When MCGA refused Eduard's nomination... Who
Followed? Who Switched the Rules?
- Brief
history of MCGA's prior election irregularities
- Introducing
the first irregularity in 2007
- Archived
copy of MCGA posting the election rules and citing the key
membership rule
- Key words
and archived copy of revised MCGA election page
- Cooperator
article on Hiebert barred as candidate
Brief
history of MCGA's prior election irregularities
During the Manitoba Canola Growers 2007 director
elections currently under way, several new and questionable election
practices have occurred that will make it harder for candidates
representing the will of the membership's majority, to have a fair
and equal opportunity to be elected. As these circumstances
are not without a prior history and old habits die hard, a brief
review of MCGA's sordid electoral politics in recent elections will
help clarify the present circumstances.
Under Manitoba law, organisations are required to
be democratic in order to be able to receive the farm "checkoff".
However, with the Government oversight lacking teeth, MCGA, under an
Ernie Sirski and Bruce Dalgarno dominated board, had enjoyed the
privilege of collecting hundreds and hundreds of thousands of
dollars annually from farmers annually for many years through
Manitoba's compulsory $0.50 per tonne of canola checkoff, without
ever having to conduct a single director election! Jumping
ahead just a bit, MCGA intends to double the compulsory checkoff to
$1/tonne for next year.
Then in early 2000, with what was has now become
MCGA's last appointment to the MCGA board, Eduard Hiebert was
appointed director. Like the others, Eduard, could easily have
gone along to get along and been acclaimed at the next AGM.
Not accepting this top down undemocratic practice, Eduard encouraged
a further three farmers to stand for election. With seven
candidates for four positions, this required MCGA to hold an
election, the first ever in its checkoff history and through very
improper electioneering, none of the three were elected! As
was widely reported, including confirmed by independent scrutineer
Fred Tait of Rosendale, MCGA conducted first one than the next year,
two very questionable and improper elections. Eduard then
sought a court order, which MCGA spent thousands of farmers' dollars
fiercely resisting what they ought to do in the first place, but
Eduard did obtain the requested court order compelling MCGA to clean
up its voters list and make it accessible to the membership in time
for the next election!
With court order in hand and short of the letter
of the law MCGA has with much reluctance corrected the most flagrant
of practices, but these elections are still a shameful far cry from
the standard demanded in civic elections.
Back to top
Introducing
the first irregularity in 2007
Now to the first of this year's election
irregularities. In line with MCGA's recent electoral history,
prior to the election, MCGA quite properly posted MCGA's nomination
and election rules. Subject to those rules and using the
required nomination form, which repeated the membership rules,
Eduard then submitted a completed nomination form prior to the
deadline on October 31, 2007.
During a previous election, Eduard had been
improperly removed from the list by which MCGA is obligated to give
the membership notice of the election. While Bill Ross, MCGA's
"Executive Manager", claimed he did not know how the
"error" occurred he did provide the assurance that it
would not happen again. This year, but a few days prior to the
deadline, Eduard realised he had again not received the required
notice, now this time, without having to check MCGA's records, Bill
Ross "knew" and asserted my membership had lapsed, adding
I had made no checkoff within the last two year period. When I
assured him I had, then in line with previous elections policy and
practice, which Bill Ross repeated to me, that if I faxed him a copy
of my grain receipt, showing a deduction was made within the time
period, everything would be fine!
However later, they changed their tune saying the
membership rule was not when the money was deducted, but when MCGA received
the money.
For an archived copy of what MCGA had posted until
the nomination deadline, please see this
page.
"An eligible member is a member who has paid
an MCGA canola check-off deduction since September 30, 2005 and...
prior to September 30, 2007."
Please note, for clarity purposes, the section I
omitted in the above quote does not apply to me, as I have not asked
for a refund.
Please note further, on the archived copy just
referenced, further below, you will find the required nomination
form which repeats the membership rule.
Since then, MCGA has removed this information and
after the nomination deadline posted different rules. On this
set of information, you will note no nomination form is available!
Please see MCGA's
website.
Just in case MCGA attempts to clean up their rules
further, for a duly
archived copy, please see this
page.
This election page was only made available after
the nomination deadline. Ignoring for now all
the other changes, the key revised rules are as follows:
"The membership list includes all individuals
and corporations;...
2. whose check-off MCGA has received
between September 30th of 2005 and September 30th of 2007"
Even though the MCGA directors have received proof
positive that my check-off has been paid and all companies only
remit funds one month after a quarter has closed, with my checkoffed
money clearly in a "receivable" and bankable position,
MCGA is turning a wilfully blind eye to this information, claiming
the check-off company must actually remit the money to MCGA BEFORE a
farmer with a check-off is considered a member. This now
creates a time gap of up to four months where the farmer has paid
the checkoff, but MCGA, despite prove, now intends to refuse members
their membership rights.
Is this change in the rules and changes to the
website accidental? Or part of old habits dying hard?
I now turn to the second break from recent
election procedures and practices, a change which will disadvantage
some candidates.
For reasons yet to be explained and in
contradiction to the established practice over the last few
elections, this year MCGA refused to publish the candidates'
biographies the day after nominations closed (October 31) and did
not do so until after the ballots must be mailed on November 15!
Why the delay? One possible reason is that this delay gives a
calculated advantage to the inside directors and the inside crowd to
begin their election period while the remainder of the members do
not yet even know there will be an election.
What is for certain, is the following:
During an earlier election, I noticed other candidates biographies
were posted on the website but not mine. That year Bill Ross
told me I had not requested to have mine posted there!
Then regarding the length of the biographies,
there is no doubt in my mind, that during a directors meeting Ernie
Sirski was the one who first advanced the meagre 150 word rule
limit, knowing in my opinion it would work to the disadvantage of
new comers.
Then two elections ago, despite Meyers Norris
Penny in charge of the election, including printing the biographies,
Bill Ross had taken clear steps to tell me my biography could be no
more than 150 words and needed to be submitted before the deadline
in order to qualify. In previous years the practice was submit
the nomination form and if an election, then submit the biographies.
However, in the 2003 election, even though Bill Ross was vigilant in
restricting mine to 150 words, neither he nor MNP took steps to
apply the rule to Ernie Sirski.
During the last election in 2005, when the
biographies were published on the website after the nominations
closed, it was only after I drew attention to the fact that each of
the inside directors, including Ernie Sirski had exceeded the 150
word limit that had been religiously applied to mine, that MNP then
undertook to allow these directors after the deadline to resubmit
new biographies.
Following the Cooperator article below, in which
MCGA people claim in fairness to exercise one set of rules equally
to all an dispersions are cast that I am seeking a special variation
on the rules, you be the judge who followed the rules and who
changed the rules.
Back to top
Cooperator
article on Hiebert barred as candidate
Hiebert says he should be able to run because
checkoff taken
Five running for four Canola Grower Association seats
by Allan Dawson
22 November, 2007
Co-operator staff
Five farmers, including two incumbents and three newcomers, are
running for four director positions on the Manitoba Canola Grower's
Association (MCGA) board this fall.
St. Francois Xavier farmer, Ed Hiebert says he
should be on the ballot too. But he won't be ironically, because the
association is sticking to its rules.
Hiebert, a former MCGA director and critic of the
MCGA for not following proper procedures, says he delivered canola
during the previous two years, didn't request the MCGA checkoff be
refunded and therefore should be eligible to vote and run in the
election. He also submitted his nomination papers before the Oct. 31
deadline. The problem is the collected checkoff money didn't reach
the MCGA by the September 30 deadline as required by MCGA bylaws,
said MCGA president Brian Chorney.
In this particular case we haven't received any checkoff (money) and
as an association we have to live by our bylaws, Chorney said in a
recent interview last week from his East Selkirk-area farm. As a
board we reviewed it and we don't feel we have any right to make any
exceptions to the bylaws for anybody. We all have to live by the
same rules.
Hiebert said in the past farmers were considered
members in good standing if they could prove the checkoff had been
deducted. Hiebert said he assumed that would happen in his case
after he complied with the request from MCGA executive director Bill
Ross Oct. 31 to supply cash tickets documenting his checkoff was
paid.
Ross confirmed he asked Hiebert for the
documentation, but added the final decision was up to the MCGA
board. Ross denied Hiebert's assertion that documentation of the
checkoff's deduction has been accepted as proof of membership in the
past. Hiebert said he delivered canola late in the crop year because
he was waiting for prices to improve. He said the company that
purchased his canola isn't at fault because, in effect, it's doing
the MCGA a favour by collecting and remitting the canola checkoff.
Hiebert said he suspects there are other farmers who wrongly assume
they are MCGA members because the association didn't receive their
checkoff money in time. Chorney said farmers can easily find out if
they are members by telephoning the MCGA. Those who want to vote or
run in MCGA elections should check their membership long before the
deadlines and ensure their member dues reach the association in
time. We are not singling anyone out, Chorney said. It would be
unfair to other members in the organization or potential candidates
if we start making exceptions for anyone.
Hiebert, a stickler for proper protocol, was
appointed to the MCGA board to fill a vacancy and then elected to a
two-year term in 2000. He alienated his fellow directors when he
complained the MCGA's voters' list was flawed and therefore
undemocratic. A judge agreed with him and ordered the list improved.
In 2002, Hiebert launched a private prosecution
against his fellow directors alleging they breached the Manitoba
Corporations Act by failing to keep a proper membership list. Court
of Queen's Bench judge, Gerald Jewers quashed the action.
Hiebert's fellow directors accused him of being
disruptive and uncooperative. They even vowed to pass a resolution
to kick him off the board if he had been re-elected in 2003. Hiebert
said he was trying to make the association more democratic. Hiebert
ran unsuccessfully for the MCGA's board in 2003 and 2005.
Incumbent directors Bruce Dalgarno of Newdale and
Dale Gryba of Gilbert Plains are seeking re-election. Two other
incumbents Brad Day of Deloraine and Tom Kieper of Russell are not
seeking reelection. Barry Chappell of Hamiota, Clayton Harder of
Winnipeg and Robert Pettinger of Elgin are three newcomers seeking
office.
Meyers Norris and Penny has been hired to run the
elections. Ballots were mailed to 9,000 MCGA members Nov. 15.
Members have until December 10, 2007 to return their ballots and
counting will occur on December 11, 2007. New directors will assume
their MCGA responsibilities following the annual meeting.
Back to top
|