After watching grain sales and governments fear of loosing a single vote,I really wonder if Ian White`s mandate from King Steven is to destroy the CWB from the inside out. This method will work,but take longer and break more farmers,physically,financally and mentally.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Ian White
Collapse
Logging in...
Welcome to Agriville! You need to login to post messages in the Agriville chat forums. Please login below.
X
-
hlg,
To blame Ian for the work of Oberg and co. is unfair. The frustration level in management has to be very high. To please everyone is impossible... which will be the CWB's undoing, if they can't operate using strong principals that recognise good ethical principals and the 'code of conduct'.
To cater to those who deliver less than 40t per year to the CWB is simply CRAZY. The NFU CWB directors will drive this apart... and commercial farmers will pay a massive price.
Running a multi-billion co using one person one vote for every interested party equally ... is far from being in the best long term interests of the CWB Corp. Producers under 40t/yr. production have totally different priorities from large scale commercial grain farms.
Hobby farming is much different from those grain growers who actually make a viable living from just growing grain.
It must be near impossible trying to cover these pressures off.
All the best to everyone at CWB trying to pull a different 'rabbit' out of the 'hat' every 5 minutes!
-
Perhaps tom4cwb is highlighting the challenge of being the CEO of a $6 bln business on the operations and also have a role in strategic direction implemented by the board of directors. You also have an arms lenghth outside boss in terms of the federal government.
The issues of the Saudi (2 cargoes from cityguys information) are driven by b. of d. policy in terms of the CWB sales pace policy and use as a performance measure. Very few farmers understand this but is a key to CWB operations. Again, B. of D. driven.
On the issue of 40 tonne voting, I note even 40 tonnes gives a 1/4 landlord a vote on a quarter section. 40 bu/acre or 10 bu/acre landlord share. 150 cultivated acres. 1500 bu or 40.8 tonnes. Realize this has some controversy with the current board but has been policy over a number of CWB board level.
Taking steps one place further, I note the difference between those under 45 and over 65 in the CWB producer survey. Will note that 51 % of those under 45 supported the CWB. 46 % indicated they opposed the CWB. Ian White's challenge from the CWB operations side is to meet the needs of the group under 45 and increase that support. He can only do that by meeting their business needs.
Comment
- Reply to this Thread
- Return to Topic List
Comment