I'm glad they are starting their case for the defence. I did half wonder if we'd see them go into a bunker.
There are a few things I'd question though. The premise that relationships on the ground will now open up. A lot made of the relationship with the Foundation /Community Trust but we already had that. Both former SD's were trustees and in fact still remain trustees. Unless things changed, we had a good working relationship on the ground, the issue was always elsewhere. I don't think it's often appreciated that most things are simply left to those on the ground.
I did notice the argument that there is discussion in terms of what the Trust is. I'd dispute that personally. While the situation always evolves, the principles remain the same. That principal issue of governance has not gone. I note that, amongst the people on the ground mentioned, Gareth Davies wasn't. That doesn't surprise me, but it does worry me.
To be honest, nothing was holding back a lot of that, beyond time spent by part of the board on the case. The website update was close to completion during my time (Adam did a good job with that).
Anyway, we'll see how this goes with the members. My concern is that, rather than seek to resolve the issues with one section of the membership, they've appealed directly to another.