IT WAS ON THE AGANDA FOR THE AGM, I WAS THERE, SPOKE AND VOTED AGAINST IT BUT THERE WAS MORE ATTENDED THE MEETING FOR IT, THE NUMBER OF FANCIERS AT THE MEETING WAS ABOUT THE NORM FOR A SHU AGM, AROUND 40, OUT OF 4,500 MEMBERS, AND FOR FANCIERS REFFERING TO NOT GETTING A SAY IN THINGS, ALL CLUBS HAVE DELEGATES (MESSENGERS) TO THEIR FEDS AND ALL FEDS HAVE DELEGATES (MESSENGERS) TO THE SHU, SO CLUB MEMBERS INSTRUCT THEIR DELEGATES ON HOW TO VOTE OR NOT TO VOTE AT FED AND SHU MEETINGS THIS IS HOW ALL MEMBERS GET THEIR VIOCE HEARD, AT AGMs ITS INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS RESPONCIBILITY TO VOTE AS THEY WANT, BUT THE PROBLEM IS THAT MOST DELEGATES GO TO MEETINGS AND SAY AND VOTE FOR WHAT THEY WANT, AND THIS IS THE BIG PROBLEM IN THE SPORT TO-DAY, AND IT'S OK FOR THIS TO BE DONE, UNTIL SOMETHING CROPS UP THAT THE FRANCIERS DO NOT LIKE THEN ALL HELL BREAKS OUT, IT'S THE FANCIERS TO BLAME FOR ALLOWING THIS AND TOO LAZY TO GO TO MEETINGS, TO FINNISH OFF, DO I PERSONALLY WANT THE ETS, NO, AS THERE IS A LOT NEEDING SORTED OUT IN ITS USE, I THINK THERE IS SOMETHING THERE MAYBE, BUT NOT AS IT IS AND MORE-SO WITH THE PROBLEMS IT HAS CAUSED, BUT IT WAS ON THE AGM AGENDA AND IT WAS VOTED FOR, A LOT SAY IT SHOULD HAVE WENT TO A MEMBERS BALOT, WELL YES THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN OK AND SOME SAY THIS IS WHY THEY DO NOT ACCEPT IT IN SCOTLAND, THE RPRA DID'NT PUT IT TO THE MEMBERS AND IT WAS DEFEATED AND ACCEPTED, NO ONE SAYING ITS NOT FAIR IT SHOULD HAVE WENT TO A MEMBERS BALOT IS THERE, AND I WOULD STILL VOTE AGAINST IT IF IT CAME UP, BUT I DO NOT HAVE ANY HARD FEELINGS AGAINST ANYONE WITH IT, THEY WENT TO THE MEETING AND GOT IT PASSED.