LUMSDEN, Sask. – Several Saskatchewan Wheat Pool members said they were insulted by the Pool’s presentation of the proposed share offering.
At a meeting June 16 Will Oddie of Regina told director Henry Seidlitz and chief financial officer Lyle Spencer they should not be promoting the share offering, but presenting both sides of the issue.
“The whole level of inadequacy of this presentation is insulting,” Oddie said. “You showed us a few color slides. Nice graphics – not a hell of a lot of information.”
About 30 members attended the meeting and most gave Seidlitz and Spencer a rough ride.
Read Also
Agriculture ministers agree to AgriStability changes
federal government proposed several months ago to increase the compensation rate from 80 to 90 per cent and double the maximum payment from $3 million to $6 million
Alf Wagner, who farms north of Craven, said members did not receive enough information during the past few months and he didn’t appreciate the wording of one letter he received. He said the letter implied older farmers, entitled to receive equity payouts over the next 10 to 15 years, are a liability to the company.
“I was insulted,” he said. “We are the people that built this Pool. Let’s not forget that.”
Spencer said the amount to be paid out is a liability, but the members certainly aren’t.
Wagner said he fears farmers will lose control of the pool once shares are sold to outside investors. The outside investors would receive Class B non-voting shares while farmers will hold Class A voting shares.
“Money talks,” he said.
“If they want something and the farmer-member wants something else, who’s going to win out?”
Wagner said selling shares in subsidiary companies like the Pound-Maker ethanol plant would sit better with members.
“I’m talking about the Mother Pool. I think the members, including myself, are all in favor of (selling shares in) subsidiaries. But for Saskatchewan Wheat Pool in itself, what I’m hearing here this evening is I am totally against it.”
Wagner, along with others, called for a chance to vote on the proposal.
“This is our pool. It does not belong to management. It does not belong to the directors.”
Fred Sykes, a delegate in District 6, said the bylaws clearly allow for a membership vote.
“My members are asking and I don’t see why they shouldn’t have this,” he said.
Another farmer asked, if the proposal is defeated, would the board of directors and senior management take that as a sign of non-confidence and step down.
Seidlitz said no.
Spencer later said this was one of the more negative meetings, but the overall response has been positive.
