Sask Pulse Grower Election Policy

[dave4441]

Saskatchewan Pulse Growers Implement New Governance Policies

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – Tuesday, November 27, 2012

In light of recent events surrounding the Saskatchewan Pulse Growers (SPG) director election and the public endorsement of candidates, the SPG Board of Directors would like to communicate some recent changes to its governance policies. The Board acknowledges its responsibility to maintain the highest standards of governance and is continually working to serve the best interest of Saskatchewan growers.

New governance policies include:
1. No director will actively campaign in an SPG election outside of campaigning for themselves.
2. Neither the SPG Board, nor its directors will endorse candidates in an election.
3. The SPG Board will review, and change where warranted, its nomination and election policies.

“The Board felt that it was necessary to address issues that have been raised during this 2012 election and to publicly clarify our governance policies to ensure that we maintain the support and trust of our growers,” says SPG Board Chair Morgan Nunweiler. “We have always had clear policies regarding director duties and conflict of interest at the board table, but felt it was essential to further develop our policies regarding director elections.”

Current SPG Directors Jim Moen, Bert Vandenberg, and Shawn Buhr apologize to the Board and candidates.

Accountable to and funded by growers, SPG’s strategic direction is guided by a seven-member, producer-elected Board of Directors. SPG’s mandate is to provide leadership for a profitable Saskatchewan pulse industry through research, market development, and communications.

For more information please contact:

Morgan Nunweiler
Saskatchewan Pulse Growers
Board Chair
P: 306-831-7667
mcnunweiler@sasktel.net

[boarderbloke]

will they run an ad in all the papers like they did(in support),,, retracting their public support for certain candidates?
seems like the toothpaste is out of the tube.

[ColevilleH2S]

Better late, than never. But yes the damage has been done.

[checking]

Perhaps a mayor Ford penalty should be imposed.

[sk9230]

I give credit to the chairman to try and head this off but it's a little late after letting these three characters run as a slate last year and then hand select and campaign for the other two through the voting.This election makes some of the third worlds look honest.
Perhaps we should ask the three Amigo's to resign at the January meeting or face a vote on a voluntary levy. Bert needs to feel the pain in the wallet to get this fixed.

[westsider]

this board is very weak, otherwise these sort of things would not happen. the spg should go out and find a real leader to get this back on track.

[dave4441]

I think that if you read between the lines west
sider, the board has confirmd some individuals on
the board have made a mistake and the board
has corrected it and took a stand against it.
Things are on track.

[cottonpicken]

I plead ignorance on this.

Why do we need a board,what has it
accomplished,what are its goals?

[oneoff]

No one should have to read between lines on issues as basic as what is at stake here.

[dave4441]

I was being nice to the uniformed. You shouldn't
have to read between the lines it is in plain
English.

And, SPG could spend a zillion on
communications and people still would have no
idea what is going on. World of info overload I
guess. Could you imagine a farm that was
growing lairds and crimsons Cotton, instead of
Improve and Maxim? I can't. Chinese pea
demand. Free trade agreements, market access
issues. There are so many things going on in the
pulse industry that it is hard to keep track of it all.
We had serious issues with the use of glyphosate
use for exports to Europe in 2011. By 2012 the
problems was cleared up and growers could go
back to glyphosate use as a desiccant for lentils.
Tons of positive things that are working.
Unfortunately, these things are not talked about,
only problems seem to surface.

[oneoff]

So 7 individuals are given/take control and use their gut instincts and power to make decisions.
The issue is boiled down to "the process" used; accountability and what fraction oof zillions of dollars; and hours of time and effort is used to reach the concensus; or whether 7 guys put their gut opinions forward and that issue is seen to have been settled "democratically".

If anywhere true that "half" the board ran as a slate last year; and this year that slate endorsed(and for all I know maybe even selected the remainder) for this years election; then even the least cynical should admit that a board with one member would be sufficient.

And then the question is if that is how the "process" is meant to work.

Oh my God.

[oneoff]

If only the problems surface; then maybe it can be taken that those in charge are doing a very poor job of disseminating information about all the positive things they pat each other for; but don't adequately advertise to those whom they pretend to be doing all the good work for.

[dave4441]

Pretending?

[sumdumguy]

When are election results made public?

There are still major issues about who gets the
rights to the new crop issues?

Also conflict of interest and ethics should be
addressed by growers. Some members on this
board need some direction, if they stay on.

[oneoff]

When you see the odd resignation then it usually means they really did need to go.
When there are only forced resignations then it usually means that person really needed to go.

When there is instance after instance of normally disturbing stuff (that isn't immediately denied with some solid evidence or demand for proof; then it usually means someone deseves to go...kicking and screaming or not.
When someone refuses to go; and claims he is not a crook; but tars the messengers and maybe worse and is later proven beyond any doubt to be a public disgrace; then they deserved everything they got; and should be held up as an example forever..
When any board of directors holds onto "their money" and refuses to allow refunds; they are acting just like the CWB whom those same persons abhorred.

There is so much wrong; on so many issues; that it is not required to prove everyone of them when any wrong doing or poor judgement should be sufficient to demand some new direction.

Many, many boards have completely lost their bearings and are way beyond their levels of judgement and competence. And yet they want their entitlements and positions more than ever.

The sad truth I'm afraid.