Worse Is Yet To Come?, page-149

In fairness and without dragging up old skeletons (it is well documented with many examples that the previous MD and Executive treated MGC has their personal slush fund and corporate governance was non-existent) it was alleged at the time that the previous MD had a direct business relationship that was an undeclared conflict of interest with the company that the Essendon Fields site was leased from ( a relative was a director with this company). To prevent any allegation of wrong doing GH made the call to move to the CBD and forego the lease. Also, when employee's at the old Brunswick site were actually asked by GH if they want to move and move to Essendon Fields there was a responding 90% yes on the move but 70% no to Essendon Fields because public transport was poor. I'm not saying it's the right call but there was logic behind the decision.

In addition and to answer another question: under the constitution the Board have a responsibility to remain in place (whether we like it or not). We are not to know whether more members of the Board want to, or have requested to, resign. If they have, Phil has a responsibility to the shareholders to maintain continuity until a replacement Board can be democratically elected by the farmers as is their right. I cannot see either the Board or the farmers wanting to make a bad situation much worse with no one at the helm, and the last thing, IMHO, MGC needs is to bring in a bunch of overpaid consultants from the big4 accounting firms to run the show.