Jump to content

 

 

Rangers First board candidates


Recommended Posts

You would certainly think so.

 

Which would make it easy enough for him to recuse himself from that part of any discussions. Just because a potential conflict of interest may be in play shouldn't necessarily exclude someone from running for office. Easy enough to prevent a potential conflict from becoming an issue, perceived or real.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Which would make it easy enough for him to recuse himself from that part of any discussions. Just because a potential conflict of interest may be in play shouldn't necessarily exclude someone from running for office. Easy enough to prevent a potential conflict from becoming an issue, perceived or real.

 

I think that's where we differ in this,Craig. Seems to me that almost any discussion at the RF Board would be about Rangers shares or otherwise investing in club assets and all such discussions would present conflicts for Mr Blair.

Edited by BrahimHemdani
Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that's where we differ in this,Craig. Seems to me that almost any discussion at the RF Board would be about Rangers shares or otherwise investing in club assets and all such discussions would present conflicts for Mr Blair.

 

 

 

i would think most of the discussion would be about raising the money not spending it

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that's where we differ in this,Craig. Seems to me that almost any discussion at the RF Board would be about Rangers shares or otherwise investing in club assets and all such discussions would present conflicts for Mr Blair.

 

If buying in the open market there is no conflict of interest. The Club are not dictating share price.

 

And as said previously, RF can only invest in club assets IF the Club allows it. This gives James Blair TWO opportunities to recuse himself from the discussions - at the RF Board level AND at the RFC Board level.

 

Cries of conflict of interest don't exclude one from running for office. I still think you are being a bit disingenuous.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well the voting is now closed and thanks for everyone who voted for me.

 

Whether I am elected or not I sincerely hope we can progress Rangers First and help improve Rangers and The Rangers Community as per RF's aims.

 

The bigger picture here should be simple.

 

1. A vehicle for fans being able to purchase shares in the Club that we love, one we feared losing and one we never wish to go through all of "that" again

2. A unified voice amongst our support which holds the Club, media, detractors, enemies, liars and "neer-do-well's" accountable.

 

We don't need one vehicle for all things. But we shouldn't need more than a couple.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to everyone who voted for me and i look forward to the result. Those elected are there to facilitate the members and should remember that when listening to proposals.

 

Rangers First – Core Principles

 

Rangers First is by definition a One Member One Vote organisation and the democratic right of all members is highly regarded.

 

Rangers First Board Members are elected by and responsible to the membership.

 

Rangers First Board Members have a term of office that stops them becoming fixtures on the board.

 

Rangers First is a fiercely independent organisation in which no undue pressure or influence can be applied.

 

Rangers First aims to have a good and fertile working relationship with any and all RIFC Boards however they are constituted but will not favour any groups or individuals other than by the democratically confirmed support of its membership.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This gives James Blair TWO opportunities to recuse himself from the discussions - at the RF Board level AND at the RFC Board level.

 

Cries of conflict of interest don't exclude one from running for office. I still think you are being a bit disingenuous.

 

They exclude you under the SD Code of Conduct for Directors which all candidates were asked if they had any issues with which is another way of inviting compliance with those rules.

 

I am not being disingenuous at all. I have stated what I truly believe to be the case and it is clear that many people including other candidates in the election have the same or similar concerns.

Edited by BrahimHemdani
Link to post
Share on other sites

Candidate Votes

1 .Richard Gough 2,009

2. Ricki Neill 1,652

3. James Blair 1,147

4. Greg Marshall 974

5. Brian Donohoe 941

6. Kelly Johnstone 864

7. Peter Ewart 843

8. Stuart MacQuarrie 835

9. Derek Miller 701

10. Marc Alexander 668

11. Graham Campbell 665

12. Graeme Henderson 627

13 .Iain Martin 531

14. Ronnie Johnstone 521

15. Brian Bowman 501

16. Richard Scott 492

17. Andy McLintock 432

18. Chris Smith 386

19. Alan Harris 338

20. Calvin Campbell 330

21. Adam Campbell 270

22. Darren Thomson 210

23. Ryan Thomson

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.