Long meeting

It’s been a long time since I sat through a proper long-winded annual general meeting. The last one I can remember was sometime in the 1990s when one of The Old Frees' Association AGMs dragged right through lunch and only wrapped up around 3pm. That one started at 10 in the morning and felt like a marathon back then. Yesterday’s made that look almost brisk.

The OFA AGM started more or less on time, but by the time I got up and left at 4.15pm, it was still going. The main reason, of course, was the elections. This year wasn’t the usual quiet affair. There was a serious, organised challenge for nine of the 11 Management Committee seats. The challengers called themselves the Fidelis Team, and they didn’t just turn up, they came ready to contest.

More than that, they managed to stir something. Members turned up in numbers you don’t often see. The newly renovated multi-purpose hall was packed, 238 voting members, which must be close to a record. You could feel the energy in the room, though it wasn’t always clear which way it was leaning. Questions came thick and fast, some of them quite uncomfortable, and the committee had to work hard for their answers. At certain points, I genuinely couldn’t tell whether the floor was swinging towards the incumbents or the challengers.

Running alongside all this was another flashpoint. The management committee had tabled five resolutions to amend the OFA Constitution or introduce a new project, one of them calling for the establishment of a private English school. They sounded straight-forward on paper, but on the day, it didn’t quite land with the members. Four of the resolutions were either withdrawn by the committee or firmly rejected by the floor. The one that did go to a vote couldn’t clear the two-thirds majority required, so that fell through as well. In the end, all five went nowhere, which probably added to the sense that the meeting was pulling in different directions at once.

When time came to vote for the new management committee, things slowed to a crawl. Ballot papers didn’t just get handed out, either the members' names or membership numbers, or both, were called out one by one. This process took ages. People milled around, chatted, drifted in and out. Lunch came and went, and counting started somewhere else in the building while we waited.

After the break, the hall was noticeably thinner. Maybe a quarter of the members came back, and even then, people gradually slipped away when it became obvious the results weren’t coming anytime soon. Word filtered back that the voting was extremely close; close enough to require recounts to keep both sides satisfied.

By then, I’d had enough. Six hours had passed since the chairman called the meeting to order, and it didn’t feel like the end was anywhere in sight. At 4.15pm, I joined the silent, trickling stream heading for the exit. It was long enough for me. More than long enough, actually.

And now that the election results are finally known, there’s not much point dwelling on who backed which side. It was clearly a close contest, and the turnout showed that members do care about where the OFA is heading. That’s a good thing.

What matters now is what happens next. Both sides need to close ranks and get on with the job. Many of the issues raised during the meeting aren’t going away, and neither are the expectations that came with such a strong turnout. If anything, the pressure is now on the new committee to show they can work together, settle the noise, and make steady, practical progress. No grand gestures needed. Just get the job done properly.