Jump to content
Frederick

Commodity Levy / Fight for the Industrys future?

RISK OF CLOSURE

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, ApiNZ Levy Proposal said:

@Trevor Gillbanks regardless of where the information came from that e-mail broke a number of laws. Good to have SNI confirm they are the author of that letter and associated websites.  That said, this forum is to discuss the levy and how it will benefit our industry.  

Are you sick.  Where did I say that we sent the letter.  I only said that we harvested the contact list.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Trevor Gillbanks We are on this forum to discuss the levy, not argue about poor past behavior.  Providing a contact list to whoever wrote that fraudulent letter still facilitates the sending of that letter, regardless of its author.  However, industry has far bigger issues in front of it right now, including this vote.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We did not have anything to do with the letter. How much clearer do I need to be.

We do not know who started beekeelersagainstapitax. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ApiNZ Levy Proposal said:

@Trevor Gillbanks I'm afraid you are confused about voting, there has not been any vote for the levy before the one that is taking place now.  Really not sure what you are on about there.  

 

Yes SNI were sent a letter from lawyers.  This was after an illegal copy of the database was used to spread false information.  ApiNZ's contact details were also used fraudulently.  That, incidentally broke a number of laws at the time, we chose not to take further action.  

 

ALL beekeepers have been invited to contribute.  9 meetings across the country, numerous smaller meetings and workshops, a dedicated website and e-mail address.  ApiNZ has enjoyed engagement with beekeepers via these forums.  If none of these methods of communication suited it would have been good to have known that at the time.  We received numerous invitations to front groups in Dunedin, Northland, Canterbury and Nelson (to name a few) and fronted them all.  It is therefore very misleading to claim your group was not consulted.   

Not a single meeting in Auckland, a city of over 1 1/2 million people with more than it's share of commercial beekeepers, so either travel to Whangarei or Hamilton.

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Frederick said:

The idea that a NO vote will result in some sort of compromise is an obscure thought;

You are entitled to your opinion @Frederick however so are all others includinng myself.

There is a very real and very large compromise involved for the majority of the people who beekeep in NZ.

The vast majority of the people in NZ who have hives have not and do not want APINZ at the helm, in control of our businesses essentially and also do not wish to fund APINZ.

A yes vote is a major compromise for this majority of people.

We are people in business being led to fund a very vague scheme managed by an entity we don't want.

We plan our business activities very carefully, know full well where we are going and what we will achieve as a result. 

APINZ has only offered vague ideas and are not bound to deliver anything at all that is tangible, nor do they actually offer anything of the same.

What sort of business people would we be to invest in something so risky that has a history so far of not delivering any tangible benefit?

They have dropped the ball badly in the current circumstances of the industry.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Ted said:

After all the waa waa on this forum from a couple of particularly vocal opponents of ApiNZ  (neither of which it would appear actually qualify to be paying the levy)

Do you mean me @Ted

Share this post


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

The vast majority of the people in NZ who have hives have not and do not want APINZ at the helm,

How much you wanna bet the vote goes affirmative ?

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I notice there has been not comment by either you or @Dennis Crowley to include the SNI group.  

We have had not invite to contribute.  Quite the reverse, During the first round of voting (which was a resounding defeat), SNI were sent a Lawyers letter.

Trevor I've only just seen this line of postings and would like to make the following initial comment prior to trawling  through the rest:

 

SNI Group have the ability to influence things as they stand! All that's required is a positive YES vote and the rest will be history:

  1. They'll be able to put up their own candidates for the board either on their own or in conjunction with other groups/organisations
  2. They'll be able to retain their own identity and with luck and good management increase their membership 
  3. They'll be able to contribute towards both the formation and on-going governance of the most universally accepted Commercial dominated industry organisation the industry's seen.

BUT:

  1. You're not going to be able to see past petty personal politicking and agendas if you keep referring back to who did what to whom 'ra-de-ra' infinitum!
  2. You're also not going to able to contribute to a successful organisational future for the commercial sector unless you take the opportunity afforded you and Vote positively YES!

 

Suggestion:

                             Please don't keep regurgitating the same old arguments take the positive line and lets see what we can do for the future of the commercial sector!

 

 

Edited by Frederick
Correction required

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/02/2019 at 12:32 PM, Trevor Gillbanks said:

You are so wrong.  We did not use that AFBPMP database.  We harvested the contact list off the MPI web site, which at the time was public information.  This public showing of contact details was harvested by all sorts or companies to send out spam information.   The contact details have now been removed.

We did not use ApiNZ contact information.  However, Facebook Beekeeperagainstapitax did use that contact information (I believe).

Quite frankly I don't give a damn who did what here I suggest both parties move on and don't bring this up again!

 

On 15/02/2019 at 12:40 PM, Trevor Gillbanks said:

Are you sick.  Where did I say that we sent the letter.  I only said that we harvested the contact list.

Ditto again to both parties; let this go and look at the positive opportunity staring us all in the face!

 

On 15/02/2019 at 12:46 PM, ApiNZ Levy Proposal said:

@Trevor Gillbanks We are on this forum to discuss the levy, not argue about poor past behavior.  Providing a contact list to whoever wrote that fraudulent letter still facilitates the sending of that letter, regardless of its author.  However, industry has far bigger issues in front of it right now, including this vote.  

Wow this is a I must have the last word standoff: APINZ Levy Proposal give it a rest you can't state 'we're here to discuss the Levy' then put the boot in with the next breath.

Let it go!

 

 

On 15/02/2019 at 12:50 PM, Trevor Gillbanks said:

We did not have anything to do with the letter. How much clearer do I need to be.

We do not know who started beekeelersagainstapitax. 

Trevor are you a positive man or not: Give me some feedback on the ideas I'm trying to put forward please?

 

On 15/02/2019 at 2:07 PM, Sailabee said:

Not a single meeting in Auckland, a city of over 1 1/2 million people with more than it's share of commercial beekeepers, so either travel to Whangarei or Hamilton.

Hey lets vote negative no and send the Industry into a few more years of turmoil because we didn't like the process (I think not).

Vote YES and the commercial sector will right the governance of the re-tweaked/re-born APINZ; then you can ensure consultation with all and sundry: Look forward not back!

Edited by Grant
merged 5 consecutive posts into one
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ApiNZ Levy Proposal said:

@Trevor Gillbanks regardless of where the information came from that e-mail broke a number of laws. Good to have SNI confirm they are the author of that letter and associated websites.  That said, this forum is to discuss the levy and how it will benefit our industry.  

Thank the powers that be that APINZ does not have control of this website and forum!

 

It is plain to me that the only voice or opinion that they (and their followers) will allow is their own and if another dares voice anything contrary they have to be heartily disparaged, referred to as doomdayers etc etc etc.

 

APINZ have managed to do themselves quite a bit of reputational damage.

 

The lack of disclosed binding detailed planning and intention does further damage.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Ali said:

You are entitled to your opinion @Frederick however so are all others includinng myself.

There is a very real and very large compromise involved for the majority of the people who beekeep in NZ.

The vast majority of the people in NZ who have hives have not and do not want APINZ at the helm, in control of our businesses essentially and also do not wish to fund APINZ.

A yes vote is a major compromise for this majority of people.

We are people in business being led to fund a very vague scheme managed by an entity we don't want.

We plan our business activities very carefully, know full well where we are going and what we will achieve as a result. 

APINZ has only offered vague ideas and are not bound to deliver anything at all that is tangible, nor do they actually offer anything of the same.

What sort of business people would we be to invest in something so risky that has a history so far of not delivering any tangible benefit?

They have dropped the ball badly in the current circumstances of the industry.

The only ball that will be dropped here is the 'Positive Industry Future' ball if this opportunity slips by.

 

I'm not talking vague platitudes of 'compromise and risk' I'm trying to instil a positive fighting spirit in the commercial beekeepers of the country who aspire to a better future for themselves and their family's

 

Nothing vague in 'lets take this vote and APINZ by the scruff of the neck' shake it out and use the strengths they have (and the do have them) for the betterment of the industry under our governance!

 

So Ali I suggest you pick up the ball and do some good with it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ali said:

Thank the powers that be that APINZ does not have control of this website and forum!

 

It is plain to me that the only voice or opinion that they (and their followers) will allow is their own and if another dares voice anything contrary they have to be heartily disparaged, referred to as doomdayers etc etc etc.

 

APINZ have managed to do themselves quite a bit of reputational damage.

 

The lack of disclosed binding detailed planning and intention does further damage.

 

Ali appreciate your enthusiasm but this is starting to fit into the monotonous ludicrous scaremongering category!

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Ali said:

Do you mean me @Ted

Whatever would make you think that??

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

Nothing vague in 'lets take this vote and APINZ by the scruff of the neck' shake it out and use the strengths they have (and the do have them) for the betterment of the industry under our governance!

Only it is a 'hope we can' type utterance. I'm not knocking your outlook in regard this hope but seriously question whether it can ever be brought to fruition.

If APINZ is given the power and the money by way of this levy vote we are in a serious risk position frankly without any mitigations currently in place to undo what is done.

Scaremongering? Monotonous? Ludicrous? There you go again. Disparaging, belittling, attempting to humiliate? 

Much better to address the issues really without descending to this stuff @Frederick, it simply reinforces what I have said in another recent post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again I call out NZ Beekeeping Inc. and SNI Group and any other organisations and individuals looking to vote NO and say look at what I'm saying/proposing (its got substance)! You hold the positive and rational organisational future of the commercial sector in your hands at least give it consideration!!!

 

I'm trying to instil a positive fighting spirit in the commercial beekeepers of the country who aspire to a better future for themselves and their family's

 

Nothing vague in 'lets take this vote and APINZ by the scruff of the neck' shake it out and use the strengths they have (and the do have them) for the betterment of the industry under our governance!

 

So NZ Beekeeping, SNI Group and others looking to vote NO  pick up the ball and do some good with it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ted said:

Whatever would make you think that??

Well @Ted, I guess I consider I have been vocal (and will most probably continue to be so) and at least 1 other has questioned my elligibility to vote.

It is par for the course with what the disparaging type comment I have already alluded to in previous posts.

Share this post


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

Only it is a 'hope we can' type utterance. I'm not knocking your outlook in regard this hope but seriously question whether it can ever be brought to fruition.

If APINZ is given the power and the money by way of this levy vote we are in a serious risk position frankly without any mitigations currently in place to undo what is done.

Scaremongering? Monotonous? Ludicrous? There you go again. Disparaging, belittling, attempting to humiliate? 

Much better to address the issues really without descending to this stuff @Frederick, it simply reinforces what I have said in another recent post.

The problem is Ali you don't add to the discussion by bringing up past anecdotal behaviour (your opinion) which has no bearing on the current discussion: If you want to disparage past APINZ performance find another forum: If I was inclined to look backwards I may well be on your side: However I'm looking at, and pointing out the opportunity that sits in front of us.

 

Your comments above are simply unfounded monotonous scaremongering and I'm not being Disparaging or belittling in pointing this out and I'm certainly not attempting to humiliate you; I'm purely passionate about an opportunity the commercial sector has on its fingertips and I'd rather that was addressed directly!

Share this post


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

Well @Ted, I guess I consider I have been vocal (and will most probably continue to be so) and at least 1 other has questioned my elligibility to vote.

It is par for the course with what the disparaging type comment I have already alluded to in previous posts.

Love the fact you engage; happy you have a vote!

Aren't upset if you disagree with me!

Would be impressed if you'd address the positive aspects on the table for the sector!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Frederick said:

Love the fact you engage; happy you have a vote!

Aren't upset if you disagree with me!

Would be impressed if you'd address the positive aspects on the table for the sector!

I would quite happily if in fact they were there.

The current situation in one which no right minded business person would entertain for a second.

Pay your money and take all the risk is what is proposed in my view.

The lack of extensive detailed and disclosed planning, intention and budgetting in some form of binding obligation presents an arena where no right minded person should go unless they are prepared to risk all. 

I know of a package of shares (bought on the high) now worth about a third of the buy price, that company also has an uncertain future. To buy them now would be a 'punt', a pretty risky one too.

 

A yes vote for APINZ would be simply that... a 'punt'....with a lot to lose!

  • Agree 1
  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frederick, I like your positive approach for setting the NZ Apiculture industry for the future.

Thinking beyond self and being positive about making change in the future.

 

I was also interested to read you are not a member of any organisation - Api NZ, SNI or Beekeeping NZ.

But you were prepared to pay the levy and work for a united organisation.

 

What intrigues me is that there are  a number of Beekeepers who are members of multiple organisations.

This was the case with the NBA and BIG before they formed Apiculture NZ.

Two present exec members of Beekeeping NZ who were life members of NBA and retained that with Api NZ were present and took part 

at the last Apiculture NZ AGM. 

Beekeepers can be an argumentive lot but it is interesting to note that many support both organisations.

 

Frederick your call for beekeepers to vote YES and get beekeepers to work for change the majority consider desirable is excellent.  

 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


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

Frederick, I like your positive approach for setting the NZ Apiculture industry for the future.

Thinking beyond self and being positive about making change in the future.

 

I was also interested to read you are not a member of any organisation - Api NZ, SNI or Beekeeping NZ.

But you were prepared to pay the levy and work for a united organisation.

 

What intrigues me is that there are  a number of Beekeepers who are members of multiple organisations.

This was the case with the NBA and BIG before they formed Apiculture NZ.

Two present exec members of Beekeeping NZ who were life members of NBA and retained that with Api NZ were present and took part 

at the last Apiculture NZ AGM. 

Beekeepers can be an argumentive lot but it is interesting to note that many support both organisations.

 

Frederick your call for beekeepers to vote YES and get beekeepers to work for change the majority consider desirable is excellent.  

 

Thanks for the feedback Don,

Considered joining NZ Beekeeping and SNI Group last year (if they'd have me) and respect many in both organisations but wanted to sit on the outside throughout this Levy process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ApiNZ Levy Proposal said:

@tommy dave There is absolutely no way we can give voting numbers. This process is being run independently by ElectioNZ.  So to answer your questions simply, no!

 

Weighted voting on levy investment is a long talked about feature of this levy and has been outlined in both consultation material and on our website.  I'm not sure if you managed to make one of the road show meetings, but it was discussed there at some length also.

 

We do encourage people to read the material on our website. www.apinz.org.nz/levy

wow, @ApiNZ Levy Proposal, i'm not sure if you intended to answer a question different to the one i asked, but if you didn't then you need to check your head. I didn't ask you to give voting numbers. And if you did....

here is the question again, have you (apinz or its representatives) been given any indication about voting numbers to date? please answer this yes/no question rather than a different question this time...

23 hours ago, tommy dave said:

here is another question for @ApiNZ Levy Proposal. Have you been given any indication about voting numbers to date? yes/no question. Please don't avoid this one.

Edited by tommy dave

Share this post


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

Are you sick.  Where did I say that we sent the letter.  I only said that we harvested the contact list.

did SNI or its representatives send the letter? yes/no question again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also don't 'belong' to any organisation (I did join Kiwifruit Pollination Association)  It's been okay so far. 

 

What we all have to acknowledge, it's a big big deal.  Once a Yes vote passes there is not turning back.  Whether or not you can make any significant change to where it goes, who knows. 

 

I don't like how the levy is administered-  Apinz needs to work a bit more on that-  They say 'it's too hard...'  Well it's damn important to set it up as best as possible as far as levy collection is concerned.  Even if it's a bit complicated.  Having unsold honey and a levy to pay on it, just bonkers.  Collection really needs to be made across all revenue generated via beekeeping.  

 

I also have concerns around 'focus' and it's likely hood of  'manuka' taking center stage. That doesn't serve me at all, and many others I would think.  I suppose the 'manuka' industry does generate revenue for breeders, nucs, hive sellers.  

Just not that excited by it, wish I were... 

 

 

 

Share this post


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

did SNI or its representatives send the letter? yes/no question again

No. The SNI group did not send the letter. We tried to find the author but had no luck. I was under the impression at one time that one of our members started beekeepersagainstapitax. But this proved to be in error

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Be advised that this topic is currently being actively monitored by moderators and it may be locked at any time.

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...