An Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) of Hort Innovation members was held virtually on Friday, 9 October 2020. At the meeting, members voted to change the company’s Constitution in respect to how Directors are appointed to the Hort Innovation Board, and how long they can serve.
Under the updated Constitution, available here, all new Directors will be elected to the Hort Innovation Board by voting members going forward. This is a change from the previous Constitution, which saw the Board made up of a mix of Directors elected by voting members and appointed by sitting Directors. Under the new Constitution, the only time Directors can be appointed by the Board itself will be to cover casual vacancies of one year or less.
With the new Constitution in effect, Hort Innovation members will elect three new Directors to the Board at the company’s Annual General Meeting (AGM) in November this year.
At this AGM, as in all years, the Directors will be chosen from a pool of qualified candidates determined by the Hort Innovation Director Nomination Committee. This committee is made up of a representative from the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment, a levy payer representative, an independent eminent member, and a current Director of the Hort Innovation Board.
Members will receive more information about the AGM and Director nominees in the official notice of meeting, to be distributed towards the end of October.
The updated Hort Innovation Constitution, as determined by company members, also sets a new maximum service period for Directors. All new elected Directors will have a maximum service period of two consecutive terms of three years (six years total), where under the former Constitution, Directors could serve up to three consecutive terms for a total period of nine years.
BACKGROUND TO THE EGM
The request to hold this EGM was made by Hort Innovation member Perfection Fresh. The EGM was attended by a quorum of voting members of the company, with 92.59 per cent of votes cast being in favour of amending the Constitution and 7.41 per cent of votes cast against the change, with no voters abstaining.