PPL’s fifth Annual Performer Meeting will be taking place on 23 November at PPL’s offices in London.

At each year's Annual Performer Meeting (APM) one of PPL's two elected performer directors must step down in rotation and, if they wish, stand for re-election. Performers may also nominate other candidates for election to this position. This year Mark Kelly was the Elected Performer Director due to step down and Mark decided to stand for re-election.

The deadline for nominations for this year's election has now passed. The PPL Performer Board did not receive any nominations for other candidates and so the sole candidate for the position of Elected Performer Director this year is Mark Kelly. Under PPL's constitutional rules eligible performers have the option of voting for one of the nominated candidates or alternatively choosing to vote for the vacated position not to be filled. It is therefore still a constitutional requirement for PPL to seek votes from eligible performers at the meeting.

Mark will be standing for election at the APM being held at PPL's offices at 1 Upper James Street, London W1F 9DE on Wednesday 23 November 2011 (attendance by invitation only).

As part of the nomination process, Mark has submitted a statement regarding his suitability for office. If you are a performer who is eligible to vote at the APM, you may wish to read this statement before attending the meeting. You can view Mark's statement below.

If re-elected Mark will resume his position as an Elected Performer Director on the PPL Performer Board and the main PPL Board.

***Performers eligible to vote at the APM who wish to appoint a proxy but have not yet done so are reminded that PPL can accept proxy forms up until 2.45pm on 21 November 2011 (please email apm@ppluk.com if you require a replacement form).***

Statement of Mark Kelly, standing as a Featured Artist performer representative and Director of PPL:

Mark KellyThis year is my 30th as the keyboard player of Marillion. I am also CEO of the Featured Artists Coalition (FAC). In the two years that I have worked with the FAC and served on the Performer board of PPL many of my aims are still the same, such as fairness and transparency from others in their dealings with performers.

In regard to PPL I have tried to, and will continue to defend the rights of performers to ensure that they get their fair share of PPL income. Recently I have become concerned that some rights holders are licensing their rights directly and outside of PPL. Their companies are going to find it difficult to pay accurate and fair equitable remuneration due to performers but I will endeavour to make sure that all monies due are accounted for and paid.

I am unhappy that PPL collect broadcast and public performance income on behalf of non-qualifying performers and pay the performers share of such income to the record companies. This money (mainly generated by US performers who are regarded as non-qualifying) should go to some kind of performer fund for the benefit of UK performers rather than to the record companies.

I continue to support the legislation that is currently going through Congress in USA which will, for the first time, provide public performance revenue from terrestrial radio. This new revenue stream will mean that US performers will finally get paid and that UK performers will enjoy a new income stream from US radio.

I'm concerned that the PPL Board has more record company members than performer members. As an organisation that deals with a right that provides 'equitable remuneration', PPL's board should be one that reflects the nature of this right – i.e. Equal numbers of performer and record company representatives. I would hope that these changes are incorporated in submissions that PPL makes to governmental organisations that seeking to ensure that collection societies throughout Europe are transparent and well-governed.

Whilst progress has been made in ensuring that correct performer line-up information for each track is supplied by record companies, some do a poor job at providing accurate information in a timely manner. This costs performers money and must be minimised. I understand that PPL are attempting to address this issue and I will be watching closely developments in this area.

I see PPL as a well managed collecting society that has made significant progress in recent years. I am very encouraged by PPL's progress in collecting international income but more work needs to be done to ensure that foreign collective management organisations strive to reach the same data management standards and distributions that are being set by PPL.

I am unable to attend the APM this year due to touring commitments with Marillion but I sincerely hope that I will be elected as a Featured Artists performer representative. I look forward to the prospect of serving the performer community for another 2 years.

Many thanks,

Mark Kelly