Jump to content
ApiNZ Levy Proposal

ApiNZ Commodity Levy Proposal

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, ApiNZ Science & Research said:

So as a non-binding (?) poll, who would kick in X amount for Y aspect of research ?  [JM]

I'm not suggesting a telephone tree. I'm suggesting a fully substantiated levy worked out on whatever basis comes out of the present round. Presented to all beeks

as a regular (gst etc) invoice, except no debt collectors called in.....the X & Y above is what isn't washing. Specific is needed. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, yesbut said:

I'm not suggesting a telephone tree. I'm suggesting a fully substantiated levy worked out on whatever basis comes out of the present round. Presented to all beeks

as a regular (gst etc) invoice, except no debt collectors called in.....the X & Y above is what isn't washing. Specific is needed. 

 

Specific has already recently been asked  - I was just asking it in a more offhand way for research ideas and what others might think they're worth (by how far they'd reach down into their pocket).

But for those that want to see the specific research ideas in play currently, please check out NZ Bee Research Priorities Survey by @Pike at Landcare Research (and also a member of the Api NZ Science & Research group) [JM]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 10/08/2018 at 12:19 AM, Dennis Crowley said:

glad to see you agree with us, see you at the meetings. One entity-one vote APINZ. With the levy being in place most beekeepers will take more of an interest in the industry and then we can get good mix of young and experienced people wanting to be on the board and take the industry further.

Edited 22 hours ago by Dennis Crowley

I don't  agree with you at all, I believe the levy will be a weighted vote , so that means the more honey you declare the more votes you get 

 

How can that be one entity -one vote 

 

And Dennis I also personally believe it was one persons pet project to get apinz 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is well proven the voluntary financial support of research in our areas of interest is a very difficult task.

That said, the present proposals by APINZ are seemingly supported by a small number of beekeeping enterprises not by far the majority of people involved. A small grouping of people with a large number hives you may have APINZ but you don't have the rest of us.

It is the representation of this larger number of people (APINZ is demanding be contributors) that needs to be addressed in way that is acceptable to those people.

The current make up of the Boards of APINZ and indeed the AFB.org present a large degree of unhappiness to the non members currently. These are the very ones who APINZ intends compelling.

Beekeepers express constant concern about the apparent make up of APINZ being dominated by the packers and larger operators particularly at a Board level. This must be addressed urgently if any unity is ever to be achieved.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, olbe said:

 

I don't  agree with you at all, I believe the levy will be a weighted vote , so that means the more honey you declare the more votes you get 

 

How can that be one entity -one vote 

 

And Dennis I also personally believe it was one persons pet project to get apinz 

 olbe everyone only gets 1 vote, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Dennis Crowley said:

 

 

Thanks for your comments Dennis I've replied in blue below:

 

 On ‎10‎/‎08‎/‎2018 at 9:43 AM, Frederick said:  

Thanks for putting some of the miscommunication to rights Dennis.

While not wanting to belittle any of the hard working people in APINZ who have had the decency to put their heads up above the parapet for what they consider is for the good of the industry I make the following points / queries for your comment:

  1. Have APINZ misread things? Can you please expand this question.  A pretty straight forward question which leads into 2.
  2. Have they pursued their aspirations for the Industry to early in the piece in that they've missed the boat in engaging the grass roots commercial sector in their vision prior to setting out on the Levy journey. No even before APINZ was formed the CLA was always on the cards, we were waiting to get the two beekeeping organisations to come together first. APINZ and a lot of beekeepers have always been upfront about wanting a CLA. I myself have spoken several times about it at conferenceses along with others. Might’ve been on the cards but as put forward it hasn’t the support of the Commercial sector: As I’ve alluded too I was a supporter of the unified APINZ at the outset but have serious doubts now: It’s great to have a vision but unless the engine room of the industry shares it you’re wasting your time!
  3. Would it not be better to actively engage with the commercial sector (on a one on one basis if need be) to sell them the APINZ vision as well as assimilating the engaged individuals ideas and concerns into the overall picture where appropriate. That is what we are doing, go to the roadshows and read the material put out send in your questions. No I mean grass roots engage; get on the phone pound the pavement; talk to the people that make up the engine room of the industry and convince the majority to back you! (i.e. JM of APINZ R & D has enough time to enter obnoxious posts in these forums, encourage him to speak directly to those he wants to pay his wages): Sell yourselves!!
  4. APINZ are the stand out organisation in the Industry but have failed miserably in winning the hearts and minds of the commercial sector. We have to disagree with that statement, the communication we are getting has been very positive from the commercial sector who are a big part of our membership, but we can always do better. This is where we part company in a major way: I’m surveying commercial associates to qualify my assumptions that the vast majority don’t support APINZ or the CLA as currently promoted and the results speak for themselves: Today I spoke to / surveyed 8 commercial entities (9900 hives & 615 sites): Only one backed the APINZ  CLA: None backed the increase in the AFB Levy and there was a majority either against the GIA /or wanting more information: By Monday I’ll have surveyed a snapshot of 21 Commercial beekeepers (Approx. 35000 hives & 2050 sites) from a cross section of New Zealand and will report their thoughts: Most I’ve spoken to regarding these issues and while I know where most stand I’ll report it as is! You haven’t got the engine room of the industry on side; it’s a problem you need to fix!!!
  5. I note their will be more Commercial board representation should the levy idea run at some time in the future and while seeing the rational here wonder at the current Commercial representation which gives a obviously talented person such as Kate Kimber a seat as a Commercial representative with little or no beekeeping experience (either in the field or the industry): I see no problem with her being on the board of any Industry good entity, however I suggest on a Marketing seat not as a Commercial Beekeeping representative. Not getting into personality politics but the company she represents has both a beekeeping arm and a packing arm both pay membership according to each arm. She has all the right to be there representing the beekeeping side as you do. Now anyone can put their name forward to be a board rep and the members vote on it. The problem comes when you have not many people wanting to get involved in the politics side of the industry, has been the same problem for all the years I've been involved. But I can see your question mark, but the answer is put more people up for standing. I agree it’s hard work getting something like APINZ up and going but again you’ve dropped the ball; not got the mandate and please don’t quote the personality card to me; I’m well aware of Manuka Health’s pedigree and the various parts of their enterprise and re-iterate Kate has no place in being a commercial representative on the board; yes as a Market Sector representative but hey I’m no longer a member so what would I know: But then again APINZ want to represent everyone whether the engine room of the industry / commercial sector give you a mandate or not!
  6. The vast majority of the commercial sector are watching these proceedings with angst! There's never going to be 100% agreement in the Industry any more than there is in Damien O'Conner's field of politics and the Ministers references to the Industry of late show his advisors and confidants have less than a little knowledge of beekeepers, beekeeping in general and the Industry as a whole!. Yet when I started we had a commodity levy we had lots of discussion and beeks attending meetings or taking notice and having a say because they had their own levy money tied up in the industry so they wanted to keep an eye on what happened with it, and so we all should, and out of that came all the manuka info and we have the industry that we have from there, right or wrong. I think right but we have a few problems that need sorting, we wont get 100% agreement as you are right we will never get that, we need the majority agreement as long as the 100% can see the long term benefit for their industry, just like in any other sphere of industry. There are always people that will never be happy but we cant let them dictate where the industry goes as it will go nowhere. Well I don’t necessarily want to dictate and I aspire to and would welcome a unified industry and yes maybe under the APINZ banner if it’s appropriate but again APINZ have work to do; they’ve lost me and the majority of the Commercial sector and need to get it back: Holding a handful of Roadshows which the commercial sector will struggle to get to due to the spring timings just not going to work; telling them to read the information; it’s not going to work: Defer the CLA posturing/positioning until you have a chance to press the flesh / pound the pavement and win the backing you aspire to!
  7. With the excruciating and public mess this is turning into may I suggest:
    1. APINZ pull the Levy application, AFB application and GIA application until further notice. The AFB is up to the AFB management board hope you had your say by way of submissions. The GLA is happening to industries wether we like it or not, govt has put that into the bio-security act its happening, we have to decide what level we want to be involved in it because even if we opt out, other industries have the ability to send us a bill if get a benefit to them paying for an incursion that effects them, crazy but true thats why we need to be thinking about that one, its not about just bee disease/viruses/bugs but how we interact with other industries as well, and beekeeping is spread far and wide on other peoples land. The CLA is already started and there will always be people who say not yet just wait., certainly people that don't want to contribute anything, or in the past those that think that because they are bigger should only have to pay perhaps 0.30/hive while the little guys have to pay $1.00/hive and the bigger guys get waited voting rights as well, those types will never want to pay the same as anyone else. At least with this levy everyone pays the same.  Yes there’s undoubtedly people within the industry that don’t want to pay their way: Yes there’s good people willing to put themselves forward only to be shot down by others who seemingly don’t want to actively contribute: You can put forward any perspective but the only one that really counts is have you the industry backing? No not at present!!
    2. Engage effectively with the commercial sector (one on one, small groups and road shows) and win their hearts and minds: You're never going to win everyone over but if you're on the right track I'll be on your side! Thats what is happening hope to see you at one of them You’ll see me at the roadshows (a good many will not make it!) but I suggest you take 7.2. seriously it’s how democracy works and it’s how you’ll capture the hearts and minds of the commercial sector
  8. And if this all doesn't work: well maybe there's an alternative idea/organisation that needs looking at: That after all is democracy - Where as the current manic, rushed Minister / APINZ driven side show isn't!. We don't need anymore organisations as we are to small an industry and then nothing gets done and we all argue over the same stuff and then people make rash decisions to try and get 1 up manship that doesn’t change anything and makes trying to deal with an issue even harder, and having a vote for the levy is democracy as you say, come along listen and learn then make up your own mind and vote. I feel your frustration and while I’m not a political animal and would like nothing more than to have a unified industry for the life of me I’m having doubts that unless APINZ can engage more positively with the engine room of the Industry (Commercial Sector) and sell the vision they have to them: Maybe it’s just got to be back to the drawing board?
Edited by Frederick
Correction
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Dennis Crowley said:

 olbe everyone only gets 1 vote, 

So that means the 5000 or so hobbyists could force a levy on the commercials.  And the hobbyists will not be paying the levy as they don't sell much honey.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Trevor Gillbanks said:

So that means the 5000 or so hobbyists could force a levy on the commercials.  And the hobbyists will not be paying the levy as they don't sell much honey.

i think that only producers of honey extracted for commercial use are eligible to vote.

from the levy consultation and voting process section about 2/3 down the page here: https://apinz.org.nz/proposed-levy-investment-programme/

 

this would mean that packers and other non-beekeeping members of api-nz would be ineligible to vote, and if they tried and their votes were counted then the whole process could be deemed invalid

 

api-nz continue to ignore the request to provide a number for how many of their members are registered beekeepers. That is quite telling.

Edited by tommy dave
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, tommy dave said:

i think that only producers of honey extracted for commercial use are eligible to vote.

from the levy consultation and voting process section about 2/3 down the page here: https://apinz.org.nz/proposed-levy-investment-programme/

 

this would mean that packers and other non-beekeeping members of api-nz would be ineligible to vote, and if they tried and their votes were counted then the whole process could be deemed invalid

 

api-nz continue to ignore the request to provide a number for how many of their members are registered beekeepers. That is quite telling.

Somewhere in one of their other posts they stated 91% of their members were registered beekeepers.  So roughly 800.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Ted said:

Somewhere in one of their other posts they stated 91% of their members were registered beekeepers.  So roughly 800.

Yes.  But they have not told us how many hives that represents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from the FAQs on the levy page:

"The Commodity Levies Act is clear that a commodity levy can be applied to commodities at the point of production.  In our industry the core commodity is honey, and this can only be levied once.

Under our proposed membership model outlined below, these stakeholders can still join ApiNZ as Associate members once the commodity levy is in place and contribute to the industry in this way. However, these members will not have the right to vote on investment of levy funds."

 

This seems to mean that Board members other than those representing, and elected by, levy payers = primary producers of honey extracted for commercial use = commercial beekeepers would be ineligible to vote on levy expenditure.

 

On this basis, it seems that to have representatives elected by non-levy payers eligible to vote on levy spend would be running fairly close to the law, and this should be clarified. Simply changing the board structure so that commercial representatives have a majority while still allowing the other Board members a vote needs to be looked at very closely - would it be legal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Trevor Gillbanks said:

Yes.  But they have not told us how many hives that represents.

They have stated they represent 50% of  hives 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, tommy dave said:

i think that only producers of honey extracted for commercial use are eligible to vote.

from the levy consultation and voting process section about 2/3 down the page here: https://apinz.org.nz/proposed-levy-investment-programme/

 

this would mean that packers and other non-beekeeping members of api-nz would be ineligible to vote, and if they tried and their votes were counted then the whole process could be deemed invalid

 

api-nz continue to ignore the request to provide a number for how many of their members are registered beekeepers. That is quite telling.

Everyone is entitled to vote for the levy to be imposed. After that the levy payers  are going to get the vote on how the science part of the levy is spent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, nikki watts said:

They have stated they represent 50% of  hives 

I find it difficult to believe that approx 800 members represent 400,000 hives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Trevor Gillbanks said:

I find it difficult to believe that approx 800 members represent 400,000 hives.

 

How's that Trevor? Too many hives for 800 members you mean? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, JohnF said:

 

How's that Trevor? Too many hives for 800 members you mean? 

Yes.  8828 registered beeks and less than 10% own 50% of all registered hives.

It may be correct, I just find it hard to get me head around

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It used to be that 600 commercials had about 90% of the hives or so - I don't know the commercial vs hobbiest numbers are now? Nor how many of those commercials are ApiNZ members

Edited by JohnF
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given it only equates to an average of around about 500 hives per member I think it is entirely probable.

Within the APINZ Board alone there will be a very large number of hives represented. The biggest players having control of 60,000 plus hives and others (members of APINZ) who hold hives in the thousands individually.

The rise in hive numbers nationally (and the problems this has created) is unlikely to be have been led by the smaller players in terms of numbers of hives.

I think it follows proportionately that the larger operators have the most to gain from APINZ's proposals.

In terms of voting rights we need to remember the large operators (represented by APINZ and it's Board members are usually honey producers, packers & also marketers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Obnoxious?

please feel free to point out the obnoxious posts to me or even better, feel free to call or email me - my details are easy to find.

i don't like people questioning the ethics or morals of the science and research group - who do this voluntarily. Whether or not a levy goes though - this will still be voluntary from people who feel they have skills to contribute. 

Thanks @Frederick - I speak to plenty of commercial and semi-commercial beekeepers - ApiNZ members, NZ beekeeping members, SNI members and none of the above. And I'm grateful to those that help us with our research. But no, neither they nor ApiNZ pay our wages or fund our research into varroa resistance, AFB and a few other things we're slowly chipping away at.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@JohnF, I think quite a few have been incensed by some of the responses or lack of to a few questions asked here.

Regarding the use of proposed funding for research, I would imagine there is an inner circle already established that would likely benefit to quite a large degree (yes the beekeeping industry may benefit as a result) but it would not be beyond the realms of reality to see funding going into hands the people funding the levy would be unhappy about.

It would be quite disturbing to find we are supporting the research arms (directly or indirectly) of the large beekeeping or marketing entities.

Tracking the money/benefit trail would prove very interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Trevor Gillbanks said:

So that means the 5000 or so hobbyists could force a levy on the commercials.  And the hobbyists will not be paying the levy as they don't sell much honey.

No trevor. it means that there is no weighted voting, those that are eligible to vote only get 1 vote, nothing to do with the amount of honey you produce

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ali said:

@JohnF, I think quite a few have been incensed by some of the responses or lack of to a few questions asked here.

Regarding the use of proposed funding for research, I would imagine there is an inner circle already established that would likely benefit to quite a large degree (yes the beekeeping industry may benefit as a result) but it would not be beyond the realms of reality to see funding going into hands the people funding the levy would be unhappy about.

It would be quite disturbing to find we are supporting the research arms (directly or indirectly) of the large beekeeping or marketing entities.

Tracking the money/benefit trail would prove very interesting.

Nothing has been decided yet,and if the levy is passed the levy payers get to decide. lets not put the cart before the horse.There is always lots of ideas yes but nothing happening yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed that perhaps nothing is decided yet. I do feel there is a real risk to those opposed that in fact the levy as proposed will come to pass and that in essence the control of the available funding (and thus the entire industry) will indeed fall under the auspices of APINZ.

AFB.org (while seemingly autonomous but in probability in my view not entirely due cross pollination/influence/sharing) levies, Honey levies, plus impending GIA levies make a very potent brew in the hands of APINZ

Only a small proportion of the Beekeepers register is granted voting rights in many of the largest issues in the current proposal. 

Given there is a very large group of votes coming from very large operators with vested interest there is very real risk to the smaller operator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Trevor Gillbanks said:

I find it difficult to believe that approx 800 members represent 400,000 hives.

Currently it would appear from numbers in the BeeKeeper Mag that 220 Beeks run 630000 hives
in the two categories 500-1000 and over 1000 hives 

  • Good Info 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would the number of beeks be for say the 150 to 1000 hives? These I feel are what I see as the smaller operators.

Edited by Ali
Clarifying parameters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...