During Thursday night's HUST AGM, Roger Groves was called on stage to explain why the HUST election had been postponed.
Groves is chair of the Election Management Group.
"The decision was made to suggest it (the election) was postponed because we had received a number of complaints regarding how the process had been put together and followed.
"That decision has been made and that decision has to stand. What you need to do now is follow the election process."
Groves was asked why the election was postponed.
"There's a time-line. If you've got a constitution and a set of rules that you follow as a Supporters Trust. There's some guidelines from Supporters Direct.
"Now there is a new election policy that they've updated on their website and within that there are some key communications that have to go out to all members.
"Now it was deemed that that hadn't been followed correctly.
"I received a few e-mails, we discussed it Keith, myself and Colin and the decision was made that it would be postponed because it was felt the strength of the argument, if you want to call it that, coming from some members was strong enough to suggest that really you need to have a fair and level playing field towards members, key dates.
"I would call it dotting the i's and crossing the t's stuff but if it's the view of members of the Trust are not happy with that then the board have a responsibility to try and follow the right process and get you onside. That was why."
A member then said that she didn't really understand what Groves was saying. 'What did not happen?'
"The communication to you was not followed correctly so if you've got a date where you have to notify members that there is going to be an AGM, then you have to give 14 days notice."
The member then asked 'Which rules have been contravened?'
"You get that through the secretary and through the rules of the Trust and the election policy through SD.
"I don't make that for you. We have an election policy that was adopted and one of the questions was that the wrong election policy has been followed."
Keith Hall then gave his view.
"If you google Supporters Direct election policy it comes up with an election policy which is dated 2009 and ratified in 2011 which as far as I can see the board followed in as much as we had over eight weeks notice of the AGM and appeal for people to stand for the board, how many were available and so on."
Groves responded.
"If you take the number of places that were available that's not up to the Election Management Group to notify you, that should come from the Trust."
Hall: "That was on the HUST website.
Groves: "Members were saying that it wasn't. So we made a judgement call on the information that was available."
Member: 'I would still like to know which rules have been contravened."
Groves: "It was around the key dates. When you notified your members, how many places were up, it's all about communication. In general it's all about poor communication from the Trust to its members about the election process."
Member: "Was it poor or wrong?"
Groves: "It was poor and."
Member: "Was it wrong, to be out of order. Poor doesn't cut it does it."
Groves: "If it's poor, it's wrong. If it's wrong it's poor.
Member: "You either apply the rules or you don't."
Another member: "It could be communicated poorly but it could be correct or communicated perfectly but be wrong."
Groves: "I apologise if you feel that's wrong or poor whichever it is, I don't know."
Member: "Either the rules have been complied with or they have not been complied with. My fear is that you are upholding with all due respect, you're acquising to complaints because they are complaints rather because they have foundation."
Another member: " Can you absolutely verify that all these complaints came from actual members."
Groves: "Yes it was, that's the information I was given."
From the floor: "Were they checked against the register of members?"
Groves: "That would be the secretary."
For HUST Martin Watson replied: "I do have to disagree with you there. I was acting as secretary and I was never asked to verify they were members."
The meeting went on to discuss when the election could take place.
Groves: "I can't answer that question right now. There's an election policy that Supporters Direct have on their website. You have one within your constitution rules. You just need to agree as a trust which election policy you are going to adopt from now going forward."
And so it continued for another fifteen minutes or so.
Yesterday HUST chairman Chris Williams, who was unable to be at the meeting, commented that it was a mess that needed sorting quickly.
BN understands that there were just two or three complaints about the election process and it remains uncertain whether they were from paid-up HUST members or not.
Yesterday HUST chairman Chris Williams, who was unable to be at the meeting, commented that it was a mess that needed sorting quickly.
BN understands that there were just two or three complaints about the election process and it remains uncertain whether they were from paid-up HUST members or not.