Pulse elections

[dave4441]

Why would growers have to have a breeder at the board table, as a director to discuss if GM pulses should be pursued? First of all, GM pulses are a marketing question first and a breeding question second. Secondly, CDC advise can be sought by a board of farmers. If farmers are running, that believe they are incapable of making decesions about the industry without having a breeder on their board, then maybe they should consider weather or not they are capable to run for that position as a director.

[haveapulse]

There has been some discussion about increasing the number of chairs at the SPG baord. We have identified the benefit of including outside expertice including a research chair. However ,there has been no conclusion. From my opinion I believe that the chairs should be designated according to our need for expertice, and to add value to the board dialogue. However in order to avoid conlfict of interest they should be a non voting chair, for a one year reappointable term, and subject to the six year full term of all board members. If we feel we should have a marketing or trade chair, this also should also be a non voting chair.
I am firly of the beleif the base chairs should remain producer chairs, as these days the range of expertice in a farm chair is significant, and in itself subjet to criticism based upon their origin(s).

I also beleive we are priviledged to have two new gen producers on our board, given the grey hair in the industry (including mine) Sask Pulse is fortunate to have new blood.

We all benefite when we mentor and reward new candidates who are brave enough to toss their name in the ring!

At the end of the day it is all our charge to bring value to this industry and the primary stakeholders which are farmers.

[haveapulse]

PS this is Vicki Dutton!