One Vote, One Member – Basics of New Industry Body Proposal Revealed

‘One vote, one member’, only commercial beekeepers have voting rights, and potential fees of approximately $400/year plus $1/hive – details of Apiculture New Zealand (ApiNZ) and New Zealand Beekeeping Inc’s (NZBI) proposed new industry group have been discussed at a January 28 ApiNZ Special General Meeting.

The SGM, held online via video link but hosted from Wellington by ApiNZ’s independent chair, Nathan Guy, was “procedural” as members unanimously passed a motion to adapt the constitution to meet the requirements of the updated Incorporated Societies Act 2022. That job taken care of, chief executive Karin Kos took the opportunity to bring members up to speed with the latest in efforts to form a new group to represent New Zealand’s beekeepers, followed by NZBI advisor Ian Fletcher’s thoughts on the matter of new governance.

The Apiculture NZ SGM on January 28 was tuned into online by 68 connections, where “procedural” constitutional changes were passed before the latest thinking regarding a new commercial-beekeeper-centric industry body was discussed. 

While the two industry groups have at times been at odds over how best to represent beekeepers and the honey industry, recent months have seen Kos and Fletcher working closely together on not only aiding the Ministry for Primary Industries’ response to the yellow-legged hornet incursion in Auckland, but on drawing up the basics of a potential new industry body which might prove more effective in attracting and representing beekeeper members on a national level.

“A co-joined industry effort has a lot more clout and ability to interact with government than operating as separate organisations,” Kos made clear to the January 28 meeting.

In December and January two meetings have been held with a group of 10 beekeepers who were presented the concept of the new industry body in an effort to “stress test” it before a full unveiling. More changes are expected to be made to that concept in the coming weeks, but it is hoped a proposal will be presented to the wider industry in February, and “hopefully early February”.

A lot more detail of the proposal will become clear then, and beekeepers’ opinions will be sought and changes likely made. From there it is hoped a new industry body might be stood up by “June or July”.

Key details were discussed at the ApiNZ SGM though, and questions came from the floor to the ApiNZ leadership. Three slides titled ‘purpose’, ‘governance’ and ‘funding’ underpinned Kos’ presentation.

The purpose of the proposed new group included a list of topics outlined during an open-floor discussion at ApiNZ’s annual general meeting in Christchurch in July 2025, as well as through a roadshow of meetings with beekeepers around New Zealand undertaken by Kos and Fletcher in the second half of 2025. The broad purpose of ‘advocacy with regulators, industry and the public of New Zealand’ topped the list, with ‘promotion of best practice beekeeping’, honey market access support, information sharing, and supporting regional beekeeping groups also mentioned.

While leadership from existing national-level industry groups Apiculture NZ and NZ Beekeeping Inc have been working together, any industry group proposed in the coming months would be a “genuine new organisation” they say.

As for governance, the proposal at this stage will see only commercial beekeepers hold voting rights – with what or who is deemed a ‘commercial beekeeper’ as yet undefined – and a ‘one vote, one-member’ equal weighting. That would see the country’s largest beekeepers, in ownership of tens of thousands of hives, holding equal weight as those with, potentially, as few as several dozen, or several hundred, colonies should they chose to become members.

Muddying that system is the proposed voluntary funding where a flat fee of $400 per commercial beekeeping member was mentioned, alongside a “small” per-hive fee of perhaps $1. That would mean the country’s largest beekeeping companies would be expected to pay $15-20,000 in membership fees and be rewarded with the same voting weight as those paying around $600.

Kos would not be drawn on what an initial budget would look like, but ApiNZ policy analyst Phil Edmonds stated they were working on just 20% of commercial beekeepers joining the group initially.

“It is pretty clear this is going to be a lean organisation from the get-up. That reflects a reset and the tough times we have been through. The new organisation has to be realistic about that,” Kos said.

That attitude follows a slide in finances at ApiNZ over several years as membership fees combined with meagre additional income has failed to meet expenses, leading to tax-payer top ups and industry-good moneys from the Honey Industry Trust propping the group up over recent years.

“We have funding constraints and if we have to wind down the industry loses because it is not only institutional knowledge that walks out the door, but what I would call soft assets, our website and some of things referred to (The Beekeeper magazine, ApiNZ library) which would easily transfer over to a new organisation,” Guy explained.

The proposed group would have a clear commercial beekeeping focus, but there would be an ‘associate’ membership class for non-commercial beekeepers and other industry stakeholders. That would come without voting rights though.

More will become apparent in the coming weeks, but at least one thing is clear according to ApiNZ – it will be a “new” organisation which will be proposed.

“It is not an ApiNZ or NZBI mark-two, it is a genuine new organisation which will aim to bring the strengths of those organisations together,” Kos said.

“How do we move from the current two organisations to one organisation? That is going to require feedback from everyone.”

And that is a point both Kos and Fletcher reinforced – the coming months and the level of beekeeper engagement to the new proposal will be critical to shaping a successful new organisation which beekeepers want to back.

“We can make any organisation you want, but it is only if it reflects the will of the membership that it will be effective,” Fletcher added.

“We need to get a clear sense from the community what a successful outcome would look like. That means thinking about two things. One, what are the provisions that will be there most of the time. The second part is, the campaigning part. What are the big issues where we have to roll our sleeves up, be tough, be focused, and win.”

The NZBI advisor reinforced – “It has to have a point”. Whether that “point” is more in line with NZBI’s “campaigning-style” as Fletcher describes it, or ApiNZ’s broader industry representation will be a key determination for beekeepers.

“Don’t just leave it to the working group,” Fletcher said, adding, “We have to know what it is you want and what it is you think will make a difference in the end.”