Canadian Wheat Board

[jdobbin]

I believe the farmers in the west are well aware that you cannot have both. It is up to the farmers and they have made a decision. If the question put to them was unfactual, then that is a problem the Federal Government will have to address in the future.

I have never questioned whether farmers should be the ones to determine the Board's future. Many farmers, however, are under the impression they will have both the CWB and open markets. As soon as the Board loses its monopoly, it ceases to exist as a legal entity according to the WTO.

It could be privatized to a pool company but unlike a pool, it has no assets. It has 500 workers and one office building. Vary greater pools have fallen by the wayside over the years: Alberta Pool, Manitoba Pool and United Grain Growers have all merged into a corporate entity. And now the mergers will go further with either SaskPool or JRI eating Agricore.

Farmers might be a little shocked to find that contrary to what they thought they were voting for, the Wheat Board was voted out of existence.

[madmax]

Farmers might be a little shocked to find that contrary to what they thought they were voting for, the Wheat Board was voted out of existence.

That would be unfortunate if the wheat board gave them significant earnings, over the open market. Most people envy a monopoly of anykind. Normally these people are on the outside looking in not the beneficiaries of such a monopoly.

We will have to wait to see how this develops.

[jdobbin]

Meanwhile, as the Canadian What Board future is decided, the Tories have about faced on the Freshwater Fish Marketing Board.

http://www.savemycwb.ca/news.php?subaction...rt_from=&ucat=4

OTTAWA -- Months after denying it had plans to gut the Freshwater Fish Marketing Board, the Harper government is looking at ending the Winnipeg-based agency's monopoly.

Documents obtained by the Free Press show the Fisheries Department is fast-tracking a study on implementing dual marketing for the FFMC, which acts as the buyer, processor and marketer of freshwater fish from Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, Northwest Territories and part of northwestern Ontario.

The $25,000 study now under way by a Guelph-based agri-food think tank comes after the Treasury Board Secretariat passed an order last fall that dual marketing be considered by the FFMC in its next corporate plan.

[Michael Bluth]

Meanwhile, as the Canadian What Board future is decided, the Tories have about faced on the Freshwater Fish Marketing Board.

http://www.savemycwb.ca/news.php?subaction...rt_from=&ucat=4

Hmm, the source is "Save My Canadian Wheat Board".

Nope, no bias there. None at all.

[jdobbin]

Editorial in the Regina Leader Post:

http://www.canada.com/reginaleaderpost/new...9d-1be79daf34ef

Harper just doesn't get it.

Justice Dolores Hansen ruled that the federal government could not create an open market for barley by order-in-council, or cabinet order. It would have to be done by an act of Parliament.

Harper seems to be saying the law is an ass and we're going to get the wheat board out of barley marketing by hook or by crook. This shows Harper's clear contempt for the law, if the law doesn't happen to conform to his world-view.

More importantly, Harper's intemperate language is an incitement to others who are opposed the CWB's statutory monopoly over wheat and barley export sales.

One such group, the Market Choice Alliance, is encouraging its members to send the CWB an invoice for losses from barley price drops following the court decision, which scotched "Barley Freedom Day'' festivities for anti-CWB forces.

One is tempted to say, what losses? While barley prices plummeted after Hansen's ruling, by the end of the week, they had regained most, if not all, of their lost ground.

Could it be that commodities markets are more concerned about market fundamentals -- weather, supply and demand, geopolitical events -- than ideological debates -- single-desk versus open market?

Others have called CWB supporters "communists.'' Since when is it "communistic'' to uphold the rule of law?

Harper was told what the law is in regards to the Canadian Wheat Board. He has been told what he needs to do to change the Wheat Board yet rails against it despite the fact that the Wheat Board all along said the decision could not be made unilaterally. It will require an act of Parliament. If the government believes in what it is doing, it will have to take it to a vote rather than doing it by order in council. It's that simple.

[jdobbin]

Court overturns federal government's gag order on Canadian Wheat Board.

http://canadianpress.google.com/article/AL...LMx35CS54s1VpXw

The federal government violated the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by ordering the Canadian Wheat Board not to spend any money to defend its marketing system, the Federal Court has ruled.

Justice Roger Hughes' ruling overturns a 2006 cabinet order passed by Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government, often referred to as a gag order, that kept the board from defending its monopoly on grain sales.

Hughes ruled the order both violated the right to freedom of expression and was made for an "improper purpose."

"There has been no demonstration of any pressing or substantial economic objective, the only true objective is to constrain the advocacy of the board against government policy," Hughes wrote.

It is funny how the Tories keep smacking into the Charter. Their gag order was just another example of their bullying.

[blueblood]

Court overturns federal government's gag order on Canadian Wheat Board.

http://canadianpress.google.com/article/AL...LMx35CS54s1VpXw

It is funny how the Tories keep smacking into the Charter. Their gag order was just another example of their bullying.

You forgot about the declassified document about the cabinet plan concerning the CWB, I think you would take interest in it.

[jdobbin]

You forgot about the declassified document about the cabinet plan concerning the CWB, I think you would take interest in it.

That they planned to shut down the Board and fire the President? I think that was pretty obvious from their actions.

The Feds have lost three cases in the last 11 months on trying to bully their way on the Wheat Board. And still the Board support remains fairly solid among farmers.

[blueblood]

That they planned to shut down the Board and fire the President? I think that was pretty obvious from their actions.

The Feds have lost three cases in the last 11 months on trying to bully their way on the Wheat Board. And still the Board support remains fairly solid among farmers.

And appoint free market directors.

This is all over the Western Producer.

Support for the Board is solid, but has declined. It's at around 40% monopoly and 52% open market.

Ritz is for the dual market, and passed a bill saying that only actual producers can vote in CWB elections.

[jdobbin]

And appoint free market directors.

This is all over the Western Producer.

Support for the Board is solid, but has declined. It's at around 40% monopoly and 52% open market.

Ritz is for the dual market, and passed a bill saying that only actual producers can vote in CWB elections.

There is no such thing as dual market for the Wheat Board. Once it loses its monopoly, it will close as per WTO rules.

[Keepitsimple]

Here's a pretty fair summary of the Wheat Board Fiasco:

The Wheat Board should remain silent

Lorne Gunter, National Post

Published: Monday, June 23, 2008

On Friday, a federal court judge ruled unconstitutional a two-year-old ban by the federal government prohibiting the Canadian Wheat Board (CWB) from spending farmer's money advocating for its continued monopoly over western grain sales.

This is a misguided decision.

All farmers from British Columbia's northeastern Peace Country across the vast prairie breadbasket to Lake of the Woods are required to sell their wheat and barley only to the CWB, unless it is destined for animal consumption.

Those who attempt to sell directly to other buyers offering higher prices have been subjected to pre-dawn raids of their farms, seizures of their crops and trucks even imprisonment and repeated strip searches.

In 2006, in an attempt to win Western farmers more freedom to conduct their business as they see fit, the Harper government initiated a number of extra-Parliamentary measures designed to break the CWB's monopoly (which, technically, is a monopsony -- one buyer, many sellers, rather than one seller and many buyers). Without a majority in the House of Commons to change the CWB law, the Tories tried, instead, to introduce market freedoms through the back door. This was only ever a second-best move, and it was fraught from the start with political and legal risks.

The board decided to oppose the government, even though it is a not-quite arms-length branch of the government, and to spend farmers' money on propaganda efforts on behalf of its own survival.

The Harper government ordered it to stay out of the debate and to refrain from diverting money from grain sales -- money that should have gone into farmers' pockets -- to its self-serving lobbying campaigns.

Snip....

Link: http://www.nationalpost.com/story-printer....72-7ecc137d9906

[jdobbin]

Here's a pretty fair summary of the Wheat Board Fiasco:

Three times the Tories have illegally tried to end the Wheat Board and three different judges have slapped them down. The Board continues to find favour with farmers and the right wing for ideological purposes is trying to break it without going through the process of putting forth legislation in Parliament.

[Wild Bill]

Three times the Tories have illegally tried to end the Wheat Board and three different judges have slapped them down. The Board continues to find favour with farmers and the right wing for ideological purposes is trying to break it without going through the process of putting forth legislation in Parliament.

I don't see your point. By losing 3 times that only proves that the Tories don't have the power of a majority to amend the existing legislation and their attempts to do it by other means have failed, 3 times.

You seem to be implying some sort of moral failure on behalf of the Tories for even trying. How do you support this?

To me, no matter how you dress it up the present situation seems a sin against the idea of the right to property. It's the farmer's crop after all and NOT the CWB's! Or the government, for that matter.

Still, we have the right to free association as well (in most instances, if politically correct, but that would be another thread) so I would not rail against farmers using the CWB if that is their choice.

The real issue is, what do the farmers want? Unless you can provide proof that a clear majority want the CWB monopoly to continue then I don't see how you can claim the moral high ground.

I would support a clear question on a referendum of ONLY the farmers involved! The CWB would then live or die and we could all get on with things.

So far it would appear that farmers want freedom and the right to choose.

[blueblood]

I don't see your point. By losing 3 times that only proves that the Tories don't have the power of a majority to amend the existing legislation and their attempts to do it by other means have failed, 3 times.

You seem to be implying some sort of moral failure on behalf of the Tories for even trying. How do you support this?

To me, no matter how you dress it up the present situation seems a sin against the idea of the right to property. It's the farmer's crop after all and NOT the CWB's! Or the government, for that matter.

Still, we have the right to free association as well (in most instances, if politically correct, but that would be another thread) so I would not rail against farmers using the CWB if that is their choice.

The real issue is, what do the farmers want? Unless you can provide proof that a clear majority want the CWB monopoly to continue then I don't see how you can claim the moral high ground.

I would support a clear question on a referendum of ONLY the farmers involved! The CWB would then live or die and we could all get on with things.

So far it would appear that farmers want freedom and the right to choose.

We had that already, it was called the plebiscite and most want a dual market, second place the board, third place completely open market.

Canada already has a dual market, Ontario Farmers, Quebec Farmers, and eastward can export their grain without the wheat board. Most Westerners want that option. They like the CWB for accountability, and the open market for competition.

The CWB is preparing for this in the fact that they are paying premiums to farmers to store their sold grain until the moment of export. Expect to see lots of bins pop up on the prairies.

[jdobbin]

I don't see your point. By losing 3 times that only proves that the Tories don't have the power of a majority to amend the existing legislation and their attempts to do it by other means have failed, 3 times.

You seem to be implying some sort of moral failure on behalf of the Tories for even trying. How do you support this?

They were advised by many that their attempts may be illegal under the Charter but went ahead wit it anyway,

To me, no matter how you dress it up the present situation seems a sin against the idea of the right to property. It's the farmer's crop after all and NOT the CWB's! Or the government, for that matter.

Still, we have the right to free association as well (in most instances, if politically correct, but that would be another thread) so I would not rail against farmers using the CWB if that is their choice.

The real issue is, what do the farmers want? Unless you can provide proof that a clear majority want the CWB monopoly to continue then I don't see how you can claim the moral high ground.

How clear do you want it?

http://ca.reuters.com/article/businessNews...634640920080606

For wheat, 57 percent of farmers said the CWB should keep its government-granted monopoly on sales to millers and export markets, while 39 percent said the market should be open.

Last year, 61 percent of farmers supported the monopoly, while 35 percent wanted it to end.

For barley, 52 percent of farmers said the market should open, with 40 percent wanting the CWB to retain its monopoly on sales to maltsters and export markets.

I would support a clear question on a referendum of ONLY the farmers involved! The CWB would then live or die and we could all get on with things.

So far it would appear that farmers want freedom and the right to choose.

The poll above seems pretty clear. There was a poll the Tories took in regards to barley that many pollsters said was one of the worst polls they've seen. It had three questions, one of which misrepresented what the Wheat Board was capable of. It asked if a dual market was desired. No dual market can exist according to WTO rules.

[jdobbin]

We had that already, it was called the plebiscite and most want a dual market, second place the board, third place completely open market.

Canada already has a dual market, Ontario Farmers, Quebec Farmers, and eastward can export their grain without the wheat board. Most Westerners want that option. They like the CWB for accountability, and the open market for competition.

The CWB is preparing for this in the fact that they are paying premiums to farmers to store their sold grain until the moment of export. Expect to see lots of bins pop up on the prairies.

There can be no dual market under WTO rules in western Canada. The right wing knows this but won't say so. The Wheat Board for example, cannot operate in Ontario and Quebec with the open market or Canada would be subject to penalties from the WTO members. If the monopoly is lost in western Canada, the Wheat Board closes the same year. It is that simple.

The pollsters who were questioned about the government poll said that they had never seen a poll so manipulated to get the answer the government wanted.

The right wing doesn't want a fair debate on this subject. That is why they continue to do illegal actions to achieve their goal.

[Wild Bill]

There can be no dual market under WTO rules in western Canada. The right wing knows this but won't say so. The Wheat Board for example, cannot operate in Ontario and Quebec with the open market or Canada would be subject to penalties from the WTO members. If the monopoly is lost in western Canada, the Wheat Board closes the same year. It is that simple.

The pollsters who were questioned about the government poll said that they had never seen a poll so manipulated to get the answer the government wanted.

The right wing doesn't want a fair debate on this subject. That is why they continue to do illegal actions to achieve their goal.

Well, once again the Reformer in me rises to the fore. I am suspicious of polls. Again, I would favour an actual plebiscite. Give the farmers a ballot with a clear question like "Do you want the CWB as your only channel to sell your grain or would you like a free choice to sell to the CWB or anyone? Yes or No?"

'Course, that's just me. A populist democrat.

Man, am I lonely!

[Fortunata]

IF it were a fair, simple question with fair debate and fair voting (no culling of known pro-CWB farmers) it would help. I mean, the Cons tactics were equal to those of communist countries, quiet the dissent by all known means, then vote. Something like Mugabe is doing in Zimbabwe right now.

[Alta4ever]

That they planned to shut down the Board and fire the President? I think that was pretty obvious from their actions.

The Feds have lost three cases in the last 11 months on trying to bully their way on the Wheat Board. And still the Board support remains fairly solid among farmers.

Really they have the support of the farmers. Maybe you should come west and talk to the farmers. You might only find one in a hundred to support the board in these parts. The CWB rips off farmers.

Edited June 23, 2008 by Alta4ever

[Alta4ever]

IF it were a fair, simple question with fair debate and fair voting (no culling of known pro-CWB farmers) it would help. I mean, the Cons tactics were equal to those of communist countries, quiet the dissent by all known means, then vote. Something like Mugabe is doing in Zimbabwe right now.

Really listening to the farmers here they are very po-ed that the CWB can use their money to campaign against them. The CWB is not accountible to farmers if it was you would find a half and half split on whether or not to get rid of it. Let the farmers who don't want to use it out.

[jdobbin]

Really they have the support of the farmers. Maybe you should come west and talk to the farmers. You might only find one in a hundred to support the board in these parts. The CWB rips off farmers.

Let's see: 57% in the last poll with majority support in Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan. That poll was this month.

[jdobbin]

Well, once again the Reformer in me rises to the fore. I am suspicious of polls. Again, I would favour an actual plebiscite. Give the farmers a ballot with a clear question like "Do you want the CWB as your only channel to sell your grain or would you like a free choice to sell to the CWB or anyone? Yes or No?"

'Course, that's just me. A populist democrat.

Man, am I lonely!

They can't sell to the Wheat Board and anyone else. It is a dishonest question. Under WTO rules, a monopoly state trading enterprise can't exist in a dual market. Once the market opens up, the Wheat Board ends.

Let's have an honest poll. The Tory government poll was criticized by many independent people who questioned its methodology. The question should read: Do you want to Wheat Board to sell western wheat? Yes or No.

The preamble should be honest and say that no means the Wheat Board will end.

[jdobbin]

Really listening to the farmers here they are very po-ed that the CWB can use their money to campaign against them. The CWB is not accountible to farmers if it was you would find a half and half split on whether or not to get rid of it. Let the farmers who don't want to use it out.

Seems there was a lot of farmers upset that the government was using their tax money to end the Wheat Board and gagging the Board from responding.

[Alta4ever]

Let's see: 57% in the last poll with majority support in Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan. That poll was this month.

I don't know what they are asking for questions, but whenI actually talk to the farmers in the coffee shops, something that you don't seem to do, or polling companies do. They answer is always the same. For years ago when I worked as a Farm insurance agent and visited most farmers in the area to inspect properties, whenwe talked about the wheat board they wanted it gone.

If you want to live in the little bubble you live in and only look at polls and post on message boards rather then talk to those around you fine, but just remeber that your polls are not regionalized. I bet if you broke that poll down between regions and farm types, and then again by different grains farmed. (as not all farmers are cash crop farmers and all cash crop farmers don't plant the same crops) you would find the numbers would change significantly.

Polls really only reflect the questions asked we do not know the questions ask on this one. We do know what was nasked on the pleblisite, and those results were very telling.

[Alta4ever]

Seems there was a lot of farmers upset that the government was using their tax money to end the Wheat Board and gagging the Board from responding.

In your poll how many of the farmers asked were still active grain and barley producers? Did they take an acuate sample? Since when does a monopoly need to advocate itself if there is no choice. Why is grain shipped straight to the port charged for freight to winnipeg then to the port? Why do grain farmers in eastern canada not have to be brought under state control?

We live in a free market economy capitalist economy, the government has no business taking away the farmers property for less then market value.

There was nothing in the budget about it was there?

Barley was voted out majority rule, enough said.

more then two thirds wanted barly out completely or marketing choice. It was a very simiple question and choice. Farmers deserve market choice, since they take all the risk, produced the crop they deserve to own the crop, and the last say in how to market it.