07-11-2012, 04:45 PM
Oh dear!
The Minutes of the AGM held on 19 August 2012 show that the chameleon-like Hampton/Laidlaw spoke in the debate to which Patrick refers. The motion - critical of the Selection Policy - was defeated. To attempt now to resuscitate that debate under an alias is not just an echo too far but dishonourable.
Let's not repeat all the acrimony and controversy we had to endure earlier. Let's just respect the gentleman's age and delete this thread. David Congalton is aware of the allegation of undue commercial influence and will no doubt monitor the position.
The Minutes of the AGM held on 19 August 2012 show that the chameleon-like Hampton/Laidlaw spoke in the debate to which Patrick refers. The motion - critical of the Selection Policy - was defeated. To attempt now to resuscitate that debate under an alias is not just an echo too far but dishonourable.
Let's not repeat all the acrimony and controversy we had to endure earlier. Let's just respect the gentleman's age and delete this thread. David Congalton is aware of the allegation of undue commercial influence and will no doubt monitor the position.