turnover at SPG

[sumdumguy]

Where money and power cogregates, very
different dichotemies emerge. Some want to
corner the power, others have the best of
intentions. Can't paint all of us with the same
brush.

[oneoff]

Very true.....and we can not afford to tolerate the other small fraction that most surely brings the whole system into disrespute.

That is always my whole point.

[oneoff]

Additionally; we should be simply able to rely on the remaining four to straighten the mess out.

So tell me how no vote count released (from Dec.6/2012 SPG election); ties in with board appointing replacements when we don't know that at least the losing election candidates with the highest vote counts got the jobs.

Appointing security forces or appointing board members. Neither one of these brings a whole lot of confidence in the belief that many understand roles and responsibilities; or codes of conduct or codes of ethics.....or accountability.



And that where "accountability" comes in.

Everyone can honestly miss what is being done behind the scenes. You can even get buried behind the scenes. There are sources for guidance in these areas.

I would suggest perhaps consulting the "Ag Council" previously mentioned or maybe Municipal advisors who have wide experience from Dep't of Municipal Affairs; or even a priest, pastor or respected member of the community; or even common sense and reasoning.

But don't did a deeper hole.

[oneoff]

All news reports seem to refer to an end of "a short lived controversy"

Be that as it may.

Is it also the end of compulsory SPG checkoffs being ever being made refundable (upon application).

Ever remember the arguments about a compulsory CWB?..... and the counter arguments.

[sumdumguy]

I suspect that it would be much easier to make
the pulse levy voluntary than to take the power
away from the CWB. To move federal
government legislation is monumental, to make
pulse levies voluntary would start with a
resolution at the AGM. Are the laws that govern
the Pulse Board enshrined in provincial
legislation?

Dave, since you have experience on the board,
you may have an idea of what the process would
be?

[TOM4CWB]

sdg

SPCDB is Federal Legislation. Farm Products Marketing
Act.

Change would be initiated at an AGM as you have said.

[dave4441]

A resolution can be brought forward at
AGM but it is non-binding.

Personally I am in favor of a non-
refundable levy for the same reason it
has always been non refundable. Growers
receive varities royalty free and she
pay accordingly. Shouldn't be a free
ride.

An example of this is the glyphosate
issue in Europe. While much of the
funding was actually covered off by
federal government, it takes dollars to
have an organization like Pulse Canada
waiting at the ready. I wouldn't want
to see a grower receive the benifit of
that work after clawing back his levy.

[oneoff]

But you see Dave; that is exactly the problem. You may be a seed grower; a director; a researcher or whatever and not be in touch with the ordinary guys that pay the bills and very well may have a different perspective.

Now if you are in the former group and have canvassed those "paying for the tune" and know for a fact that that melody is what they wish to hear..... then all is well.

But as you say; you have a personal opinion; as might everyone else.

What is wrong is when anyone on a board of directors; ever gets to thinking that their personal agenda and personal preferences trump even a majorities wishes.

Its all about representation and not at all about benevolent dictators.

Do we really want "a" benevolent dictator(s); even if it would on the surface be seen to be a good choice for the present circumstance.

Go to the people to know their needs and the direction to embark upon.

"Non-binding" sounds like "blank cheques". They are meant for emergencies, not to be used regularly as an excuse for vetoing the other democratic ways of conducting business.