I do not think that I am thick, but I am confused about Item 9 of the Agenda and hope that others are likewise. In Summit we have a simple, if very badly drafted, no confidence motion that reads: Item 9 That this motion of No Confidence is brought against the Executive Committee of the BMC and in particular because of the wilful and deliberate withholding of future policy decisions from the members in attendance at the Annual General Meeting held Lhosehill (sic) Hall, Castleton, Derbyshire, on Saturday 16th April 2016’. So far so good. I can see my way to deciding how I will vote on this. However, in the accompanying flyer Background to AGM Agenda Item 9 there is an addition that reads: 'Further, this withholding of key and vital information to its membership is an example of very poor governance by the Executive Committee in their role as Company Directors, in a registered company limited by guarantee, and does not conform with the recently published Sport England Code for Sports Governance' This sentence follows the phrase in bold 'Wording of the Motion' and has attached a few proposer's whose names I recognise. It contains what amounts to a second motion to do with the executive failing generally to meet it's duties as our Board of Directors that is exemplified by the first sentence. I can also see my way to deciding how to vote on this. My confusion is of course that my two decisions are not the same.. Can somebody in head office or the proposers explain what precisely it is that we are supposed to be voting on, the specifics of the failure to report last year, or this same thing as an example of poor governance that runs counter to a Code to which I assume BMC is signatory? I see no reason to remain anonymous. Dave Unwin, Bowline CC