The Three Amigos try to Takeover SPG

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[LEP]

It is now obvious grower99 is either Shawn Buhr
or his mom..

Give it up Shawn , nobody believes Grower99 is
just an interested farmer.

[dave4441]

If we define a organization or company as dysfunctional, when staff move to other positions in other companies, then most organizations and companies in Saskatchewan must be classified as dysfunctional in the last 5 years. The job market is hot and people seek opportunity. Fact of the matter is that people dont stay in positions forever. But, this is a continued attempt to stir the pot and suggest something sinister has occured.

[grower99]

People can't say why they moved.Can anyone
tell us? The point is that the SPG board
will once again have some respect as the
best grower board in Sk like it used have
several years ago if growers elect some
young farmers like Hundeby and Simpson. By
the way why was the SPG board asked to
appear before the AF Council? Just for
coffee?