Michael Pascoe SMH article- brokers + Chairman look bad, page-5

I would imagine that he believes that CTN shareholders will be better served having these new directors

As Pascoe says, you can't_not_advise shareholders what you believe is in their best interest. You can't excuse yourself, unless you are a direct beneficiary of the vote.

And that is probably the answer isn't it. He is possibly better off personally by hitching his horse to the CAM, Bourbourous, Taylor Collison camp, than to the existing directors. And in my opinion that is disturbing

In no way could a chairman not vote declare on something like this. It is utterly laughable, and downright despicable. I'd like to see an argument that this is not negligence of obligation. Making no statement IS a statement. It is very clearly saying you have no confidence in your co directors to best represent the interests of shareholders. The irony is magnificent.

I am so wishing I could make it to this AGM. Does Steven Mayne still do Proxies?