Absolutely agree that I am for competition but disagree with your analogy to the electricity industry:

1.  auDA is a private non-profit company that makes money cartel style with government approval and government representation on the Board (as I understand it);

2. its internal operations including expenditure should be accountable and open to transparent process;

3. sub-contractors should provide services for tender on the same basis that any government authority operates

You seem convinced that you represent the majority of members.  Fail to understand how you come to that conclusion.  

> James
> 
> You sound like one of these people who would call for
> electricity to be opened to competition, as it is in most
> states in this country, and the one state, WA, that has the
> most efficient and cheapest electricity that is a
> government monopoly. And yet this efficient monopoly is now
> required to be opened to competition because
> neo-conservatives view that the only way there is
> efficiency is with competition.
> 
> But as WA shows, competition does not mean a better
> service. Just ask those who live in Victoria and South
> Australia if competition delivered better and cheaper
> electricity supply.  You could also ask the same question
> to Californians.
> 
> So, accept that having a tender is not necessarily the way
> to go for auDA's legal services and let auDA make this
> decision themselves. There seems to be little, if any,
> complaint on this issue apart from you.
> 
> You seem to be, as the saying goes, pushing shit up hill.
> 
> David