 

[Jake the snake]

What is the basis of your interpretation. There is no suggestion in that Act of a need to imply any interpretation of 'to hold office' other than a literal one? You hold office from the time the result of a poll is declared until you resign, are sacked, or until the start of the next AGM (when all positions are spilled). At any given time, the people who 'hold office' are the current directors. If the intention of the Act was to prohibit employees (or personal services contractors as I suspect this case really is) it would include this. Ben Smith's behaviour is perfectly consistent with being informed of the content s.30 of the Act and then giving notice. I note that the club's statement makes no reference to who made this deliberation (i.e. they do not quote or reference the returning officer or the advice of the returning officer).

I'll say it again, this is childish stuff. Neither the Constitution or the Act prohibit Smith from standing for election. I'm all for the current Board staying on, I think they are doing a pretty fair job, but that doesn't mean I like everything they do

Well said! I shall call the plumber a new name now.....Vladimir Putin. Rigged elections are Vladimir's specialty.

 

[Jake the snake]

Yes but baz this is politics so that you have to agree completely with the side you align with, and completely shun the other side.

Even when your mob starts doing the same things the other mob used to do.

I agree. It is incredibly petty and just embarrassed the club, it's candidates, and it's procedures yet again.

More snouts in the trough jealously guarding the spoils.

Completely unimpressive.

x 2 it's hypocracy at it's worst. Is this worse than the Fitzy trying to buy our vote with Tingha palace freebie? Their needs to be an investigation.

 

[Jake the snake]

Wonder if Smith has been the ultimate puppet in all this.
DF used the Reg. Clubs act and the Constitution to kill 2 special motions at the last AGM. Now he has a means of publically lambasting the incumbents before the election for getting it wrong.

You have to admit that it's pretty embarrassing when our chairman doesn't know the rules.

 

[emjaycee]

You have to admit that it's pretty embarrassing when our chairman doesn't know the rules.

Actually i dont have to admit that because i doubt that any Chairman of any club knows all the rules associated with the governing of their club in detail. A licenced club in NSW is governed by the Reg. Clubs Act, the Corporations Act and its own Constitution - way too difficult for an elected Chairman to know all the intricate details of.

I would admit that the legal advisor to the club/board should be aware of these rules as this would be their job.

 

[Chipmunk]

If Smith has invoiced the club as late as the 20th of April as has been stated and it was completed on the 27th of April then he would have been an employee of the club at the time of his nomination. As such he can't hold office as a member of the governing body of the club.

Since when do employees Invoice their employer for work performed?

 

[Avenger]

Since when do employees Invoice their employer for work performed?

They do if they are subcontracting.

 

[Chipmunk]

They do if they are subcontracting.

Well then they're not an "employee"

 

[BennyBoy]

Well said! I shall call the plumber a new name now.....Vladimir Putin. Rigged elections are Vladimir's specialty.

:lol::lol:

 

[Suitman]

Anyone else get the email from the club.?
Them's fightin' words.

Suity

 

[I bleed blue & gold]

The soap opera that is the Parramatta board elections has taken another weird turn, with radio commentator Ray Hadley denying he has paid former Eels hooker and current 2GB stablemate Mark Riddell to stand. Hadley is closely aligned with long-standing former club CEO Denis Fitzgerald. "The answer to the question for the social media types is no I'm not paying Mark Riddell to stand for the board," Hadley said on the weekend. "Mark Riddell out of courtesy before he nominated phoned me and said 'would it create a problem if I stood for the board as far as my job at the Continuous Call is concerned?' and I said 'No it doesn't'. Bob [Fulton] of course has a connection with Manly. People are free to do what they want to do apart from where they work. Do I support Mark Riddell being a member of the Parramatta Leagues Club board? If he wants to be, good luck to him. Am I paying him to do it? No I'm not."

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...tta-eels-board-elections-20150503-1myxxk.html

 

[phantom eel]

What is the basis of your interpretation.

Common sense? Experience?

Unfortunately, I'm not sure which box under the bed contains my old printed copy of the LC Constitution, but I would expect our Club Constitution contains more detail on eligibility to stand at our elections, to make our Club's interpretation of that part of the Act quite clear...

Think of this example... people under 18 (like employees) are not eligible "to hold office" at a registered club. If you (as returning officer) received a nomination at closing time from someone who was 17 - but turning 18 one day prior to the scheduled election - you'd likely rule it ineligible, as the nominee did not meet the eligibility "to hold office" at the time of nomination. Because they would be campaigning etc in the lead-up to their birthday, while they are ineligible.

Similarly, if you received a nomination from a Club employee who had not yet resigned their employment, you'd likely rule it ineligible, as the nominee did not meet the eligibility "to hold office" at the time of nomination. Whether the person then later resigned their employment is out of your hands as a returning officer, you can only rule on how things stand at close of nominations - and a nomination from a current Club employee (who had not yet resigned) means (from your point of view) they could be campaigning etc while they are ineligible - before they decide whether or not to resign if they were elected "to hold office".

You'd rule Ben Smith's nomination out immediately once you realised he was on the Club's payroll (imo). Even if Ben resigned his role after that, it's too late... While it was not stated this would have been either the independent returning officer's decision, or the returning officer's decision based on legal advice. These guys don't usually get this stuff wrong, otherwise they'd be out of a gig pretty soon....

Does anyone know if Ben Smith/Spagnolo have been complaining about this ruling at all, or whether it's just a few people on a forum arguing the toss?

 

[T.S Quint]

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...tta-eels-board-elections-20150503-1myxxk.html

The soap opera that is the Parramatta board elections has taken another weird turn

Doesn't sound like a weird turn at all.
In fact, it seems pretty normal. Stupid journos.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Common sense? Experience?

Unfortunately, I'm not sure which box under the bed contains my old printed copy of the LC Constitution, but I would expect our Club Constitution contains more detail on eligibility to stand at our elections, to make our Club's interpretation of that part of the Act quite clear...

Well ,you can expect all you like.....but the Constitution doesn't make that interpretation any clearer (in the sense that you imply).

Think of this example... people under 18 (like employees) are not eligible "to hold office" at a registered club. If you (as returning officer) received a nomination at closing time from someone who was 17 - but turning 18 one day prior to the scheduled election - you'd likely rule it ineligible, as the nominee did not meet the eligibility "to hold office" at the time of nomination. Because they would be campaigning etc in the lead-up to their birthday, while they are ineligible.

Here is a better example (i.e. one that I haven't just assumed is true), from the NSW Electoral Council. Public servants are prohibited from holding office. However, public servants are not required to resign until elected.

[/QUOTE]

Similarly, if you received a nomination from a Club employee who had not yet resigned their employment, you'd likely rule it ineligible, as the nominee did not meet the eligibility "to hold office" at the time of nomination. Whether the person then later resigned their employment is out of your hands as a returning officer, you can only rule on how things stand at close of nominations - and a nomination from a current Club employee (who had not yet resigned) means (from your point of view) they could be campaigning etc while they are ineligible - before they decide whether or not to resign if they were elected "to hold office".

You'd rule Ben Smith's nomination out immediately once you realised he was on the Club's payroll (imo). Even if Ben resigned his role after that, it's too late... While it was not stated this would have been either the independent returning officer's decision, or the returning officer's decision based on legal advice. These guys don't usually get this stuff wrong, otherwise they'd be out of a gig pretty soon....

[/QUOTE]
Would 'common sense' suggest that you'd ask them to clarify their situation? Particularly as in the Smith case, he hardly appears to be a regular employee of the club? It appears that he is a contractor.

Does anyone know if Ben Smith/Spagnolo have been complaining about this ruling at all, or whether it's just a few people on a forum arguing the toss?

My problem is that I'm sick to f**king death of the circus. But as this is a forum, yep it is also a few people on a forum arguing the toss ;-)

 

[Gronk]

 

[Captain BF]

It was only a couple of weeks ago that Riddell said on 2GB that he still considered himself a Dragon.

 

[phantom eel]

Here is a better example (i.e. one that I haven't just assumed is true), from the NSW Electoral Council. Public servants are prohibited from holding office. However, public servants are not required to resign until elected.

Good example, of which I was also aware. I'm just saying that everything isn't necessarily like it is for other professions and under other circumstances, and that among several possible interpretations, there is one where the refusal of Ben Smith's nomination can seem like "common sense" and not controversial or a big deal in the slightest.

My problem is that I'm sick to f**king death of the circus. But as this is a forum, yep it is also a few people on a forum arguing the toss ;-)

It's only a circus because for some reason we still have historical factions (Fitzy, Spagnolo) who keep wanting to reclaim control of the Board. 27 candidates for 7 spots, a bun fight for no real reason...! Sharp isn't perfect however is his own man, and his team will live or die into the future via his performance and decisions.

So far it looks (to me) like Sharp's successfully steered the ship through the middle of the two duelling ego-factions that have plagues our club's governance sing 2008. This should be the election where the members finally put the Fitzy and Spagnolo factions out to pasture, never to come back.... The last thing we need now is to chop and change course or let any of those candidates aligned to these fighting factions back into the picture.

 

[hineyrulz]

:lol:

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

It's only a circus because for some reason we still have historical factions (Fitzy, Spagnolo) who keep wanting to reclaim control of the Board. 27 candidates for 7 spots, a bun fight for no real reason...! Sharp isn't perfect however is his own man, and his team will live or die into the future via his performance and decisions.

So far it looks (to me) like Sharp's successfully steered the ship through the middle of the two duelling ego-factions that have plagues our club's governance sing 2008. This should be the election where the members finally put the Fitzy and Spagnolo factions out to pasture, never to come back.... The last thing we need now is to chop and change course or let any of those candidates aligned to these fighting factions back into the picture.

Agreed. I don't want Spags or Fitzy or their stooges back. But I also don't want them to be able to say that we lost coz our guys weren't allowed to run.

 

[I bleed blue & gold]

If Riddell really meant that, why would he run for the board if he wasn't a Fitzy puppet??