auDA AGM Details
- Thread starter Scott7
- Start date
ttfan
Top Contributor
Yes I noticed that too, some of the proposed changes to the constitution are about being able to refuse new members, and although they list the grounds under which new members can be refused, they don't need to give reasons to the applicant. So we're supposed to trust the board will make the right decisions...
Nicole Murdoch
Regular Member
It is just another power grab by auDA. It wants to be able to pick and choose who is a member.
I particularly dislike the suggesting that if anyone is the "subject" of a disciplinary proceeding they can removed. What do they mean by "subject of a disciplinary proceeding"? Do they mean that someone simply needs to have a complaint filed against them even if the complaint has no foundation? It would be quite ridiculous to remove someone as a member simply on the basis that one person made a complaint against the member to a regulatory authority when that complaint is not upheld. The ability to abuse that clause is incredible.
Even if a complaint is upheld how does it affect the person's ability to properly act as a member or director? The complaint may have nothing to do with the industry.
What about timing? So someone has a complaint against them when they are 20 years old but when they are 55 years old they are thrown out of auDA?
Plus I don't see how it will work in practice. All a member needs to do when they are removed is to start a company and have the company join as a member.
I particularly dislike the suggesting that if anyone is the "subject" of a disciplinary proceeding they can removed. What do they mean by "subject of a disciplinary proceeding"? Do they mean that someone simply needs to have a complaint filed against them even if the complaint has no foundation? It would be quite ridiculous to remove someone as a member simply on the basis that one person made a complaint against the member to a regulatory authority when that complaint is not upheld. The ability to abuse that clause is incredible.
Even if a complaint is upheld how does it affect the person's ability to properly act as a member or director? The complaint may have nothing to do with the industry.
What about timing? So someone has a complaint against them when they are 20 years old but when they are 55 years old they are thrown out of auDA?
Plus I don't see how it will work in practice. All a member needs to do when they are removed is to start a company and have the company join as a member.
Bacon Farmer
Top Contributor
Good to see a retiring demand director going for re-election as a supply director.
Why do we have different membership classes?
Is Craig Marchant co-founder of Ventraip? Wouldn't, shouldn't he be going for a supply side directorship?
Why do we have different membership classes?
Is Craig Marchant co-founder of Ventraip? Wouldn't, shouldn't he be going for a supply side directorship?
neddy
Top Contributor
Sticky fingers all over this one. Have they learnt nothing from the SGM? Have they learnt nothing from last years AGM when their Special Resolution was voted down?
This is what they said immediately after the SGM on 31st July. Not much consultation! It also seems to be a smack in the face to the newly appointed "Constitutional Committee".
This is what they said immediately after the SGM on 31st July. Not much consultation! It also seems to be a smack in the face to the newly appointed "Constitutional Committee".
snoopy
Top Contributor
Guess he knows he has near zero chance of being re elected in demand whilst supply just needs support of other directors.
It is an example of just how broken AUDA is.
neddy
Top Contributor
And look who proposed him.
neddy
Top Contributor
Exactly. With this sort of nonsense and machinations, I can feel another SGM coming on.
Bacon Farmer
Top Contributor
I see the amendments for the AGM have been proposed by Simon.
He must of been too busy to consult with the members?
Nicole Murdoch
Regular Member
People who are proxies should be able to attend regardless of their membership.
Bottom of the proxy form is a clear indication they are able to attend ....
"Your proxy does not need to be a member of auDA. If you do not name a proxy, or your named proxy does not attend the meeting, the chairperson of the AGM will be your proxy."
Bottom of the proxy form is a clear indication they are able to attend ....
"Your proxy does not need to be a member of auDA. If you do not name a proxy, or your named proxy does not attend the meeting, the chairperson of the AGM will be your proxy."
DomainNames
Top Contributor
Add to the AGM Agenda provision to members and all interested parties the following prior to the meeting the following:
1. Documents referred to here
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/au_historical_financial_irregula
2. Deloitte latest report and how much Deloitte was paid this time.
3. Individual trip reports and breakdown of costs from all parties auDA paid for to travel. Icann etc.
5. Breakdown of past auDA Chair remunerations and expenses incurred. How much per year did it cost in total for each Chair? Annual Remuneration, Expenses etc.
6. Consultants cost breakdown - Detailed breakdown since auDA began of all the costs of all Consultants and copies of all of their reports/ work done to check ROI. - Is it over $10 million spent on "Consultants"?
7. Status of the auDA Foundation and any audits/ forensic accounting done to date.
https://www.audafoundation.org.au/
_______________________________________________
https://www.domainer.com.au/auda-members-have-been-heard/ ??
1. Documents referred to here
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/au_historical_financial_irregula
2. Deloitte latest report and how much Deloitte was paid this time.
3. Individual trip reports and breakdown of costs from all parties auDA paid for to travel. Icann etc.
https://www.auda.org.au/about-auda/our-org/agm/2010/agm/
"Simon Johnson queried the Board’s view on travel expenses, in the 2009- 10 Accounts
Chris Disspain advised that auDA has been increasing its domestic and international outreach activities in line with the Strategic Plan approved by the Board. Domestic travel increases were also due to Board & staff attendance at ICANN Sydney June 2009 and the 2009 AGM in Perth. The Chair assured members the Board would monitor the travel budget".
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/au_historical_financial_irregula
Historically, auDA's leadership was driven by CEO (Chris Disspain) and Chair (The Hon. Tony Staley AO), each of whose tenures lasted for more than 15 years. According to the Cameron Ralph Report 2016, which forms the best practice standard of auDA's corporate governance (accessible here - https://www.auda.org.au/assets/Uploads/C... ), "While these long-standing relationships have had considerable strengths, they have also continued early patterns of fairly informal Board practices over a period of some 15 years" which, arguably, "have not kept pace with auDA's growth in scale and importance to the Australian community, nor with evolving good practice in governance and accountability". In light of this alleged lack of governance, accountability and transparency, the newly appointed CEO and management has taken initiatives in the past 12 months to introduce various organisational and administrative policies to reform auDA's governance framework.
As part of these initiatives, a forensic review of auDA's historical expense management practices was performed to ensure accountability on expenditure in general. According to slide six of the CEO presentation given at the Special General Meeting on 31 July 2017 (accessible here - https://www.auda.org.au/assets/pdf/SGM/a... ), the Board of auDA ("Board") appointed PPB Advisory, which specialises in undertaking forensic investigations and investigating fraudulent activities, to conduct an independent forensic review of auDA's expense management in two phases ("PPB Review") as follows:
• Phase 1: travel and expenses review under instructions from Maddocks commencing in February 2016; and
• Phase 2: forensic investigation under instructions from Ashurst commencing in September 2016.
Slide seven of that presentation summarises the findings of the PPB Review as follows:
"The review of travel and expenses identified there was a lack of formal policies and procedures governing how travel and expenses were managed at auDA. There were high levels of expenditure on international travel and reimbursement arrangements with international bodies that lacked transparency, which should have warranted a more robust process;.. There was general a lack of formal procedures and supporting documentation."
4. PBB Investigation and Report"Simon Johnson queried the Board’s view on travel expenses, in the 2009- 10 Accounts
Chris Disspain advised that auDA has been increasing its domestic and international outreach activities in line with the Strategic Plan approved by the Board. Domestic travel increases were also due to Board & staff attendance at ICANN Sydney June 2009 and the 2009 AGM in Perth. The Chair assured members the Board would monitor the travel budget".
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/au_historical_financial_irregula
Historically, auDA's leadership was driven by CEO (Chris Disspain) and Chair (The Hon. Tony Staley AO), each of whose tenures lasted for more than 15 years. According to the Cameron Ralph Report 2016, which forms the best practice standard of auDA's corporate governance (accessible here - https://www.auda.org.au/assets/Uploads/C... ), "While these long-standing relationships have had considerable strengths, they have also continued early patterns of fairly informal Board practices over a period of some 15 years" which, arguably, "have not kept pace with auDA's growth in scale and importance to the Australian community, nor with evolving good practice in governance and accountability". In light of this alleged lack of governance, accountability and transparency, the newly appointed CEO and management has taken initiatives in the past 12 months to introduce various organisational and administrative policies to reform auDA's governance framework.
As part of these initiatives, a forensic review of auDA's historical expense management practices was performed to ensure accountability on expenditure in general. According to slide six of the CEO presentation given at the Special General Meeting on 31 July 2017 (accessible here - https://www.auda.org.au/assets/pdf/SGM/a... ), the Board of auDA ("Board") appointed PPB Advisory, which specialises in undertaking forensic investigations and investigating fraudulent activities, to conduct an independent forensic review of auDA's expense management in two phases ("PPB Review") as follows:
• Phase 1: travel and expenses review under instructions from Maddocks commencing in February 2016; and
• Phase 2: forensic investigation under instructions from Ashurst commencing in September 2016.
Slide seven of that presentation summarises the findings of the PPB Review as follows:
"The review of travel and expenses identified there was a lack of formal policies and procedures governing how travel and expenses were managed at auDA. There were high levels of expenditure on international travel and reimbursement arrangements with international bodies that lacked transparency, which should have warranted a more robust process;.. There was general a lack of formal procedures and supporting documentation."
5. Breakdown of past auDA Chair remunerations and expenses incurred. How much per year did it cost in total for each Chair? Annual Remuneration, Expenses etc.
6. Consultants cost breakdown - Detailed breakdown since auDA began of all the costs of all Consultants and copies of all of their reports/ work done to check ROI. - Is it over $10 million spent on "Consultants"?
7. Status of the auDA Foundation and any audits/ forensic accounting done to date.
https://www.audafoundation.org.au/
_______________________________________________
https://www.domainer.com.au/auda-members-have-been-heard/ ??
Pardon my language but this is absolute bulldust from auDA.
I sincerely hope that news of the AGM being restricted to only members and "invited parties" is incorrect, because the concept is completely ludicrous. We never restricted attendance in the past. Yes, people were greeted on arrival but only for the purpose of noting attendance and to make sure that anyone who was a member (who we may not recognise) had the relevant materials to vote.
I mean, what would happen at this AGM if I turned up with other ex-staffers like Vanessa and Liz, along with a picture of Jacki (remember her? she typically greeting folks at past AGMs until she was "managed out" by auDA while suffering terminal cancer)? Would we be locked out? What if Di Parker or Rachael Falk turned up? Same for them? And what if a sympathetic member in the room decided to step out and make one of us their proxy? Suddenly we are in? As I said, ludicrous. Might need to bring along some journalists for (excluded) company.
On another topic, it seems to me that the auDA Board or, at least some Directors, are completely disconnected from the wants and needs of membership and broader stakeholders. As others have noted, the proposed special resolution regarding a "Fit and Proper Persons Test" for members is completely bonkers. No consultation, no advance notification, just proposed text for a very significant Constitutional change - from a Demand class Director, no less!
I just hope Simon enjoys his last 12 months on the auDA Board. At least as much as the recent jaunt to Abu Dhabi.
I sincerely hope that news of the AGM being restricted to only members and "invited parties" is incorrect, because the concept is completely ludicrous. We never restricted attendance in the past. Yes, people were greeted on arrival but only for the purpose of noting attendance and to make sure that anyone who was a member (who we may not recognise) had the relevant materials to vote.
I mean, what would happen at this AGM if I turned up with other ex-staffers like Vanessa and Liz, along with a picture of Jacki (remember her? she typically greeting folks at past AGMs until she was "managed out" by auDA while suffering terminal cancer)? Would we be locked out? What if Di Parker or Rachael Falk turned up? Same for them? And what if a sympathetic member in the room decided to step out and make one of us their proxy? Suddenly we are in? As I said, ludicrous. Might need to bring along some journalists for (excluded) company.
On another topic, it seems to me that the auDA Board or, at least some Directors, are completely disconnected from the wants and needs of membership and broader stakeholders. As others have noted, the proposed special resolution regarding a "Fit and Proper Persons Test" for members is completely bonkers. No consultation, no advance notification, just proposed text for a very significant Constitutional change - from a Demand class Director, no less!
I just hope Simon enjoys his last 12 months on the auDA Board. At least as much as the recent jaunt to Abu Dhabi.
DomainNames
Top Contributor
- Phone auDA and ask for Cameron Boardman. You may be told he is "away on leave".
- Ask who is next in charge and ask them the question. Let's see if the auDA official response has changed today or not.
- The AGM should be open for open, transparent and inclusive of all parties having an interest in use of the domain name system in Australia.
DomainNames
Top Contributor
SIMON JOHNSON - seems to have rightly raised issues with past auDA Expenses. When can members read the trip report of Simon from his trip to Abu Dhabi Icann so we can all see the ROI auDA members receive from it?
- Was Simon and others trips and related expenses paid for using auDA funds?
- How much in total? Business Class? Why not Economy?
- Full daily trip report to show the trip was required etc?
- Wasn't there the same option for attending online this year to watch talks, submit questions etc
https://www.auda.org.au/about-auda/our-org/agm/2010/agm/
"Simon Johnson queried the Board’s view on travel expenses, in the 2009- 10 Accounts
Chris Disspain advised that auDA has been increasing its domestic and international outreach activities in line with the Strategic Plan approved by the Board. Domestic travel increases were also due to Board & staff attendance at ICANN Sydney June 2009 and the 2009 AGM in Perth. The Chair assured members the Board would monitor the travel budget".
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/au_historical_financial_irregula
findtim
Top Contributor
domainnames: re ICANN, i'll just speak for myself here.
although i have not been to an ICANN meeting i do intend to as my role as a director, we are part of a global group and much i feel can be gained by face to face meetings, FAR more then video as being there enables you to " work the room" and make connections you can not make via a set video time frame.
i also agree that a ROI is valid and a trip report is also valid, i have done this in the past for other companies and it helps focus on a goal, a "definition of success " , having said that sometimes you only pull out 1 item from days of meetings but that item might be VERY valuable. being someone that goes to many conferences in my own business i see great value in attendance.
business class: it is acceptable in most organisations that over a certain number of hours flight that business class will be used, you want to arrive at the conference as fresh as you can and 18 hours + in economy will not achieve that and NOTE that directors are not paid whilst attending so i would be giving up my work time to go FOR the organisation.
so far my burden on the costs of auda have been a few train dailies, 2 cab fairs and an overnight in sydney where i gave up 2 days of my work time on auda business.
so i don't consider i'm on a gravy train and my understanding is that this was simons first time ever at icann in 3-4 years of opportunity.
a small delegation to icann to keep our fingers on the pulse is part of properly representing as a director, to do "video" is like having a business in a back alley and not advertising. my experience at conventions is MOST business and knowledge gets exchanged outside of seminars and over dinner.
tim
although i have not been to an ICANN meeting i do intend to as my role as a director, we are part of a global group and much i feel can be gained by face to face meetings, FAR more then video as being there enables you to " work the room" and make connections you can not make via a set video time frame.
i also agree that a ROI is valid and a trip report is also valid, i have done this in the past for other companies and it helps focus on a goal, a "definition of success " , having said that sometimes you only pull out 1 item from days of meetings but that item might be VERY valuable. being someone that goes to many conferences in my own business i see great value in attendance.
business class: it is acceptable in most organisations that over a certain number of hours flight that business class will be used, you want to arrive at the conference as fresh as you can and 18 hours + in economy will not achieve that and NOTE that directors are not paid whilst attending so i would be giving up my work time to go FOR the organisation.
so far my burden on the costs of auda have been a few train dailies, 2 cab fairs and an overnight in sydney where i gave up 2 days of my work time on auda business.
so i don't consider i'm on a gravy train and my understanding is that this was simons first time ever at icann in 3-4 years of opportunity.
a small delegation to icann to keep our fingers on the pulse is part of properly representing as a director, to do "video" is like having a business in a back alley and not advertising. my experience at conventions is MOST business and knowledge gets exchanged outside of seminars and over dinner.
tim
Scott7
Top Contributor
Come on, Tim. What about your use of the auDA helicopter to attend Melbourne DNTrade Meetups?
Hmm ... I suppose that technically you're telling the truth. You're not on the gravy train, you're on the gravy chopper.
Business class flights? Yeah right! When our man Tim takes his turn to attend ICANN it will be first class all the way with a ten day stopover in Hawaii.
findtim
Top Contributor
hmmm, maybe ICANN do that?
