Last night you saw the executives of Banks Holdings give their side
of the dispute between the CGA and CPBL. And today the CGA responded with its
own press conference. But before we get to that, we’ll do a bit of straightening
out of terms – because the feedback we’ve been getting is that some
folks are slightly confused.
- First, Banks Holdings is not a bank – it is a large Barbadian Beverage
Company – kind of like the Bowen and Bowen of Barbados. It produces
soft drinks like coca cola and sprite, Banks beer, assorted dairy products
and fresh juices.
- Second the Citrus Growers Association or CGA is the growers group which
owns 51% of Citrus Products of Belize Limited, or CPBL – that’s
the company which actually makes the Citrus Valley juice or concentrate that
you drink.
- Henry Canton is the CEO and Managing Director of the company – which
means he’s the boss and as managing director, he also sits on the board.
Now Banks Holdings owns 47% of CPBL making them the minority shareholder.
- Five of the nine directors on the CPBL Board are put there by the CGA as
the majority shareholders. They say that three of those directors, Henry Canton,
Chairman Mike Duncker and Frank Redmond have gone rogue and ceased to represent
the Citrus Growers Association. The CGA now wants them off the board.
That’s a basic background and today one of the CGA’s other
directors, Chuck Woods – who remains allied with the CGA – held
a press conference along with CEO of the CGA Henry Anderson. Following up on
the announcement made yesterday by Sir Allan Fields that Duncker and Redmond
are willing to step down, Woods said they’ve been proposing that for months.
In fact with only two months left on their term – the urgency is that
they’ve been trying to eject them since July of last year.
Chuck Woods, CGA Board Member
“You would have had the impression that it was something the CGA just
dreamt up, perhaps in the past few weeks to try and replace some of its appointed
directors. In fact we started to do this from last year July. So it is nothing
overnight and to say that we could just simply wait until the AGM may be misleading.
We have been trying really from last July to do so and we have been denied.
What we suggested as our initiative, we are the ones that made the move,
to contact Banks Holdings and see if we can at least get an agreement on two,
if they would at least support us moving at least two of our appointed directors
whose seats are not contested; they have no contractual arrangements with the
company for example and we would continue to discuss and continue with the argument
and the demand for us remove any of our five directors. But let’s begin
with those two since there is apparently not a problem with them. That didn’t
happen. So I just want to make the point that if those two directors would decide
to step down tomorrow, we would be happy, at least we can get two more of our
own on our five seats. So we are not saying no to that.
Where do we go from here, how do we resolve this dispute, how do we save
the industry from further burden, carrying this burden of a dispute between
CPBL and CGA and Banks Holdings. What needs to happen in the case of CGA and
CPBL issue is CGA needs its five directors of its choice on board CPBL. That
has to happen before anything else can happen.
CGA has the absolute right to appoint and replace five directors. Three
of those who we had appointed last year and have sought to replace have refused
to step down and probably will be there through to the AGM in April and it did
not have to happen. They could have politely step down, the CGA puts fresh face
at CPBL to join the others that they want to remain there, and everything else
continues. Any other dispute, any other disagreement then can continue to be
negotiated and discussed. So the problem is the denial our absolute right to
get our people on board CPBL.
The reason why we need to continue pushing to get our people onboard as
soon as possible is that everyday that goes by that that doesn’t happen,
we believe those who are there that we have tried to remove are making decisions
in capacity of directors that had we had our appointed directors of choice would
not be making those same decisions. In other words they are making decisions
that are not in the best interest in our opinion of CPBL or the industry for
that matter. So the longer they remain there, we believe more damage can be
done to the company CPBL and by extension to the industry and the majority shareholder.”
Adele Ramos, Amandala
“What sort of injury has these directors in question caused to CPBL or
CGA’s interest in the industry?”
Chuck Woods,
“To me one of the glaring damages that has result since then has been
our subsidiary company, CPBL, to have resigned from the CGA. That could only
have happened at a board meeting of CPBL and it could only have happened because
they had directors there purporting to be acting in the interest if the majority
shareholder. Obviously that is not the case or they would not have supported
that decision. So to me that is the most glaring of all.”
Henry Anderson, Chief Executive Officer – CGA
“We watch CPBL resources being used to attack us. When you look at
all of those ads it is copyrighted CPBL. Those ads are not promoting CPBL, they
are promoting individuals.”
Email
Print