The Three Amigos try to Takeover SPG

[haveapulse]

I have a couple of quesionts as a candidate and as a director: How does this affect future SPG elections, if SPG directors hand pick and lobby for candidates.

I am concerned about who will want to run for SPG in the future, unless Bert, Sean and Jim endorse them. Because I can tell you as a candidate who is pretty tough, my name would not be on a ballot if I knew they would do this. It feels like I have been bullied.

And so the question what is the longrun impact to our organization and farm elections in general of these actions?

How does it affect the autonomy of board nominees when candidates are really hard to find in the first place.

[bucket]

The breeder promoting the seed growers and thats not a conflict of interest?

Too load a board for self serving interests, is that not leaving a bad taste in anyone's mouth?

[dave4441]

I think not only is there confict of interest issues here but also serious ethical issues. I can't imagine that this whole thing won't have long term ramnifications to Sask Pulse Growers as a organization. I feel for the people that have put their name forward, both currently sitting on the board and participating in this election. When i was at SPG we had our differances but i never once actively campaiged against someone that I would expect to be sitting with on the board with in the next term. It reeks of disrespect for people that have sat on this board in the past as well as those running currently.

[Burbert]

IT IS SIMPLE SOOOOOS SASK FRAMERS KIN
UNDERSTAND WHAT AN ELECTION IS ALL ABOOT!

[westsider]

even though i cant vote but my father that lives in Saskatchewan can here is what he said. "My mind is made up. Not voting for either Simpson or Hundeby. In fact i have lost 100% respect for anyone that is currently on the board right now. Is there not a chair that can take control of this shit? i would support an election that started from scratch and not one of these board member's that are on right now are allowed to run again." (paraphrased)

maybe we need to bring back a couple of the old guard to get this ship back on course.

all this advertising reeks of Simpson's old money.

Politics - that's all this is. Why has it come to this?

[sumdumguy]

You got it.

[haveapulse]

Ag Council governs boards in Saskatchewan, make your concerns known to them.

[grower99]

Personally I felt it was great that
Shawn,Jim and Bert were elected to the
SPG board. Having these three on the
board gives it a lot of respect in all
aspects of our industry.I don't believe
that the SPG board has been summoned to
appear before the Agri food Council(the
government's supervisory agency)since
they were elected! These three can be
described as: honest, reliable,
innovative,ethical and hard working.They
have the ability to work with others to
try and develop a consensus. If they are
supporting Hundeby and Simpson I know
that they also share similar traits. No
one questions the importance and the
benefit of differing views on a board
but in the end the Board decision must
be supported by all board members. To
say that these three people are
unethical... is bs!

[JohnGalt]

Just filled out my ballot and did not vote for either of the recommended candidates.

Is it just me or do others feel the need for a shower after coming in contact with Shawn Buhr?

[dave4441]

Gee, i was at the Agri Food COuncil meeting that you are refering to and you make it sound like we were pulled in front of them and had our hand slapped. It was simply a discussion about the changes that were made at SPG. Changes that were supported by the board of SPG at that time. You are stretching again grower99!!!

[haveapulse]

Grower99 maybe you would like to comment on how the actions of these directors will effect the future automomy of SPG elections, and our potential candidates, not to mention the confidence in our electorate about the process.

Boards rely on people who feel comfortable and motivated to allow their names to stand for election, most do so assuming a fair shake at the process. Although boards do recruit potential members for talent, the difference here is the public endorsement by existing directors, and the question of ethics this brings forward.

Confidence in a board by the electorate is dependent upon the confidence in the neutrality of an individual candidate in their capacity to weigh in on issues without any allegiance to another board member or members as a group.

This is the question of ethics which anyone concerned about governance is weighing today.

[grower99]

What I've been told the SPG appeared
before the Ag food Council because the
Executive Director was let go, the
controller was quitting and so was the
head of SPG research. Sounds like
dysfunctional board at that time. That's
why the Three ran last time.