ANY genuine move to reduce the number of grower-elected directors on the CBH board must be made parallel with a reduction in the number of independent directors, according to Tammin grower Eric Charlton.
Mr Charlton, who also served as the WA transport minister from 1993 to 1998, said the original appointment of independent and non-grower directors to the board was a backwards step.
"Any change to the structure of the board as far as numbers are concerned would need to include the reduction or the total removal of the three independent directors," Mr Charlton said.
"If CBH management and the board of directors need any additional professional advice, they should buy that in the form of whatever the area of inquiry needs to be.
"I don't think those independent directors have added anything to the management of CBH and I don't think the majority of growers would even know their names."
However, Wongan Hills grower Robert Sewell, who floated the idea of cutting the number of grower-elected directors from nine to four at the CBH annual general meeting last month, said the independent directors provide three very special fountains of knowledge which were required on the board.
"One is a high level of financial understanding, not just of bookkeeping but of the financial markets and finances within a company and you can't necessarily expect a grower-elected director to have that level of financial management," Mr Sewell said.
"The next is marketing and the director that was elected at the most recent AGM is well skilled at domestic and international marketing.
"The last is basic board administration, management and the understanding of the relationship between the board and the executive and how that goes about."
Mr Charlton also argued that any attempt to reduce the number of grower directors, without also reducing the number of independents, could be seen as a covert move to corporatise the co-op.
"I know that the plans for corporatisation haven't been stated, but I'm saying that I think that's what's behind this - it can be seen as nothing other than a backdoor step to gaining support for corporatising CBH," Mr Charlton said.
"It's a lot easier to get control of the management of CBH and further pursue corporatisation if you've got only four growers members on there and three independents.
"There's 4000 growers today and they're growing the grain that 12,000 used to and it's just as important for those 4000 to have the confidence that CBH remains a co-operative."
Mr Sewell rebuked that assumption and labelled the accusation "insulting".
"To corporatise CBH it has to have the grower shareholders vote in favour of it, so no matter what you do, by cutting numbers, by putting particular people on the board, that's going to have no effect towards a corporatised company," Mr Sewell said.
"In 2000, CBH had nine growers directors and eight of them wanted to corporatise, but the shareholders voted it down and it didn't happen.
"Corporatisation has nothing to do with it because it doesn't matter how many directors you have, if the shareholders don't want it, it won't happen."
Kondinin grower Lindsay Tuckwell, who was nominated for the 2012 and 2018 CBH director elections in District 3 said she was in favour of the idea of reducing the number of grower-elected directors.
"I think we're probably a bit top heavy with grower directors, but I'm not sure about four, I think we need five as a minimum," Ms Tuckwell said.
"But I'm mainly in favour of fixed terms for directors and I think maybe three terms for directors and four terms for a chair would be adequate.
"There's a lot of good people out there who would be great to get into the co-operative and they would be able to come in with new ideas and look at things differently.
"That's not to say if you stood down you couldn't stand again after a few years, but I just think it'd be good for renewal of the co-operative, especially given the independent directors seem to turn over naturally anyway."
Mr Sewell said he has been looking into the legal side of the matter and may have to amend his thoughts, saying it might be necessary to have five rather than four board members.
"My preference would be to have four grower directors, but that may cause a problem due to the constitution," Mr Sewell said.
"Meetings have to have a majority of grower directors and if one wasn't there, there wouldn't be a quorum and the meeting couldn't go ahead."
Mr Sewell plans to seek legal advice on the wording of the petition, as a result it will likely be July or August before any formal progress is made.
