Members Grant ApiNZ a “Stay of Execution”

While the Apiculture New Zealand (ApiNZ) Board had the industry-good group – with roots in the National Beekeepers Association (NBA) going back 112 Years – seemingly destined to be dissolved and assets transferred as they entered a March 25 online special general meeting, some influential members had other ideas. A stay of execution was earned and the ball put back in the board’s court, for now.

Seemingly set on a path to death, the group – which has been operating since 2016 as ‘Apiculture New Zealand’ when Federated Farmers Beekeeping Division joined with NBA – entered the meeting of 76 participants with four resolutions on the agenda, designed to ensure a smooth dissolution.

Held via online video stream, the ApiNZ AGM on March 25 was chaired by Nathan Guy who was flanked by chief executive Karin Kos. Guy says the board was aware, ahead of the meeting, that a move by life member Allen McCaw to delay a decision on dissolving the group would be made.  

Only one made it past a vote of members though, that of allowing memberships and director roles to continue on indefinitely, or at least to a date considered applicable by the board. The other three remain figuratively sitting on the ApiNZ table as life member Allen McCaw moved a procedural motion, which then gained support of 85% of the vote, to have the key resolutions tabled to be addressed at a later date. The date is to be determined by the board.

Three days after the SGM a date for the board to meet had not been set, according to a statement from chair Nathan Guy.

“As a board and management team we appreciated the vote of confidence but recognise there is a job ahead of us, along with the membership, to consider how the organisation could be re-shaped to meet membership needs for the future. And importantly how that can be supported with a sustainable funding model,” Guy’s statement says.

He confirmed that the board had been made aware, ahead of the meeting, that the procedural motion was to be raised.

McCaw’s address to the meeting included his understanding of the board’s position as membership dwindles.

“The board’s decision to put the resolutions forward was clearly based on the need for fiscal responsibility to be taken and they had little alternative to present that to us. I personally feel – and others do too obviously – that there has been insufficient time to explain or examine any alternative,” McCaw said to the meeting.

The now-retired Otago beekeeper said the recent failure to secure “partnerships arrangements” was not adequate reason to wind up the organisation. Unique Mānuka Factory Honey Association members voted against constitutional changes which would have acted as a merger of sorts with ApiNZ following a controversial SGM on February 28. 

“People from all aspects of the apicultural industry, laboratories, universities, beekeepers, packers, exporters, service organisations, we have a very wide representation. To my mind it would be a travesty if that structure that has been put together was to just disappear overnight, essentially,” McCaw said.

“We definitely need to reexamine the constitution. There are many good parts in it, and many parts that need to be worked on. In the lights of the industry situation and the economic circumstances we are dealing with here, clearly there is a need to look very closely at funding options.”

McCaw said a vote in support of the motion would “demonstrate that the current situation is recognised, but that we as members wish to give further consideration as to the future of ApiNZ Incorporation within the New Zealand apicultural sector”. The membership’s overwhelming support followed.

Arataki Honey director Pam Flack seconded the motion and called the ApiNZ structure “good but complex”.

“I believe something more simple can move us forward, but we need some more time. I think we need to concentrate on the grassroots,” she said.

Earlier in the meeting life member Ricki Leahy had expressed concern that an online meeting in the beekeeping season was not an adequate setting for such pivotal decisions. Flack supported that sentiment.

“If we can find a format to move through for at least three months I think it will give a better time for beekeepers to be talking… beekeepers have very specific seasons where they can sit down, have a yarn and make decisions,” Flack said.

Life member Barry Foster also spoke in favour of the motion saying, “to go ahead with rushed decisions without adequate discussion from members, you can end up in a place you really don’t want to be and would take a lot to recover from”.

Long time board member Sean Goodwin, CEO of The Mānuka Collective, explained that the decision of the board had not come about at short notice.

“It is a little bit disappointing to hear the rhetoric that beekeepers don’t have time to consider these issues. This is material and has been happening for a long time and we have seen the direction of travel by the membership. There has been a relatively small and decreasing group of supporters that have propped this (ApiNZ) up,” Goodwin told the meeting.

“I think a three month extension makes sense, but it requires a real effort on behalf of members and those outside of us. We would need to increase membership in that time … we’ve got to use this opportunity if we have it, to corral the troops and get a mandate from a larger group of beekeepers and those on both sides of the drum to move the industry forward. Otherwise, it’s a stay of execution.

“I think we can survive another three months, but it needs a collective will.”

It therefore looks likely that an in-person meeting will be held in the coming months to reassess the resolutions.

“The Board will want to take some time to consider and plan next steps and once we do that we will want to go back to our members on those plans,” Guy’s statement read.

What lights will be left on at ApiNZ on a day-to-day basis is unclear with the chair of the board not willing to elaborate further than “the exact make up of the staff is a board decision”.

Another two life members, who also serve as executive members of industry-good group New Zealand Beekeeping Inc (NZBI), Jane Lorimer and Russell Berry, expressed a desire to make an amendment to the resolutions set out in the meeting agenda. However, McCaw, a former president of the NBA, called on his experience chairing such meetings to prevent the amendment being proposed.

“If this procedural motion is followed, no further discussion would take place on the affected resolutions,” McCaw said.

Guy confirmed that was due process and Berry deemed it “a very bad outcome for this meeting”.

“Whilst the intent of this procedural motion might be good, the fact that you are financially in a situation that you may not be able to continue, then the other resolutions need to be looked at and amendments accepted,” Lorimer said.

Asked following the meeting what her amendment was, Lorimer expressed a desire to see a hard deadline of March 31 set to close down ApiNZ, rather than the more prolonged dissolution proposed of only when ‘ApiNZ is no longer the management entity responsible for implementing the National American Foulbrood Pest Management Plan’.

“I see any prolongment of the organisation as wasting money,” Lorimer explained post-meeting.

“I am pretty annoyed at ApiNZ frittering away all the money that the NBA had accumulated, via voluntary subscription, that was then passed onto them. The team around me at the time worked really hard to build up those funds.”

The Waikato beekeeper served on the NBA executive from 2000 to 2006, leading the group as president for the last four of those years.

“I think that it is not fiscally prudent to continue the organisation when the directors have indicated it needs to be wound up,” Lorimer said.

Closing remarks to the approximately hour-and-a-half-long meeting typified the perilous situation faced by ApiNZ, with Berry raising concerns about the incorporated society continuing to trade if it became insolvent.

“We absolutely understand that as directors, it is the highest priority for us,” Goodwin retorted.

“But it you have any thoughts on the sustainability of the organisation going forward, feel free to engage with the board on it. We will be taking it under consideration over the next short period, as directed by this meeting.”

It no doubt stands as an open invitation.