Ann: Notice of General Meeting/Proxy Form , page-22

Hugh 11,

You express a sentiment which many of us feel.However to finalise this JG episode an established procedure has to be followed to close the matter properly.We need to be informed as to what this all about.Some posters appear to be foreshadowing a brave new world of contained admin costs on the basis of no information at all.Others are saying he has moved on.Based on what? Seeing that there is a resolution to remove him, rather than being in receipt(as far as we know) of his resignation, tends to suggest that he might in fact be being moved on.

The two issues needing clarification:

a)A full disclosure as to the reasons for his departure.Should JG take issue,his right of reply must be respected.

b)His replacement on what terms? This brings up the whole pressing issue of excessive costs.What will the new CEO's remuneration be? Will the board be slimmed down? Will everybody take a haircut?(the secretary is the first to come to mind here).I would not just assume that the remuneration scales will be adjusted downwards.They could in fact stay as they are.As we have heard nothing from the board on this issue,clarification before the vote is essential.

Once the situation is properly in perspective,then it is reasonable for voting on the resolution to take place,but not before.One can detect a sort of "lynch mob" mentality rearing its head here."Give him the shove and be done with it...that's good enough for me." It may be good enough for some, but in any ultimate sense it is nothing like good enough.Being given no option but to vote on the blind will raise feelings of indignation in many.People object to being treated like fools.As a protest vote the resolution could actually be lost. Or there could be a large number abstaining which would seriously undermine the legitimacy of the ballot. Worse still an aggrieved man may not accept a shaky result and take the matter to court.

Proper procedure must be followed so that the matter is absolutely laid to rest and done so in a civilised and dignified manner.If not it can come back to bite you badly.

I would expect, being fully aware of the necessity to do so,the board will clarify the issues for us in good time and well before the meeting.Leaving it until the meeting would make a mockery of pre meeting directed proxies,as it would require voting on the blind,which brings us full circle back to the original bone of contention.In that event a backlash cannot be ruled out.