SASKATOON – Even as the new Saskatchewan Wheat Pool Act was being introduced into the provincial legislature last week, opponents continued their public criticism of proposed changes to the pool.
A group calling itself the Co-operating Friends of the Pool, which has gone to court to block the financial restructuring, said in a press release the new act will allow non-farmers to become directors of the company for the first time.
Pool president Leroy Larsen said the group’s fears are groundless and control of the company will remain in the hands of farmers through the delegate body.
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
The CFOP is basing its concerns on a section in the explanatory notes to the new act, which says delegates can, by a two-thirds majority vote, decide whether to nominate and elect directors to represent the holders of Class B non-voting shares.
Those shares, which have not yet been issued, will be traded on the Toronto Stock Exchange and could be held by any investor. The Class A voting shares, which will be issued to existing pool members, will not be traded publicly.
John Burton, a Regina-area farmer and spokesperson for the CFOP, said in the press release that paves the way for directors representing outside interests like investment houses, banks or railroads.
“Existing shareholders have been told that control of SWP will remain unaltered as SWP stock is sold to the stock market, but now we have proof that all of the doors are to be opened to Class B shareholders, whether they are farmers or not,” said Burton.
He added that if the share price of the pool was to decline, those non-farmer Class B shareholders would soon start demanding direct representation on the board.
Larsen said in an interview that under the new act, delegates will continue to elect the company’s directors amongst themselves. Delegates already have the power to change the makeup of the board through a two-thirds vote, he said, but there has been no reason to do so.
Asked if he could foresee any circumstances under which the delegates in a restructured pool would vote to have non-farmer shareholders represented on the board, Larsen said “not at the present time.
“They (the Class B shareholders) would have to convince the delegates, who are put in place by the Class A shareholders, that this would have to happen,” he said. “The composition of the board is in the power of the delegates and the delegates are elected by the Class A shareholders.”
The pool president said a crucial objective throughout the process has been to maintain control of the company in the hands of farmers, and the restriction of Class A voting shares to active members does just that.
He added that it’s already possible under existing bylaws for a non-farmer to sit on the board, citing the example of one former director who cash-rented out all of his land. He was a landowner, not a farmer.
