NZBeekeeping has launched a consultation for the AFB PMP 10 year review

[Alastair]

OK well an election by all and sundry would be an interesting experiment but do you truly believe it would result in a more competent board or a better board, or a better run organisation than we have now?

Me, I think it would be something like our elections for government. People with charm, charisma, good looks or an ability to speak well get elected. Some very competent people who unfortunately lack those attributes would not get elected. So to compensate for that we also have a system of "list MP's". To get competent people into government who would be unlikely to otherwise get in due to an inability to attract votes from the general public.

This system gets people of talent and needed skills in. But it could equally be argued it is not truely democratic. But it works.

 

[bighands]

To me the AFBPMP is not working. If the idea is elimination then why do we still have outbreaks of AFB. The plan has been around for a long time but we still have not eliminated Afb and I do not think we will ever achieve that goal.

 

[Alastair]

why do we still have outbreaks of AFB

Cos of some beekeepers not doing their job.

Sad thing being it only takes a very small number of beekeepers to perpetuate the problem.

The AFBPMP can only do so much. They cannot be inside every hive of every beekeeper, they don't have enough money for that, nor should they have to. The beekeeper is supposed to do that. If they did we would be free of the disease.

 

[Alastair]

I guess it is human nature to blame someone else for ones own problems.

But blaming the AFBPMP for the continuation of AFB don't make a whole lot of sense.

Kind of like I left the keys in my car, it got stolen, so I blamed the police not me. Something like that.

 

[Dennis Crowley]

As ApiNZ is the management agency it has over all control of the AFB PMP
It appoints the members of the AFB PMP board, can sack them and can direct them to act as it sees fit

Here we go again, No APINZ does not appoint anyone to the board except the seat that I hold, it does ok and check any person appointed.

ApiNZ board is made up of members of ApiNZ
Not sure of the membership numbers, but it will will only be a small number of the over all beekeeping community

Nothing to do with AFB board

Remember that on the board of ApiNZ we have Comvita, Manuka Health, Dennis, Kings Honey/100 pure

Kings honey not. Yes there are beekeepers and Honey packers on APINZ Board as that is the make up of the bee Industry.

Full details here Our people
Remember that Dennis, who is appointed by ApiNZ to the AFB PMP board, is to report back to ApiNZ

Yes, only to see that the AFB Board is doing what they have been tasked with, as they run the Day to Day AFB.

So yes it is controlled by the elite few !

No not controlled by elite few, wish I was an elite.

I believe one of the main ideas NZBeekeeping Inc is proposing is a levy payer appointed board

Not apposed to this, but its not a big thing, every beekeeper now has the ability to put their names forward for the board, we have asked NZBK each time a vacancy comes up to put names forward, to date no reply, we have asked NZBK to come and have a slot to discuss the proposal, so far no reply and no action.

In the last review the government raised concerns of having the NBA (Now ApiNZ) as the management agency

Not quite right, Taken out of context and missing information in this statement.

A number of people have raised this with the Management agency but it seems to have been ignored (is this job protection ?)

Not ignored, just hasn't come up that much in all the consultation reply's so far.

 

[John B]

Like I have said before I think the board is doing a good job as are the people who work for it but some things could be looked at to see if it made things both cheaper and more efficient.
Take full brood inspections for example. There is no doubt that a full brood inspection will find more AFB than say checking two frames in each brood box but I strongly suspect that done properly this much quicker and far less intrusive inspection would pick up over 95% of all infections and 100% of any medium to bad infections.
I do not believe it is the authorities job to find every AFB for the beekeeper. It is their job to find out which beekeepers have a problem, help them deal with it and to stop them infecting other beekeepers. I have done full brood inspections many times and when there are only a few hives or when there are infected hives in an apiary it is fair enough but when you are doing an inspection on say 40 hives and you have found nothing after the first 10 then it is a colossal waste of time and resources not to mention it's pretty intrusive on the hive and to do a full brood inspection on a large apiary at this time of year with the robbing that is occurring at the moment would be plain stupid and I would be very unhappy if somebody did it to my hives.
It has to be remembered that even if you do a full brood inspection that same hive can have a clinical infection two weeks later.
I know from bitter experience that when you get a bad outbreak of AFB because your hives have robbed out somebody else's problem that one check no matter how thorough will not identify all the AFB unless you are very lucky.

 

[Dennis Crowley]

They are selected by an independent body which is appointed by Apinz and one has to assume that they give this body instructions.
It is not democratic.

The independent body was signed off yes, as to a company that could be relied upon for discretion and doing the job properly. APINZ doesn't go through the hiring process but signs it off. It was done that way so there would be independence in the hiring's. Every beekeeper can put their name forward.

 

[Dennis Crowley]

Bit of a nonsensical answer Alastair, but good to see you are beginning to get my point

If all levy payers could vote, an election process would have to occur.
The election process would heighten the profile of the AFB PMP board and the work it does
Those interested would feel some ownership of the process, which increases the possible number of people who would be interested in the governance process, from which would follow a bigger pool of possible board members. Making the AFB PMP function better.

No I disagree with this premise, just because you change the way a vote happens doesn't mean you get more people interested in being involved.
If beekeepers dealt with their afb, that would make the AFB PMP function better.

It also makes the board members accountable to the levy payers

How about levy payers be accountable to other levy payers and deal with their AFB.

Currently the board members have no accountability to the levy payers

This whole post is nonsensical, as board members we are very accountable, not only to beekeeping community but also the legal community and fiducial responsibilities and GOVT as a legal piece in law .
Just saying things doesn't make them true Roger.

 

[Dennis Crowley]

To me the AFBPMP is not working. If the idea is elimination then why do we still have outbreaks of AFB. The plan has been around for a long time but we still have not eliminated Afb and I do not think we will ever achieve that goal.

If every beekeeper did what they should and what's in the AFB book, we could get rid of AFB or at least mange it to a very low point within 2 -3 years.

 

[Morporks]

The next interesting point being raised in the NZ Beekeeping Inc review document is the lack of a reasonable complaints policy

Currently the only way to seriously have your complaints against the management agency heard is to hire a lawyer and start court proceedings.
Not many people have a spare 10k or more to pursue complaints regarding the actions of the AFB PMP

 

[NickWallingford]

The Subject: line for this discussion is "NZBeekeeping has launched a consultation for the AFB PMP 10 year review".

The Apiarist's Advocate article says "NZBI’s process of consultation is yet to be fully finalised."

Is there a process for the NZBI review?

Has NZBI approached the Minister to determine if the Minister will call for such a review, given that the Mgmt Comm review is currently underway? Yes, anyone can call for a review, but only the Minister can cause one to happen...

 

[Bee Real]

Not apposed to this, but its not a big thing, every beekeeper now has the ability to put their names forward for the board, we have asked NZBK each time a vacancy comes up to put names forward, to date no reply, we have asked NZBK to come and have a slot to discuss the proposal, so far no reply and no action

They will never apply to become AFB board members because for them it is easier to sit on the wall and criticize rather than to be part of the solution.

 

[Bee Real]

To me the AFBPMP is not working. If the idea is elimination then why do we still have outbreaks of AFB. The plan has been around for a long time but we still have not eliminated Afb and I do not think we will ever achieve that goal.

Roy the Afb PMP works otherwise how have you eliminated afb from your own hives?. It is only a very small minority who are not eliminating AFB and leave afb to spread. They are the reason we need law that forces them to eliminate AFB even against their will.
I have seen NZBEEKEEPING trying to come in the defence of a known serial afb spreader in the West Coast who refused to destroy all his afb contaminated gear, so if they represent this type of beekeepers they don't have my support.

If you don't want to have enforcement actions on your beekeeping operation you need to eliminate afb from your own hives, do what your DECA says. It is that simple, I believe...

 

[Alastair]

They will never apply to become AFB board members because for them it is easier to sit on the wall and criticize rather than to be part of the solution.

Truth!

Old rugby maxim - "those on the sidelines make the most noise". 😉

 

[John B]

The old NBA had its faults and was as prone as any organisation to being dominated by strong-willed individuals but I don't see any real difference under Apinz except that under the NBA structure you could be heard at things like the AGM whereas Apinz's AGM is over before it starts and there is certainly no time for people to raise concerns whether valid or not.
I mention this because people are saying that anybody could get on the AFB board and in my experience this is just not the case and I'm not talking about my application to be on the board as I'm pretty much politically neutral and try and get on with everybody (I struggle with the corporate's).
Apinz used its new broom to sweep out dissent and I have seen little or no indication that they want these people back in the fold.
That is their prerogative but they don't represent all beekeepers.
There have been some fairly high profile cases where both beehives and stored gear have been destroyed against the wishes of the beekeepers involved. I do not know much about the individual cases and to be honest have more sympathy for their neighbours.
Other than the board being elected by beekeepers which would be my preferred option there could perhaps be a small group of experienced\independent beekeepers tasked with investigating individual complaints against the board or even a beekeepers ombudsman.

The current system is working but it is leaving a significant fraction of the beekeeping community disenfranchised.

 

[Dennis Crowley]

NBA structure you could be heard at things like the AGM whereas Apinz's AGM is over before it starts and there is certainly no time for people to raise concerns whether valid or not.

The old NBA agm's where just an allday talkfest where every branch personal pet project was put forward as another job the exec had to do. After the Auckland conference when i joined the Exec i put forward that any branch putting forward a motion for the exec to do also had to be prepared to pitch in and help as the exec was getting overloaded with telling the councils not to plant tutu(they didn't they come up naturally sometimes) bushes when roads were built and other small stuff of no consequence for the industry as a whole, they also spent/lost $50,000 on the varroa queens debacle.
APINZ has no issue with bringing up something at the agm, we only ask that at least 10 others also want that discussed (so it at least has some weight) and it to be submitted in a timely matter beforehand, (just like you'd expect from any other board,) this is to stop silly stupid time wasting personal pet projects.

 

[John B]

It was more than a one-day talkfest in the early days. We now have two separate organisations both of which are made up of groups of relatively like minded individuals which I suppose is one reason why both their AGMs go pretty smoothly. We also have a lot of beekeepers who are not represented by anybody .
I wonder what the chance of finding 10 beekeepers who agree on anything is.

 

[Morporks]

The old NBA agm's where just an allday talkfest where every branch personal pet project was put forward as another job the exec had to do. After the Auckland conference when i joined the Exec i put forward that any branch putting forward a motion for the exec to do also had to be prepared to pitch in and help as the exec was getting overloaded with telling the councils not to plant tutu(they didn't they come up naturally sometimes) bushes when roads were built and other small stuff of no consequence for the industry as a whole, they also spent/lost $50,000 on the varroa queens debacle.
APINZ has no issue with bringing up something at the agm, we only ask that at least 10 others also want that discussed (so it at least has some weight) and it to be submitted in a timely matter beforehand, (just like you'd expect from any other board,) this is to stop silly stupid time wasting personal pet projects.

At least at the NBA Conference, non members you didn't have to pay to attend the AFB PMP annual presentation

 

[Morporks]

They will never apply to become AFB board members because for them it is easier to sit on the wall and criticize rather than to be part of the solution.

Go look at your history of the AFB PMP

Many of these people you speak of have been involved since it started

 

[NickWallingford]

The NZBI discussion document refers to a "bargain that may never had been made explicit". It seems to be saying that beekeepers have agreed to find and destroy clinical cases of AFB without compensation. But that if other means - spore testing - were to be used, then compensation would have to be paid.

There is no connection whatsoever between compensation and the means by which AFB can be identified...