The membership of the G.M.S.T. was never consulted by those individuals who have unsuccessfully pursued Jim Gallacher.

Such was their determination to silence any who opposed their autocratic march over the cliff’s edge, that the obligatory 2015 A.G.M. failed to take place.

That constitutional farce was eclipsed when a properly convened Special General Meeting was vetoed in order to gag Trust members who were supportive of Mr Gallacher. The ‘legal advice’ Chairman ‘Plonker’ Feeney cited did not come from the Trust’s solicitors!

Those matters, currently under investigation by the Financial Conduct Authority, may prove critical in coming months when G.M.S.T. v Gallacher has been dismissed and retribution is sought by the membership of the Trust.

While the court action was ‘live’, it remained necessary to resolve the ‘mandate’ issue, and that was addressed in the penultimate paragraph of a response to the Trust’s preposterous incidental application last June. Solicitor Andrew Upton sought to establish the identity of the person or persons from whom Blair & Bryden had taken instructions, and the authority on which they were based.

‘Finally, it is our view that your instruction to continue the pursuit of this action would require the ratification of the members of your client. Please confirm the basis of your authority, together with the identity of your instructing agent.’

When no satisfactory response had been received after many weeks, Mortonjag, on behalf of Mr. Gallacher, put the question directly to Trust Secretary Mary Sellar, who is constitutionally obliged to answer queries from the membership.

Mortonjag asked a simple question – had the committee endorsed that incidental application?

When no response was forthcoming, Mortonjag persevered – this time by recorded delivery – but once again, to no avail.

Why was the Trust Secretary hiding critical information from the membership she was elected to serve?FotoFlexer_Photo

History was repeating itself!

Just as the Trustee had hidden from Mortonjag’s legitimate enquiries, so the Trust Secretary was hiding from questions she was constitutionally bound to address.

Was that because she and her fellow committee members hadn’t a clue about the true circumstances of the court action, and their ‘hands were tied’ by the TOADMEISTER who claimed ‘full delegated authority’, and had ordered them to keep their mouths shut?


Meanwhile, other approaches were being made to the Trust committee in an attempt to get to the truth – to people who claimed to represent the second largest shareholder in Greenock Morton Football Club with an investment of some £120k.

That lot, it seemed, couldn’t be trusted to organise a jumble sale!