The Celtic AGM has been brought forward a month. The Celtic Trust has submitted two Resolutions for debate and discussion and they need your support to make sure that both are on the agenda, and that both are taken seriously by the board.
There is no need for me to gild the lily here or elaborate on what these guys have written; if you don’t believe that these are worthy of debate and discussion you need not do a single thing. If you do believe that they are worthy of debate and discussion you must contact the Trust with your pledge of support by 3:30 tomorrow afternoon, which Celtic has set as the deadline.
I will not labour the point or suggest that there is some significance in the club’s decision to choose a week-day in which we’re engaged in playing a match at that time except to say that if they were looking to make this as difficult as possible for the Trust that they could scarcely have chosen a better way of doing it.
Some might even call this shamelessly cynical.
You’d almost think they didn’t want either of these motions on the agenda.
The first Resolution is what’s called a Governance Resolution; it seeks to make the way Celtic is run more professional and more transparent. It is surely not something with which a single person could disagree.
This club does too much in secret and in a manner that does not befit a major organisation with shareholder responsibilities.
The second Resolution is what’s called a Note Of Concern Resolution; specifically, this one is in relation to Resolution 12, the club’s lack of progress on the matter and Peter Lawwell’s answer at the 2019 AGM that he had no seen the Five Way Agreement.
These are clearly matters of the gravest magnitude, the first element of which is the continuing dissatisfaction with the way Resolution 12 has been handled and the second element, involving our former CEO, because either he lied to the meeting of the shareholders in 2019– which I’ll just say isn’t kosher – or it’s one the most serious abrogation’s of professional responsibility that you could ever hope to find.
It is vitally important that whatever your stance on these two matters, whether you want to see these adopted or not, that both of them are at least discussed and answers sought; the shareholder’s organisation is seeking answers for all of us, to key questions that the board must at the very least provide them with information on.
To get there, these Resolutions need 100 Requisitioners signatures apiece; the club has done its best, it seems to me, to make them hard to get.
If you’re a shareholder it is now up to you.
If you care about the way our board operates, this is the time to use your voice.