agm report 2005

Well, it was another freezing day at Celtic Park with not many of us in attendance to generate any heat at this year's AGM. The turnout was much smaller than in the last couple of years, although Dermot Desmond saw fit to turn up and mention his money again. Every time that man gets criticised he seems to think someone is asking him for more money, as though his role at Celtic is generous (and sorely put upon) benefactor rather than shrewd businessman.

There were a couple of no shows at the top table (Eric Hagman and Kevin Sweeney) although the new boys, Brian Wilson and Brian McBride, turned up and nodded at the right times.

As usual, we had the pre-recorded pieces by the Chair, the Chief Executive and the Manager, which attempted to address (deflect?) the issues that were likely to be raised from the floor.

This was followed by the main business of the day, the resolutions.

The first ten resolutions were proposed by the Board and included the elections of the new non-executive directors, the re-election of Dermot Desmond and Brian Quinn, and some technical matters relating to bank borrowing and unissued share capital. These were all passed overwhelmingly although there were some interesting, if minute, variations in the total votes on the elections of Quinn and Desmond. Clearly some people used this opportunity to make their feelings known about the performance/statements of those individuals.

Brian Quinn introduced the last two resolutions - put forward by the Celtic Trust - by firstly, explaining the role of shareholder requisitioned resolutions and accepting their role in keeping the AGM democratic and businesslike. He also announced the success of the dividend reinvestment scheme (qualified this year but likely to be more successful in future years as more and more people sign up for it) and thanked the Celtic Trust for bringing it to the AGM last year.

Resolution No 11 was moved by Jeanette Findlay on behalf of the Trust. This resolution which called (yet again) for the Board to consider a scheme which they would then bring to the next AGM, for the election of a director who would directly represent the wider fan body. Arguing the case in terms of good governance, in terms of examples from other clubs and in terms of the growing level of disaffection and mistrust which exists between sections of the fan body and the Board, she ended by noting that the cover of the season book this year has a paraphrase of the famous quote from Jock Stein in which he said that 'football without the fans is nothing'.

This was followed by Joe Hill from the Trust who moved Resolution No 12, which called on the Board to organise an annual charity match, with all proceeds going to the Celtic Charity Fund. Joe tied in the upcoming unveiling of the monument to Brother Walfrid, recalling the charitable roots of our club, with the idea that instead of having meaningless friendlies to hone the match fitness of the first team, why not have a glamour charity match against a top European or English team which would kill two birds with one stone (both speeches can be found on the Celtic Trust website celtictrust@tripod.com )

Quinn replied to both resolutions in the following terms. He argued that there are technical and legal reasons why you cannot have a supporter-elected director on a PLC Board.

This is actually not true and flies in the face of the reality that 15 clubs in the UK have exactly that.

He then went on, in great detail, about his own status as a 'fan' and asked plaintively 'when did I stop being a fan?'

Mr Quinn is far too intelligent for anyone to believe that he is not deliberately missing the point that being a fan and being a director is not actually the same thing as being elected by, and accountable to, the fans. He called, for the second year in a row, for us to put someone up for election to the Board. This is an idea which might have to be considered but it does carry with it the danger that, without having a properly regulated system for election and accountability of such a person, we would be no better off than with the Board members we have at present.

In this regard, the principle is everything and needs to be established prior to any election taking place. On the Charity match resolution, Quinn said that they had no objection in principle to this idea but that it should be dealt with by the Charity Fund (another unelected body with which I have no idea how you get involved).

The hope would be that, as with the dividend reinvestment scheme, the Board, having called on shareholders to vote against the idea, might consider it further and actually introduce it next year.

But, as for Resolution 10, it was a case of frozen, and frozen out, for yet another year. As usual a poll was called for and the results of those two votes should be out by early the following week.

The question and answer session which followed, was interesting in so far as there were a few more pops at Desmond which goaded him into actually speaking for the second time. Other than that it was, like the weather, a pretty dreary affair.