The WIA Secretary has written to the WIA Reform Group outlining the reasons that the General Meeting called for by members will not proceed. The letter includes a copy of a legal opinion which advises that:
This means that the requirement for 100 signatures does not contravene the provisions of the Act, which means that 100 signatures is enough, since that's what the WIA constitution says.
The advice also includes the following statement:
This raises an interesting question, "Which additional motion?" Who raised this motion, when and how?
The legal opinion also states that the lawyer received additional communication from the WIA Secretary which among other things stated that:
In response to the letter from the WIA Secretary, the WIA Reform Group has responded, pointing out that the cover letter was identical for all signatures, that the WIA Secretary wasn't acting in the best interest of the members, that he overstepped his authority and that he acted in an unprofessional manner bringing the WIA into further disrepute.
The WIA Reform Group has lodged a formal complaint with the board of the WIA in regards to the Secretary and suggests that the Secretary be removed and replaced with Mr Deefholts who is employed by the WIA in the capacity of Executive Administrator.
A copy of the legal advice and the letter from the WIA Reform Group is attached.