Back
to SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage
My resignation from the committee of the
Scottish Beef Council
James Irvine
Teviot Scientific, Cultybraggan Farm, Comrie,
Perthshire
Filed 08 Apr 06
©www.land-care.org.uk
On 30th March I wrote an article regretting the
actions of the Executive of the Scottish Beef Council towards the
National Beef Association (1).
As mentioned in that article, a meeting of the committee of the
Scottish Beef Council, of which I am an elected member, was to be
held on 6th April at United Auctions, Perth. It was - all four hours
of it.
From my perspective the meeting was a dreadful
affair. The Chairman of the NBA, who had taken the trouble to attend,
was treated with the utmost rudeness in so far that he was debarred
from attending the meeting for about an hour and half until the
committee felt it was ready to talk with him.
The tone of the meeting was characterised by allegation
upon allegation against the NBA which, as far as I could assess,
was not always based on evidence necessarily related to the truth.
As mentioned in my previous article, there seemed to be a determination
among the executive to breakaway from the NBA and set up a Scottish
organisation of their own. Curiously, while the NBA antagonists
kept on and on about their perception of the NBA finances (although
understandably the audited accounts for the year end 31st December
2005 were not yet available) they provided not a hint of how they
would fund their own separate organisation. A few members tried
hard to establish a sense of realism into the proceedings, emphasising
the excellent work the NBA has done and continues to do for the
beef industry throughout the UK including Scotland, and that its
strength comes from pooling resources.
The fevered nurturing of personality clashes seemed
to me to the main activity of the meeting.
The best that could be achieved was the resolution
to the effect that
the SBC would give the NBA one more go provided
that Scotland had three representatives on the NBA Board (instead
of one), and that the Board conducted itself, allegedly in terms
of the management of its finances, according to criteria determined
by the Scottish members.
The NBA Board was to be given a week to come back
with their answer. Otherwise the Executive of the SBC would call
an Extraordinary General Meeting of its members to consider the
motion:
"That the Scottish Beef Council has no
confidence in the NBA Board".
The vote in favour of this was unanimous. I did
not opose the motion as it appeared to be the only option left whereby
there might be any chance of keeping the NBA and the SBC together
to their mutual advantage. However, the manner in which the chairman
of the NBA was treated and the insistence that the SBC must have
an answer from the NBA Board within one week was unreasonable.
Sadly, I doubt in the present emotive climate
that, if three representatives from the SBC committee had places
on the NBA Board they would necessarily use their positions in the
best interests of the NBA, including the productive and harmonious
relationship between the NBA as a parent organisation and its Scottish
members. It just could be they might be more interested in finding,
or concocting, more reasons for breaking away and thereby cause
further havoc, just when it is so important for everyone to pull
together.
We will have to wait and see what the NBA Board
think of the SBC demands. But perhaps SBC members might give some
consideration to raising a counter motion at the proposed EGM of
the SBC that
they have no confidence in the SBC Executive.
But they may not need to go that far as I understand
that the members of the SBC executive have to be elected annually
at the AGM. Only snag is that the SBC is calling for an EGM before
an AGM to get their motion considered, even although an AGM must
be due in the not too distant future. Perhaps they are trying to
get their motion in before they may be sacked by the SBC membership.
But if any members of the SBC want to raise such
a motion, they had better check with the current executive as to
the number of seconders required (?10) and the notice in terms of
days (an uncertain 21 - 27 days?) none of which is defined in the
Constitution (3).
Mrs Shirley Harrison, New Craig, Oldmeldrum sums
up the situation rather well in her recent letter in the Scottish
Farmer 'Beef boys' - enough is enough (2)
"Perhaps somewhere in Scotland exists another
'Mrs Thatcher' - but in the beef world, who will take the marbles
away from these 'little boys', smack there bottoms, and direct
their minds and brains in the right direction"
Another way of expressing the same sentiment would
be
The SBC committee at their meeting of 6th April
acted like a bunch of bullies with character assassination as
their weapon going up an alley looking for an ASBO
As far as I am concerned I do not want to be party
to that sort of behaviour. So, on the mon ring following the meeting,
I resigned from the SBC committee, although not of course from membership
of the NBA. If the bullies want to go off and play their game on
their own with their own separate organisation so be it. Hopefully
the rest of us will get behind the NBA as a national organisation
and provide it with strong support. The NBA does sterling work for
the beef industry in Scotland as well as throughout the rest of
the UK
Join the NBA, support the NBA, and don't knock
it! We need it.
©www.land-care.org.uk
References
1. Irvine, James (2006). The regrettable
actions of the Executive of the Scottish Beef Council towards the
National Beef Association.
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLIICAL Homepage, filed 30th Mar 06,
www.land-care.org.uk Click
Here to View
2. Harrison, Shirley (2006). 'Beef
boys' - enough is enough.
The Scottish Farmer. Letter. 8th April 2006, p 8
3. The Constitution of the Scottish
Beef Council Click Here pdf
Finis |
