Canadian Wheat Board

[blueblood]

Baloney on the incompetence. The President and the communications director were fired for not towing the like.

As for the gag order, the federal judge compared it to Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe.

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/subscribe...p-4783356c.html

Hence why I put incompetence in quotation marks. Harper runs a tight ship, like he says, get in my way and get walked over.

If it was a true gag order, the directors of the CWB wouldn't even be able to write editorials, or appear on TV interviews, or newspaper interviews.

They can defend themselves just fine without ripping me off.

[jdobbin]

They can defend themselves just fine without ripping me off.

Which the judge said was totally bogus.

Harper can't seem to do anything without breaking the law and getting slapped down by the courts.

[blueblood]

Which the judge said was totally bogus.

Harper can't seem to do anything without breaking the law and getting slapped down by the courts.

So a farmer who doesn't believe in the board and is forced to sell his grain through there, while the CWB is giving discounts to countries like Iran, has to take an even lesser cut because the CWB is going to run an ad campaign on TV, that is completely unethical.

How much money does it cost the CWB to appear on a CBC interview? They can defend themselves and the farmer doesn't lose money, everyone wins.

And they fear monger about the Conservatives stacking the court benches...

[jdobbin]

So a farmer who doesn't believe in the board and is forced to sell his grain through there, while the CWB is giving discounts to countries like Iran, has to take an even lesser cut because the CWB is going to run an ad campaign on TV, that is completely unethical.

So a farmer who believes in the Board watches the federal government use his taxpayer money to campaign against the Board while firing and gagging the farmer run Board from replying? That's unethical.

How much money does it cost the CWB to appear on a CBC interview? They can defend themselves and the farmer doesn't lose money, everyone wins.

You forget they were gagged from doing that as well. Only the elected Board directors were allowed to speak but they could not receive assistance from the Board officers.

And they fear monger about the Conservatives stacking the court benches...

Nice try when it was some Conservative appointed judges who struck down the Tory government tactics.

[madmax]

So a farmer who doesn't believe in the board and is forced to sell his grain through there, while the CWB is

Is the farmer not a voting member? There are many things one can believe in, or not believe in.

The farmer should believe in democracy, and the views of his peers. So perhaps you and this said farmer are in agreement.

Are you in the majority or not?

[blueblood]

So a farmer who believes in the Board watches the federal government use his taxpayer money to campaign against the Board while firing and gagging the farmer run Board from replying? That's unethical.

You forget they were gagged from doing that as well. Only the elected Board directors were allowed to speak but they could not receive assistance from the Board officers.

Nice try when it was some Conservative appointed judges who struck down the Tory government tactics.

That farmer who believes in the Board has a right to choose which government controls the board. He had 13 years of pro board times which were also times when grain prices were in the tank. He is paying taxes regardless which stance the gov't takes. Having the CWB steal farmers money means they get hit twice. The CWB is a marketer, not a propaganda machine. It doesn't cost the feds any money to run down the wheat board in newspaper and TV interviews as well.

Having Board directors speak out on behalf of the board is not a gag order. If the directors were silenced, I would agree with you, but they are in the Western Producer every week beating the drum; which is fine, it doesn't cost me money and they have the right to speak. Buying a TV spot during say the Grey Cup hypothetically would be an insult--> that is what I would have a problem with.

[jdobbin]

That farmer who believes in the Board has a right to choose which government controls the board. He had 13 years of pro board times which were also times when grain prices were in the tank. He is paying taxes regardless which stance the gov't takes. Having the CWB steal farmers money means they get hit twice. The CWB is a marketer, not a propaganda machine. It doesn't cost the feds any money to run down the wheat board in newspaper and TV interviews as well.

But that not what the Feds do. They run an advertising campaign to promote ending the Board while gagging the board in a way that our federal court calls an undemocratic way. The Board is farmer run and should be able to respond to a campaign against it. And that means giving the Board some independence to speak out on the issue.

The rules have been made plain: if the government wants to make changes, they have to present them in Parliament. The government has tried to act unilaterally which is against the law.

A change of government does not mean the government can change the Wheat Board act on a whim. They have to go to Parliament. Why won't Harper do that?

Having Board directors speak out on behalf of the board is not a gag order. If the directors were silenced, I would agree with you, but they are in the Western Producer every week beating the drum; which is fine, it doesn't cost me money and they have the right to speak. Buying a TV spot during say the Grey Cup hypothetically would be an insult--> that is what I would have a problem with.

Then you should have a problem with the government doing their ad campaign as well.

[blueblood]

But that not what the Feds do. They run an advertising campaign to promote ending the Board while gagging the board in a way that our federal court calls an undemocratic way. The Board is farmer run and should be able to respond to a campaign against it. And that means giving the Board some independence to speak out on the issue.

The rules have been made plain: if the government wants to make changes, they have to present them in Parliament. The government has tried to act unilaterally which is against the law.

A change of government does not mean the government can change the Wheat Board act on a whim. They have to go to Parliament. Why won't Harper do that?

Then you should have a problem with the government doing their ad campaign as well.

The board does respond to the feds saying they're ending the monopoly, they go on interviews and write editorials.

What gov't advertising campaign?

I've not seen one ad in any farm publication from the feds calling for an end to the monopoly, I've seen interviews and editorials.

The fight against bill C-17 is an ad campaign, note the billboards, tv ads, and newspaper and magazine ads.

Harper won't do that because he has bigger fish to fry. As much as I believe agriculture is an important issue, in the grand scheme of things to an average urban dweller it's not and Harper is catering to that.

[jdobbin]

The board does respond to the feds saying they're ending the monopoly, they go on interviews and write editorials.

The Wheat Board was gagged from directly and indirectly speaking on the issue. That meant that elected farmers to the Board were not able to receive any information from the Board that would assist the directors in advocating for the single desk.

What gov't advertising campaign?

The one where each of the Tory MPs used their mail outs to advocate for Board abolition and where they gagged the Board from responding to the issue of the monopoly. Then the Board was forced to use the wording the Feds wanted for the vote on barley as well as use the information provided by the Feds to explain the vote.

Probe Research was asked to comment on this and said they believed the wording was political in that it was done in a way to get the answer the government wanted.

I've not seen one ad in any farm publication from the feds calling for an end to the monopoly, I've seen interviews and editorials.

The ad campaign was associated with the vote.

Harper won't do that because he has bigger fish to fry. As much as I believe agriculture is an important issue, in the grand scheme of things to an average urban dweller it's not and Harper is catering to that.

What Harper was hoping to do was avoid an actual vote in Parliament. He has been trying to sneak things through by order in council which broke the law.

[Fain]

Hello,

I just want to say a few things about the Canadian Wheat Board, or as many of us call it the 'CWB.'

First of all, the CWB doesn't throw farmers in jail for not using the CWB to market their grain. That group of farmers that were jailed went over the boarder without an export permit. So Canada Customs confiscated there trucks. They then proceeded to steal their trucks back from Customs.

Surprisingly, the only punishment was a fine. They chose to not pay the fine and chose jail time for publicity reasons. This would be the equivalent of getting pulled over for speeding, and starting a fist fight with the police and then claiming 'police-brutality.'

Secondly, without the CWB, farmers' will be at the mercy of the multinational grain companies that have no interest in helping farmers—all they care about is there own shareholders and profits.

Many of you are probably saying, "Well Harper and his government are only trying to give farmers choice on how they market their grain."

Many people believe that the CWB could exist in this 'choice' environment. The falsehood here would be that this 'choice' environment would not include the CWB, as the CWB could not exist. Turing the CWB into just another grain company with no export terminals and no elevators doesn't make any sense. The CWB would have to rely on it's competitors to handle and ship its grain. How exactly would that work?

The people promoting the destruction of the CWB are the same people that have failed farmers many many times in the past. They promoted the elimination of the crow rate (worth around $800 million per year for farmers). Gave plant breeders' rights to corporations and now corporations can sue you for growing your own grain. If the conservatives are so upbeat on property rights, why aren't they giving the farmers the right to grow their own grain?

For more information please visit http://www.savemycwb.ca

Your not a farmer, you don't know their issues.