Richard,
You are not considering the EGM that was called and held in Canberra to hold the Board to account over a number of piss poor performance issues and one of them was this accountability issue relating to transparency of process and the attitude of secrecy.
I think most of us understand the need to maintain reasonable levels of confidentiality, but to use confidentiality as a reason not to communicate with transparency when matters should be known to members is what got the Board in trouble in the first instance.
The original confidentiality document was disgraceful and arguably illegal. It was changed and I believe the current version is benign, but until someone sends me a copy of the current one, I couldn't possibly know.
One thing is for sure that the platform on which pretty much all of the new Board members advertised was for transparency. I am seeing a lot more now than ever, but there are years of cluster Fs to fix up. For the moment I am prepared to give them space.
I am hoping that the Natfly GM will be an opportunity to provide the members with quality information on real progress. Having to deal with CASA would bring its own challenges (not all bad), but nevertheless a learning curve for all.