CWB - op-ed by Jim Pulfer and Senate Speech by Lillian Dyck
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Pulfer
Sent: Friday, November 25, 2011 12:58 PM
Subject: CWB - op-ed by Jim Pulfer and Senate Speech by Lillian Dyck
CWB reforms try to fix what isn't broken
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/opinion/r ... at+broken/
5764526/story.html?id=5764526&cid=megadrop_story
by Jim Pulfer, Saskatoon
StarPhoenix November 25, 2011
Federal Court Justice Dolores Hansen ruled in 2007 that the Government of Canada did not have the power to unilaterally dismantle barley marketing from the Canadian Wheat Board by applying Article 47 (1) of the wheat board act, which says:
"The governor in council may, by regulation, extend the application of Part III or of Part IV or of both Parts III and IV to oats or to barley or to both oats and barley."
The government argued that it had the right to apply Article 47 (1) to eliminate the marketing of barley. Justice Hansen said this went against the spirit and intent of Parliament in enacting this section in 1998 to include barley and oats as board-traded grains. The ruling was upheld by the Federal Appeal Court in 2008.
The federal government does not own the wheat board nor control it directly as a Crown corporation. The act specifically states that it's the producers of board traded grains who ultimately control the implementation of the act. Of the 15 members of the CWB board, 10 directors are voted onto the board by farmers, four are nominated by government, and the 15th member, the chair, is nominated by the government in consultation with the board. Equally important, the chair's remuneration is set by board policy.
The only way that board traded grains can be changed is by a clearly worded plebiscite, run at arms length by the board. Only farmers who hold valid permit books for marketing the grain in question may vote.
This summer, such a plebiscite was held on wheat and barley. The results were announced on September 12, with 62 per cent of 36,823 wheat permit holders opting to maintain the single desk system for marketing that grain and 51 per cent of 12,297 barley producers opting to keep barley, as well.
Given the spirit and intent of the act, this result should prevail and the government should respect it. Had the barley vote gone the other way, it would have been removed from the single desk, as was done with oats some years ago.
Instead, the Harper government has opted to use Bill C-18 to abolish the CWB Act, a power that it undoubtedly has. However, having the power and exercising it prudently and responsibly are two entwined parts of our cherished democratic traditions.
The application of unfettered power leads to abuse and, ultimately, dictatorship. Excessive prudence stifles freedom and innovation. Any mindful government would try to balance these two competing but necessary aspects of any proposed new bill, especially one as sweeping in scope as Bill C-18.
What is this all about, anyway? The government notes that about 20 per cent of Prairie wheat farmers produce about 80 per cent of the grain. Straw polls show that those farmers would dearly love to sell their grain on the futures market.
They can lock in high prices and deliver 75 per cent to 90 per cent of their proposed production at those levels. Over the past dozen years, they contend this marketing choice would have produced considerable profit for themselves. But better than the CWB would have done? It's a moot point.
Let's concede that perhaps futures traded grain would have produced as good or possibly slightly better result. But, what happens in those years when drought or flood sharply curb production across the West? Those same farmers will lose their shirts trying to buy back contracts at much higher prices than what they were paid for them. Who will save them then?
In the United States, it turns out that Congress has had to step in to bail out American farmers. Under the wheat board, the federal government has not had to do this in Canada. We have escaped the costly and debilitating effects of wheat subsidies as a result.
Is this not a good outcome for Prairie farmers and, indeed, for us all? In short, if the system ain't broke, then why fix it?
It's not a question of freedom of choice in marketing, so much as whether a system of marketing works well over the long term. In my view, responsible governance would have to concede that keeping the Canadian Wheat Board's monopoly on export grain sales is the better option.
© Copyright (c) The StarPhoenix
.......................................................
Hon. Lillian Eva Dyck: Honourable senators, I find it quite amazing that we are having a debate and things are relatively quiet. However, the moment that letters from individual farmers are read aloud, honourable senators opposite go ballistic. Why is it that they do not want to hear what the actual farmers have said to us in their letters and their emails? I thought democracy was about listening to what people have to say. Clearly, they do not want to listen. They can roll their eyes and shake their heads all they want, but farmers have a right to be heard. This is unbelievable.
Please, these people want to be heard. I was not planning to read any letters but I will do so. I am sorry, Senator Tkachuk. This letter is from Saskatchewan; these are all from Saskatchewan.
Dear Senator:
In spite of the fact that I have often voted Conservative, I feel I must speak out against this government's shabby treatment of the Canadian Wheat Board and ask those of us who wish to retain the Canadian Wheat Board in its present form. In their crusade to dismantle the single desk marketing structure, the Harper administration pretends to represent the majority of
farmers . . .
Maybe I should repeat that:
In their crusade to dismantle the single desk marketing structure, the Harper administration pretends to represent the majority of farmers, but the evidence belies that claim.
Just because honourable senators opposite say it is so, does not mean it is true.
I will continue the letter:
Over the years, western Canadian farmers have consistently chosen single desk advocates to represent them on the Canadian Wheat Board Advisory Committee. In a recent Canadian Wheat Board producer plebiscite, the majority voted to retain the single desk. From the time the Harper Conservatives came to power, they have worked tirelessly to scuttle the single desk. In so doing, not only have they refused to respect the wishes of the majority of western Canadian farmers but have seemingly employed every dirty trick in the book, including deception, slander and bullying, to promote their political agenda. If the average Canadian citizen conducted himself in that fashion, he would be in danger of being tarred and feathered. I deeply resent my federal leaders limiting parliamentary debate on a piece of legislation which adversely affects my livelihood as well as that of my friends and neighbours in the false pretence that they speak for the majority and know what is best for us. What arrogance.
You in the Senate are our last hope. Farmers have been denied a say on a subject which affects them profoundly; yet the law of the land requires a farmer plebiscite before anyone is permitted to tamper with the Canadian Wheat Board. Given the fact that this government does not speak for the majority of western Canadian farmers and is running roughshod over the legal right to a plebiscite, I urge you to put the current legislation on the back burner until this government obeys its own laws and farmers have had a chance to express their views.
------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Lillian Eva (Quan) Dyck
Saskatchewan
1-800-267-7362
KILLING THE CANADIAN WHEAT BOARD: Harper
50 posts
• Page 2 of 4 • 1, 2, 3, 4
CWB - op-ed by Jim Pulfer and Senate Speech by Lillian Dyck
by Oscar » Fri Nov 25, 2011 2:29 pm
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9102
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
KILLING THE WHEAT BOARD, KYOTO AND THE RULE OF LAW
by Oscar » Mon Dec 19, 2011 10:53 pm
KILLING THE WHEAT BOARD, KYOTO AND THE RULE OF LAW
BY Jim Harding
Published in R-Town News December 16, 2011
Since it got its long-sought after majority government last May, the Harper government has fast-tracked legislation that reflects its ultra-conservatism. This includes its crime bill which would see more disadvantaged Canadians imprisoned and fewer resources available for community-based crime prevention in an era of a falling crime rate. It includes its new U.S.-Canada border agreement which some observers believe could undermine ordinary Canadians' privacy. And it includes Bill C-18 which would undermine the Canadian Wheat Board (CWB).
The Harper government is using closure and limiting speakers at Committees to push its legislation through. It assumes that a parliamentary majority gives it the right to ram through whatever it wants; to remake Canada in its own image. Luckily the Harper government doesn't control the courts or the media, though some supporters would like to obliterate the division of powers that provides for an independent judiciary and a free press, which is what fundamentally differentiates dictatorship from democracy. Canada's democracy will surely be severely tested over the coming years of Harper rule.
KILLING THE CWB
When Bill C-18 was recently tested in the Federal Court, Judge Douglas Campbell concluded that Harper's legislation breached the government's "statutory duty to consult with the CWB and conduct a vote" among the farmers to be affected by the legislation. This meant the Harper government was breaching the rule of law, which wasn't setting a very good example by those who regularly manipulate the fear of crime and staunchly advocate retributive law and order.
Harper's Agricultural Minister, Gerry Ritz, however was intransigent, claiming the "Parliament of Canada alone has the supremacy to enact, amend and repeal any piece of legislation", continuing "This is a fundamental feature of democracy". The Minister totally missed the point. Judge Campbell wasn't saying that the Harper government couldn't bring in new legislation; he was saying that the way it was doing this breached existing law, specifically Section 47.1 of the 1998 Canadian Wheat Board Act which requires a vote by producers. The Harper government nevertheless plans to appeal the ruling and proceed to implement Bill C-18 as soon as possible. Damn the rule of law!
KILLING KYOTO
The same disrespect for the rule of law is shown in Harper's international dealings. Just as the United Nations Durban conference on the climate crisis was getting under way, Harper's Environment Minister, Peter Kent, indicated Canada would soon withdraw from its obligations under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. Kent said "Kyoto is the past" as though Canada's global environmental commitments could be wiped from the slate at will.
The response was immediate with international observers saying Harper's actions were at best "unhelpful" and at worst "belligerent". Green Party leader and newly elected MP Elizabeth May called the Harper government a "global pariah". When the Harper government carries through with its threat we will stand alone as the only country which ratified Kyoto and then pulled out. Our international reputation, which includes bringing countries together for the Montreal Protocol which led to a treaty to protect the ozone layer, will be further squandered; we will become a environmental rogue state.
Minister Kent argues that the failure to meet Kyoto targets of reducing greenhouse gases by 6% below 1990 level by 2012 is solely the failure of the Liberal government which signed the Protocol. Yet the Protocol was ratified by the House of Commons as a binding international treaty and the Conservatives have been stalling on climate action since they took power in 2006. Kent's Parliamentary Secretary repeats Harper's mantra that we "can't disadvantage our economy", which is exactly what Harper is doing by ignoring the mounting evidence that not acting will have untold effects on the social, economic and environmental security of our offspring.
WATERED-DOWN AGREEMENT
The international community hasn't been dissuaded by the Harper government's reckless behaviour. After extending the Durban conference for 36 hours, a watered-down framework was finally accepted for future negotiations to replace the Kyoto Protocol. All emitting countries will start negotiating a binding treaty in 2013 to be completed by 2015 and take effect by 2020. Years of stalling, most notably by the Harper government has however left us all at greater risk. 2010 tied 2005 as the warmest year on record and we are already on course to surpass a 2 C degrees average global temperature increase, the threshold atmospheric scientists say could lead to irreversible climate changes. Water and food insecurity would ensue.
Agreement was also reached to extend the Kyoto Protocol to fill the gap until the new binding agreement takes effect. And a $100 billion Green Climate Fund to assist developing countries convert to sustainable energy was also established. Minister Kent however refused to endorse either of these measures, which will further marginalize Canada from international action on the climate crisis.
VIGILENCE NEEDED
The disrespect for the rule of law shown by Harper's government is distressing. I sometimes have a sinking feeling when I think about a government such as this being "in charge" of our country. And this isn't because I am a distraught partisan supporter of another party which lost in the May federal election, for I am not. It's because history teaches us that if we aren't vigilant about democracy, democracy can begin to slip away before the public catches on.
The distinction between the "rule of law" and "rule by law" is crucial. A government that thinks it can use raw power to impose whatever laws it wants, with little or no regard for existing law, will inevitably move towards authoritarian rule. After only six months the Harper majority government is beginning to look a little like a clique that had a successful coup, rather than a mature government that fundamentally embraces democracy.
Let us never forget that notorious authoritarian regimes are sometimes originally elected to power and democracy can be weakened by governments that go overboard to manipulate simplistic views. The Harper government spends much time building up the image of the military while slowly undermining the freedoms that we often credit the military with protecting.
The Harper Conservatives may have grown out of the Western Canadian Reform Party with its call to make the federal government more accountable and transparent. But Harper's rule is now taking us in the opposite direction. The 30% of eligible voters who gave Harper his majority government may not have grasped what they were doing and they can't be held personally responsible for Harper's inclination for arbitrary rule. Nor can those who didn't vote, though they also played a role in allowing Canada to get on this slippery slope. But, nor can any citizens now be excused for not closely watching what the government actually does, how it does it and what this will mean for Canada's future. We can only hope more Canadians will wake up and stand up for Canada in 2012.
A very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to all my readers!
Other articles:
http://jimharding.brinkster.net
BY Jim Harding
Published in R-Town News December 16, 2011
Since it got its long-sought after majority government last May, the Harper government has fast-tracked legislation that reflects its ultra-conservatism. This includes its crime bill which would see more disadvantaged Canadians imprisoned and fewer resources available for community-based crime prevention in an era of a falling crime rate. It includes its new U.S.-Canada border agreement which some observers believe could undermine ordinary Canadians' privacy. And it includes Bill C-18 which would undermine the Canadian Wheat Board (CWB).
The Harper government is using closure and limiting speakers at Committees to push its legislation through. It assumes that a parliamentary majority gives it the right to ram through whatever it wants; to remake Canada in its own image. Luckily the Harper government doesn't control the courts or the media, though some supporters would like to obliterate the division of powers that provides for an independent judiciary and a free press, which is what fundamentally differentiates dictatorship from democracy. Canada's democracy will surely be severely tested over the coming years of Harper rule.
KILLING THE CWB
When Bill C-18 was recently tested in the Federal Court, Judge Douglas Campbell concluded that Harper's legislation breached the government's "statutory duty to consult with the CWB and conduct a vote" among the farmers to be affected by the legislation. This meant the Harper government was breaching the rule of law, which wasn't setting a very good example by those who regularly manipulate the fear of crime and staunchly advocate retributive law and order.
Harper's Agricultural Minister, Gerry Ritz, however was intransigent, claiming the "Parliament of Canada alone has the supremacy to enact, amend and repeal any piece of legislation", continuing "This is a fundamental feature of democracy". The Minister totally missed the point. Judge Campbell wasn't saying that the Harper government couldn't bring in new legislation; he was saying that the way it was doing this breached existing law, specifically Section 47.1 of the 1998 Canadian Wheat Board Act which requires a vote by producers. The Harper government nevertheless plans to appeal the ruling and proceed to implement Bill C-18 as soon as possible. Damn the rule of law!
KILLING KYOTO
The same disrespect for the rule of law is shown in Harper's international dealings. Just as the United Nations Durban conference on the climate crisis was getting under way, Harper's Environment Minister, Peter Kent, indicated Canada would soon withdraw from its obligations under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. Kent said "Kyoto is the past" as though Canada's global environmental commitments could be wiped from the slate at will.
The response was immediate with international observers saying Harper's actions were at best "unhelpful" and at worst "belligerent". Green Party leader and newly elected MP Elizabeth May called the Harper government a "global pariah". When the Harper government carries through with its threat we will stand alone as the only country which ratified Kyoto and then pulled out. Our international reputation, which includes bringing countries together for the Montreal Protocol which led to a treaty to protect the ozone layer, will be further squandered; we will become a environmental rogue state.
Minister Kent argues that the failure to meet Kyoto targets of reducing greenhouse gases by 6% below 1990 level by 2012 is solely the failure of the Liberal government which signed the Protocol. Yet the Protocol was ratified by the House of Commons as a binding international treaty and the Conservatives have been stalling on climate action since they took power in 2006. Kent's Parliamentary Secretary repeats Harper's mantra that we "can't disadvantage our economy", which is exactly what Harper is doing by ignoring the mounting evidence that not acting will have untold effects on the social, economic and environmental security of our offspring.
WATERED-DOWN AGREEMENT
The international community hasn't been dissuaded by the Harper government's reckless behaviour. After extending the Durban conference for 36 hours, a watered-down framework was finally accepted for future negotiations to replace the Kyoto Protocol. All emitting countries will start negotiating a binding treaty in 2013 to be completed by 2015 and take effect by 2020. Years of stalling, most notably by the Harper government has however left us all at greater risk. 2010 tied 2005 as the warmest year on record and we are already on course to surpass a 2 C degrees average global temperature increase, the threshold atmospheric scientists say could lead to irreversible climate changes. Water and food insecurity would ensue.
Agreement was also reached to extend the Kyoto Protocol to fill the gap until the new binding agreement takes effect. And a $100 billion Green Climate Fund to assist developing countries convert to sustainable energy was also established. Minister Kent however refused to endorse either of these measures, which will further marginalize Canada from international action on the climate crisis.
VIGILENCE NEEDED
The disrespect for the rule of law shown by Harper's government is distressing. I sometimes have a sinking feeling when I think about a government such as this being "in charge" of our country. And this isn't because I am a distraught partisan supporter of another party which lost in the May federal election, for I am not. It's because history teaches us that if we aren't vigilant about democracy, democracy can begin to slip away before the public catches on.
The distinction between the "rule of law" and "rule by law" is crucial. A government that thinks it can use raw power to impose whatever laws it wants, with little or no regard for existing law, will inevitably move towards authoritarian rule. After only six months the Harper majority government is beginning to look a little like a clique that had a successful coup, rather than a mature government that fundamentally embraces democracy.
Let us never forget that notorious authoritarian regimes are sometimes originally elected to power and democracy can be weakened by governments that go overboard to manipulate simplistic views. The Harper government spends much time building up the image of the military while slowly undermining the freedoms that we often credit the military with protecting.
The Harper Conservatives may have grown out of the Western Canadian Reform Party with its call to make the federal government more accountable and transparent. But Harper's rule is now taking us in the opposite direction. The 30% of eligible voters who gave Harper his majority government may not have grasped what they were doing and they can't be held personally responsible for Harper's inclination for arbitrary rule. Nor can those who didn't vote, though they also played a role in allowing Canada to get on this slippery slope. But, nor can any citizens now be excused for not closely watching what the government actually does, how it does it and what this will mean for Canada's future. We can only hope more Canadians will wake up and stand up for Canada in 2012.
A very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to all my readers!
Other articles:
http://jimharding.brinkster.net
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9102
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
HARDING: FARMERS STANDING UP TO HARPER’S ANTI-DEMOCRATIC RU
by Oscar » Wed Jan 25, 2012 6:47 pm
FARMERS STANDING UP TO HARPER’S ANTI-DEMOCRATIC RULE
BY Jim Harding
Sent for publishing in R-Town News January 27, 2012
After squeezing a majority government out of the Canadian electorate Harper is ratcheting up his assault on our democracy. One of his first acts was to ram through Bill C-18 which undercuts the farmer-elected Canadian Wheat Board (CWB). A Federal Court judge found Harper had breached his “statutory duty to consult the CWB and conduct a vote”, a requirement under Section 47.1 of the 1998 legislation. Harper barreled on and now former CWB directors have called for an injunction on Bill C-18; and a class action suit is seeking compensation for damages to farmers. As Bruce Johnstone so rightly asked in the January 14, 2012 Leader Post: “What gives this government the right to seize farmer’s assets, sell them and pocket the proceeds, without paying any compensation to farmers?”
Farmers need a lot of financial support in their efforts to draw a line in the sand and show Harper that he can’t trample on the rule of law. The line may have to be drawn one community meeting at a time.
And this is starting to happen. On January 22nd nearly 100 people gathered in the Raymore Elks Hall to show their support for standing up for the rights of farmers. CWB members, a diversity of political party supporters and a wide-range of community leaders from 30 communities packed into the small hall. Ralph Goodale, Minister when the CWB was changed to give farmers a say, spoke last and spoke passionately. After speeches, questions, debate, lots of learning and a great supper, many people started donating $1 for every acre they farm to the farmer’s defense fund.
ANTI-DEMOCRACTIC LEGACY
I was asked to talk about Harper’s assault on democracy, to look at the pattern of his rule since 2006. I was dumbfounded by the growing list of undemocratic acts. There was the proroguing of Parliament before the Vancouver Olympics to suppress information about complicity in Afghan torture. Bullying was already happening, as Harper warned the Law Clerk to conduct himself “according to government interpretation”. There was a constant misleading of Parliament to impose his rule: cuts to KAIROS, a long-stand ecumenical and international development group, were done deceitfully. Minister Oda claimed KAIROS failed to meet CIDA’s new guidelines; it was later found that someone in her office had inserted “not” onto the grant form reversing CIDA’s actual recommendation. Basic honestly was beginning to erode. Then Harper’s 2006 and 2008 Campaign Manager was accused of making “false and misleading statements” regarding overspending for attack ads used against the Leader of the Opposition.
Harper wasn’t just suppressing information required for a functioning Parliamentary democracy, he was starting to repress the inherent rights of Canadians. The government squandered $1 billion on the G8 and G 20 meetings; 20,000 police were brought in, 1,100 Canadians were arbitrarily held in detention centers, the vast majority of whom had no charge laid or were there under false arrest. Harper made Canada look like a banana republic.
The list continues. Harper obstructed international attempts to negotiate a climate treaty. Under his rule Canada became the only country to not repatriate its citizens from Guantanamo Bay. When Harper tied to get Canada a seat on the Security Council, his hostility towards international law was already well known. Canada, a pioneer of the United Nations, was soundly defeated by Portugal.
Harper steadily centralizes power. Though using populist rhetoric about accountability and transparency, he appointed an unelected party supporter to his Cabinet, eliminated an Access to Information database (CAIRS), and fired the head of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission for trying to regulate nuclear safety at Chalk River. The Chief Statistician at Stats Canada was driven out because he spoke the truth about how the qualitative information from the Long Census Form was required for good governance.
Harper established rigid controls over Cabinet and civil service contact with the media. After taking $10 million in public subsidies for his election campaign, he threatened to abolish the per-vote public subsidy that keeps Canadian politics from being in the pockets of the rich, as in the U.S. Harper was found to be in Contempt of Parliament prior to the 2011 election. This was a first for any Prime Minister in the Commonwealth, yet another blight on Canada.
ONE-MAN RULE
With the economic uncertainty following the 2008 financial crisis, Harper was carefully marketed as an Economic Strong Man who could rule decisively. This helped deflect attention from the $10 billion dollar surplus becoming a $50 billion deficit, the largest in our history. Harper branded the federal stimulus package, Action Canada, as a Conservative vote-getting macine and was trying to rebrand Government of Canada departments as those of the “Harper Government”. Most Canadians didn’t fall for this, but with 4 of 10 not voting and the opposition vote split several ways, Harper gained enough seats, mostly from suburban Ontario, to get his majority.
Harper is sometimes referred to as Teflon Man: nothing sticks. He has deflected criticisms of his anti-democratic legacy mostly by playing the politics of fear. He has barged ahead with his extravagant plan to build super-jails in a time of a lowering crime rate and a plan for super-jets (The F-35 Stealths) without any rational bidding process. This is perhaps a $40 billion combined cost, at a time when the government says it will cut $8 billion in spending.
Harper preemptively undermined the UN climate treaty process by announcing he would withdraw from all commitments to the Kyoto Accord, which had previously been endorsed by Parliament. Following a similar pattern, he preempted the National Energy Board’s hearings on the Northern Gateway pipeline by attacking opponents as “foreign-funded radicals”. NGOs and First Nations were demonized while multi-nationals who would export thousands of jobs to China were in “the national economic interest”. This brings us back to the CWB, where the benefactors of Harper’s squashing of the rule of law will be the grain and transportation corporations to which farmers will be more beholding.
POLITICS AS WARFARE
While others in the world struggle and in some cases die to create democratic space for progressive reform, Harper systematically shuts down and closes off democratic processes so he can force through his corporate agenda. He skillfully manipulated the electoral system using attack ads, wedge issues like gun control and immigration, suppression of opponents and outright deceit. He’s no democrat in any sense of the term. What characterizes his politics is preemptive attacks: Syria’s dictator labels his opponents as “foreign-supported terrorists”; Harper’s slams his as “foreign-funded radicals”. It’s semantic warfare.
Harper and his circle of ideologues are angry at democracy for its tolerance for dialogue and compromise. They are angry at those who would dare oppose them; they prefer to strike first, with no apologies. Harper’s past political adviser, Tom Flanagan, has spoken of elections as “war by other means”; you fatally wound your enemies. Flanagan actually called for the assassination of Wikipedia activist Julian Assange. What kind of model is this for upcoming generations?
Harper sees politics as war. He sees sport as warlike. He wants the military to be at the centre of our political culture, while he undermines the very freedoms for which we ritually thank the military. Politics is not rivalry among citizen politicians; it’s not about political participation by farmers, workers, environmentalists, indigenous or other peoples to find the best methods of governance. It is a zero-sum game where winner takes all; where you rule by law not by the rule of law.
Saskatchewan Farmers have now drawn a line in the sand. The majority of Canadians do not like Harper’s anti-democratic rule. Will others soon join the farmers who have said “enough is enough”?
For more info or to donate go to:
www.friendsofcwb.ca
BY Jim Harding
Sent for publishing in R-Town News January 27, 2012
After squeezing a majority government out of the Canadian electorate Harper is ratcheting up his assault on our democracy. One of his first acts was to ram through Bill C-18 which undercuts the farmer-elected Canadian Wheat Board (CWB). A Federal Court judge found Harper had breached his “statutory duty to consult the CWB and conduct a vote”, a requirement under Section 47.1 of the 1998 legislation. Harper barreled on and now former CWB directors have called for an injunction on Bill C-18; and a class action suit is seeking compensation for damages to farmers. As Bruce Johnstone so rightly asked in the January 14, 2012 Leader Post: “What gives this government the right to seize farmer’s assets, sell them and pocket the proceeds, without paying any compensation to farmers?”
Farmers need a lot of financial support in their efforts to draw a line in the sand and show Harper that he can’t trample on the rule of law. The line may have to be drawn one community meeting at a time.
And this is starting to happen. On January 22nd nearly 100 people gathered in the Raymore Elks Hall to show their support for standing up for the rights of farmers. CWB members, a diversity of political party supporters and a wide-range of community leaders from 30 communities packed into the small hall. Ralph Goodale, Minister when the CWB was changed to give farmers a say, spoke last and spoke passionately. After speeches, questions, debate, lots of learning and a great supper, many people started donating $1 for every acre they farm to the farmer’s defense fund.
ANTI-DEMOCRACTIC LEGACY
I was asked to talk about Harper’s assault on democracy, to look at the pattern of his rule since 2006. I was dumbfounded by the growing list of undemocratic acts. There was the proroguing of Parliament before the Vancouver Olympics to suppress information about complicity in Afghan torture. Bullying was already happening, as Harper warned the Law Clerk to conduct himself “according to government interpretation”. There was a constant misleading of Parliament to impose his rule: cuts to KAIROS, a long-stand ecumenical and international development group, were done deceitfully. Minister Oda claimed KAIROS failed to meet CIDA’s new guidelines; it was later found that someone in her office had inserted “not” onto the grant form reversing CIDA’s actual recommendation. Basic honestly was beginning to erode. Then Harper’s 2006 and 2008 Campaign Manager was accused of making “false and misleading statements” regarding overspending for attack ads used against the Leader of the Opposition.
Harper wasn’t just suppressing information required for a functioning Parliamentary democracy, he was starting to repress the inherent rights of Canadians. The government squandered $1 billion on the G8 and G 20 meetings; 20,000 police were brought in, 1,100 Canadians were arbitrarily held in detention centers, the vast majority of whom had no charge laid or were there under false arrest. Harper made Canada look like a banana republic.
The list continues. Harper obstructed international attempts to negotiate a climate treaty. Under his rule Canada became the only country to not repatriate its citizens from Guantanamo Bay. When Harper tied to get Canada a seat on the Security Council, his hostility towards international law was already well known. Canada, a pioneer of the United Nations, was soundly defeated by Portugal.
Harper steadily centralizes power. Though using populist rhetoric about accountability and transparency, he appointed an unelected party supporter to his Cabinet, eliminated an Access to Information database (CAIRS), and fired the head of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission for trying to regulate nuclear safety at Chalk River. The Chief Statistician at Stats Canada was driven out because he spoke the truth about how the qualitative information from the Long Census Form was required for good governance.
Harper established rigid controls over Cabinet and civil service contact with the media. After taking $10 million in public subsidies for his election campaign, he threatened to abolish the per-vote public subsidy that keeps Canadian politics from being in the pockets of the rich, as in the U.S. Harper was found to be in Contempt of Parliament prior to the 2011 election. This was a first for any Prime Minister in the Commonwealth, yet another blight on Canada.
ONE-MAN RULE
With the economic uncertainty following the 2008 financial crisis, Harper was carefully marketed as an Economic Strong Man who could rule decisively. This helped deflect attention from the $10 billion dollar surplus becoming a $50 billion deficit, the largest in our history. Harper branded the federal stimulus package, Action Canada, as a Conservative vote-getting macine and was trying to rebrand Government of Canada departments as those of the “Harper Government”. Most Canadians didn’t fall for this, but with 4 of 10 not voting and the opposition vote split several ways, Harper gained enough seats, mostly from suburban Ontario, to get his majority.
Harper is sometimes referred to as Teflon Man: nothing sticks. He has deflected criticisms of his anti-democratic legacy mostly by playing the politics of fear. He has barged ahead with his extravagant plan to build super-jails in a time of a lowering crime rate and a plan for super-jets (The F-35 Stealths) without any rational bidding process. This is perhaps a $40 billion combined cost, at a time when the government says it will cut $8 billion in spending.
Harper preemptively undermined the UN climate treaty process by announcing he would withdraw from all commitments to the Kyoto Accord, which had previously been endorsed by Parliament. Following a similar pattern, he preempted the National Energy Board’s hearings on the Northern Gateway pipeline by attacking opponents as “foreign-funded radicals”. NGOs and First Nations were demonized while multi-nationals who would export thousands of jobs to China were in “the national economic interest”. This brings us back to the CWB, where the benefactors of Harper’s squashing of the rule of law will be the grain and transportation corporations to which farmers will be more beholding.
POLITICS AS WARFARE
While others in the world struggle and in some cases die to create democratic space for progressive reform, Harper systematically shuts down and closes off democratic processes so he can force through his corporate agenda. He skillfully manipulated the electoral system using attack ads, wedge issues like gun control and immigration, suppression of opponents and outright deceit. He’s no democrat in any sense of the term. What characterizes his politics is preemptive attacks: Syria’s dictator labels his opponents as “foreign-supported terrorists”; Harper’s slams his as “foreign-funded radicals”. It’s semantic warfare.
Harper and his circle of ideologues are angry at democracy for its tolerance for dialogue and compromise. They are angry at those who would dare oppose them; they prefer to strike first, with no apologies. Harper’s past political adviser, Tom Flanagan, has spoken of elections as “war by other means”; you fatally wound your enemies. Flanagan actually called for the assassination of Wikipedia activist Julian Assange. What kind of model is this for upcoming generations?
Harper sees politics as war. He sees sport as warlike. He wants the military to be at the centre of our political culture, while he undermines the very freedoms for which we ritually thank the military. Politics is not rivalry among citizen politicians; it’s not about political participation by farmers, workers, environmentalists, indigenous or other peoples to find the best methods of governance. It is a zero-sum game where winner takes all; where you rule by law not by the rule of law.
Saskatchewan Farmers have now drawn a line in the sand. The majority of Canadians do not like Harper’s anti-democratic rule. Will others soon join the farmers who have said “enough is enough”?
For more info or to donate go to:
www.friendsofcwb.ca
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9102
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
CWB forms alliance with Cargill Ltd
by Oscar » Fri Mar 02, 2012 6:33 pm
CWB forms alliance with Cargill Ltd
http://www.carmanvalleyleader.com/
ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3489668
By QMI Agency
The Canadian Wheat Board has reached its first agreement for grain handling services with programs for farmers.
The agreement was made with Cargill is expected to provide farmers who market through the CWB with the delivery access and port handling services.
"We are very pleased that Cargill, with whom we've partnered very successfully in the past, has become the first player in the Canadian grain industry to find innovative ways for us to work together," said CWB president and CEO Ian White in a press release. "We can now move ahead to provide farmers with an exciting package of programs they can use with confidence in this new era."
AVAILABLE FOR FARMERS
White said CWB pools and cash contracts, future programs as well as malting barley production contracts, will be available for farmers in the next couple of weeks.
Cargill Ltd. President Len Penner said: "We are excited about this opportunity. It allows us to present the most complete offering of wheat marketing tools to western Canadian growers. The CWB has a proven track record of managing a western Canadian wheat pool. It is only logical that farmers continue to have access to CWB pools, if that's what fits for them."
Cargill's co-operation gives farmers who market through the CWB access to their 30 facilities across Western Canada.
= = = = = =
Canadian Wheat Board to tweak name
http://www.grainews.ca/news/
canadian-wheat-board-to-tweak-name/1000949865/
Feb 29, 2012 4:07 PM - 2 comments
The Canadian Wheat Board will shorten its name, one of the most storied and well known in global grain trading, to simply "CWB," as it starts to compete in an open market.
The board will give up its 69-year-old Western Canada wheat marketing monopoly on Aug. 1 under new Canadian law, but grain handlers are already buying farmers' 2012 crops for delivery this autumn.
The Wheat Board is expected to join them in buying 2012 crops on forward contracts as early as this week, starting with its staples: spring wheat, durum and barley.
"It's going to be (known as) CWB," said Ken Motiuk, one of five government-appointed directors of the board, on the sidelines of the Wild Oats GrainWorld conference here Tuesday.
"You have to differentiate yourself from the past" while maintaining some continuity, he said.
The Wheat Board has long been informally called the CWB.
It’s not unheard of for companies to shed their full names in favour of their accepted abbreviations, such as CHS (Cenex Harvest States), BASF (Badische Anilin- + Soda-Fabrik) and 3M (Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co.).
= = = = =
Shrybman leads constitutional challenge in defence of the Canadian Wheat Board
http://canadians.org/blog/?p=13745
By Brent Patterson, Friday, February 24th, 2012
The Globe and Mail reports the Harper government “faces challenges by (Wheat) Board defenders on a number of fronts.”
Unfortunately, “The Court of Queen’s Bench in Manitoba on Friday threw out a request for an injunction to suspend implementation of the new federal law stripping the CWB of its role as sole marketer for Western Canadian wheat and barley… Judge Shane Perlmutter concluded that a producer plebiscite was not required under the terms of the new marketing act, and turned down the injunction request.” Former Wheat Board directors are considering appealing that decision.
But, “Lawyer Steven Shrybman of law firm Sack Goldblatt Mitchell LLP says the Manitoba ruling does not affect the class action suit his firm has brought, backed by the Friends of the Canadian Wheat Board and other groups. The class-action challenge is being waged on the basis of Charter rights, including rights of association. Even if it fails, he said, the law firm will ask for recovery of lost assets, revenues and damages for farmers caused by the end of the board’s 70-year-old marketing role.”
In mid-September, Shrybman said, “If we win (the constitutional claim), the board would be restored but there would be a lot of damage we expect between now and then. If we fail with our constitutional arguments and the board is essentially and effectively destroyed, we’re seeking damages for the loss of goodwill and the loss of property and the loss of all of the assets that have been acquired and built over time with proceeds from the sale of grain grown by Prairie farmers.”
The Harper government is also facing a class-action suit initiated in Saskatchewan.
“Meanwhile, the government has appealed a Federal Court ruling in December that Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz breached the law in not consulting with the wheat board or holding a farmers’ vote before introducing the new legislation. The appeal is expected to deal with the question of the law’s validity.” The Council of Canadians participated in that Federal Court challenge - represented by Shrybman - to defend the Canadian Wheat Board.
More on that challenge at http://canadians.org/blog/?p=12618.
For Council of Canadians blogs related to the Canadian Wheat Board, please go to
http://canadians.org/blog/?s=%22canadian+wheat+board%22.
http://www.carmanvalleyleader.com/
ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3489668
By QMI Agency
The Canadian Wheat Board has reached its first agreement for grain handling services with programs for farmers.
The agreement was made with Cargill is expected to provide farmers who market through the CWB with the delivery access and port handling services.
"We are very pleased that Cargill, with whom we've partnered very successfully in the past, has become the first player in the Canadian grain industry to find innovative ways for us to work together," said CWB president and CEO Ian White in a press release. "We can now move ahead to provide farmers with an exciting package of programs they can use with confidence in this new era."
AVAILABLE FOR FARMERS
White said CWB pools and cash contracts, future programs as well as malting barley production contracts, will be available for farmers in the next couple of weeks.
Cargill Ltd. President Len Penner said: "We are excited about this opportunity. It allows us to present the most complete offering of wheat marketing tools to western Canadian growers. The CWB has a proven track record of managing a western Canadian wheat pool. It is only logical that farmers continue to have access to CWB pools, if that's what fits for them."
Cargill's co-operation gives farmers who market through the CWB access to their 30 facilities across Western Canada.
= = = = = =
Canadian Wheat Board to tweak name
http://www.grainews.ca/news/
canadian-wheat-board-to-tweak-name/1000949865/
Feb 29, 2012 4:07 PM - 2 comments
The Canadian Wheat Board will shorten its name, one of the most storied and well known in global grain trading, to simply "CWB," as it starts to compete in an open market.
The board will give up its 69-year-old Western Canada wheat marketing monopoly on Aug. 1 under new Canadian law, but grain handlers are already buying farmers' 2012 crops for delivery this autumn.
The Wheat Board is expected to join them in buying 2012 crops on forward contracts as early as this week, starting with its staples: spring wheat, durum and barley.
"It's going to be (known as) CWB," said Ken Motiuk, one of five government-appointed directors of the board, on the sidelines of the Wild Oats GrainWorld conference here Tuesday.
"You have to differentiate yourself from the past" while maintaining some continuity, he said.
The Wheat Board has long been informally called the CWB.
It’s not unheard of for companies to shed their full names in favour of their accepted abbreviations, such as CHS (Cenex Harvest States), BASF (Badische Anilin- + Soda-Fabrik) and 3M (Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co.).
= = = = =
Shrybman leads constitutional challenge in defence of the Canadian Wheat Board
http://canadians.org/blog/?p=13745
By Brent Patterson, Friday, February 24th, 2012
The Globe and Mail reports the Harper government “faces challenges by (Wheat) Board defenders on a number of fronts.”
Unfortunately, “The Court of Queen’s Bench in Manitoba on Friday threw out a request for an injunction to suspend implementation of the new federal law stripping the CWB of its role as sole marketer for Western Canadian wheat and barley… Judge Shane Perlmutter concluded that a producer plebiscite was not required under the terms of the new marketing act, and turned down the injunction request.” Former Wheat Board directors are considering appealing that decision.
But, “Lawyer Steven Shrybman of law firm Sack Goldblatt Mitchell LLP says the Manitoba ruling does not affect the class action suit his firm has brought, backed by the Friends of the Canadian Wheat Board and other groups. The class-action challenge is being waged on the basis of Charter rights, including rights of association. Even if it fails, he said, the law firm will ask for recovery of lost assets, revenues and damages for farmers caused by the end of the board’s 70-year-old marketing role.”
In mid-September, Shrybman said, “If we win (the constitutional claim), the board would be restored but there would be a lot of damage we expect between now and then. If we fail with our constitutional arguments and the board is essentially and effectively destroyed, we’re seeking damages for the loss of goodwill and the loss of property and the loss of all of the assets that have been acquired and built over time with proceeds from the sale of grain grown by Prairie farmers.”
The Harper government is also facing a class-action suit initiated in Saskatchewan.
“Meanwhile, the government has appealed a Federal Court ruling in December that Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz breached the law in not consulting with the wheat board or holding a farmers’ vote before introducing the new legislation. The appeal is expected to deal with the question of the law’s validity.” The Council of Canadians participated in that Federal Court challenge - represented by Shrybman - to defend the Canadian Wheat Board.
More on that challenge at http://canadians.org/blog/?p=12618.
For Council of Canadians blogs related to the Canadian Wheat Board, please go to
http://canadians.org/blog/?s=%22canadian+wheat+board%22.
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9102
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
The man who killed the family farm
by Oscar » Fri Mar 02, 2012 6:40 pm
The man who killed the family farm
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/
the-man-who-killed-the-family-farm-140405813.html?device=mobile
Roving rural columnist finds Harper's decision to dismantle the wheat board goes against the grain for many Manitoba farmers
By: Bill Redekop 02/25/2012 1:00 AM
GILBERT PLAINS -- Clare McBride has already lost her Irish accent, even though her farming family just emigrated from the Emerald Isle in 1998. Except when she gets angry.When asked what she thinks of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's decision not to let farmers vote on the future of the Canadian Wheat Board, her eyes dilate, her nostrils flare and that clipped, Irish tongue returns in all its glory.
"Stephen Harper's taking something that doesn't belong to him. It belongs to farmers," she fires back."It's like he sees a car and goes, 'That's a nice car. I'll just take it.' It's not his."
That feeling of betrayal is being expressed by farmers across the prairies over the Harper government's decision to dismantle the 69-year-old wheat board without allowing farmers a vote.
A recent poll found 62 per cent of farmers favoured keeping the wheat board's monopoly on wheat sales.
I hear the word "dictator" again and again, from farm to farm, as I travel this staunchly pro-wheat board region around Dauphin and to the south of Riding Mountain National Park.
"I remember when we were in the Reform Party together and we talked about direct democracy," recalled Inky Mark, the former MP for this area, about his days with Harper.
Direct democracy was where constituents would be allowed to vote on government policy initiatives and would even have a mechanism for recalling their MP.
Where's that direct democracy now? Mark asked. The federal government refuses to allow farmers to vote on the wheat board.
"It's because (Harper) knows he can't win it," growled McBride.
The Harper government has hardly discussed the issue. One can contrast this process with the intense debate over the Crow Rate rail subsidy in the 1990s.
Then, the government of the day held public meetings with farmers across the Prairies.
There's been none of that.
The Harper government's campaign has been tightly controlled, sticking to two main talking points.
One is the government believes in marketing freedom. Three generations of farmers have been forced to sell their wheat to the wheat board but will no longer after the board is gutted Aug. 1.
The other is the Harper government claims that it doesn't have to give farmers a vote because it was elected in most rural Prairie ridings that have farm constituents.More on these arguments later.
Mark's successor in the riding is Robert Sopuck (Dauphin-Swan River-Marquette). Sopuck recently sat with the PM in lower level seats at the Winnipeg Jets season opener -- a favour that never would have been afforded to Mark. Mark was shunned by the party for representing his constituents' wishes and voting against the government's motions on the wheat board.
Privately, Sopuck has told people he's "a team player" and will abide by his government's decision. Mark has always been a maverick. In an interview with the Free Press, Sopuck denied his region is staunchly pro-wheat board. He maintained farmers in his riding are "split 50-50" on the issue.
"A 50-50 split?" people here reply. "Are you kidding?"
Informed estimates show 80 to 90 per cent of farmers in this riding favour the wheat board.
"People out here think co-operatively. My grandfather said many times the reason he survived was because he could turn to his neighbours," said Larry Bohdanovich, who farms 2,500 acres of crop land south of Grandview and supports the wheat board.
It's a highly ethnic community with a history of pulling together, he continued.
"It's the Ukrainians and Germans and French guys that want the board the most. We tend to co-operate more as a community.
"They are also staunch wheat board supporters simply due to logistics. They are too distant from the Canada-U.S. boundary to benefit from an open border with the U.S. -- that is, if the U.S. keeps its border open after the wheat board's gone.
Some here go so far as to say the government's discourse has tried to mislead. An example is a parliamentary communication sent by MP Merv Tweed (Brandon-Souris) to constituents that said the wheat board was "imposed" on farmers by government. That's a false statement.
The wheat board has been the sole seller of Prairie wheat since 1943, when a Liberal government agreed to farmers' demand to make the wheat board their mandatory seller. Under pressure from farmers, Manitoba later allowed votes to add oats and barley to the wheat board sellers' monopoly, which farmers passed with a majority of about 90 per cent. Saskatchewan and Alberta quickly followed Manitoba's lead.
"I was there. I remember," said Gerald Pederson, 79, who still farms with his son, Delbert, near Newdale.
"It wasn't imposed on us. Farmers were on their knees begging for the wheat board."
Someone who has taken an interest in the wheat board case is Arthur Schafer, Director of the University of Manitoba's Centre for Professional and Applied Ethics.
"The facts seem pretty clear," Schafer maintained. "One is that Western farmers have benefited significantly by selling their wheat through this monopolistic, collective marketing system. It's given them power vis-a-vis the huge grain companies and the international marketplace.
"Dick Dawson, a former senior vice-president of Cargill Canada, once told the Free Press, in a candid moment after his retirement that farmers would be "dumb" to give up the wheat board.
"It's worked bloody well," Dawson said. "The overall scorecard for the wheat board would be a strong one."
To its credit, the Harper government hasn't argued very strenuously that marketing freedom will translate into greater prosperity for farmers. More money isn't going to magically appear in the markets. In fact, money will likely disappear. The wheat board doesn't take a profit from selling farmers' wheat. It merely pays its administration costs, which amount to about two per cent of gross sales. The rest of the money is returned to farmers.
Actually, the wheat board was allowed to borrow money at government rates and sell wheat on loan. For example, borrowing money at two per cent interest and loaning money at perhaps four per cent to a foreign buyer earned enough money in some years to pay all the board's administrative costs. So farmers had their grain marketed for free.
Private industry doesn't work that way. Private industry will definitely take profits.
The problem, maintained Schafer, is that "not all farmers have benefited equally" from the wheat board. For example, some who live along the border might be able to truck their grain into North Dakota and sell at a higher, spot price -- often a short-lived price opportunity -- on their own. Other farmers think they can do a better job of marketing their wheat than the wheat board."
The ideology of liberty is very powerful," said Schafer. "So these farmers fly under the banner of liberty. How can you force everyone into the system? They wrap themselves in the banner of farmer autonomy and individual liberty. And this government is ideologically very sympathetic to appeals to individual liberty. The end result is the government is going to abolish the wheat board.
"But it will be at a price. Schafer contends."
Western farmers collectively will be heavy losers and so will Western Canadian agribusinesses. Huge American multinationals will benefit greatly. Some individual farmers near the border may benefit," Schafer said.
"What they're doing is going to seriously undermine, if it doesn't destroy, many smaller communities in Western Canada, and it's going to transfer power and wealth to gigantic American multinational corporations, and out of the hands of small family farms."
In Canada, Viterra has already said its operating profit should rise by up to $50 million by 2014, with the wheat board out of the way. Where will that profit come from? McBride knows.
"We get to tighten our belts, and they get to loosen theirs," she said.
It isn't likely to help Winnipeg. The Canadian Wheat Board had 435 employees at the time of the federal government's announcement, most of them working in downtown Winnipeg. Sources at the board say staff will be just 50 to 80 employees by Aug. 1 when the board officially loses its selling monopoly. (It will try to survive as a voluntary board -- Canadian Wheat Board 2.0, people are calling it -- even though it has no country elevators or port facilities to compete against private companies.)
Supporters say the wheat board monopoly has given farmers marketing clout, instead of tens of thousands of wheat growers "trying to undercut each other like in a Dutch auction," as farmer Doug Gamey of Strathclair put it. The wheat board has operated for almost seven decades with really only one asset but it's a powerful one: its monopoly to sell all Prairie farmers' wheat and barley. But that's the asset being taken away.
It's like a labour union in some ways, to put it in terms an urban audience might understand. Once that union becomes voluntary, its bargaining power falls apart pretty fast. The solidarity of labour unions -- a kind of monopoly of worker services, if you will -- earns employees seven to 14 per cent higher earnings over non-unionized employees, according to a recent Learning Curve essay in the Free Press by David Camfield, who teaches labour studies at the University of Manitoba.
Probably the most reputable study on whether the wheat board's monopoly benefits farmers was conducted in 1996 by respected farm economists Daryl Kraft, Ed Tyrchniewicz and Hartley Furtan.
The economists were allowed to compare the wheat board's actual sale prices, which are normally kept strictly confidential, versus open market returns over a period of years. They found the wheat board's monopoly added an average $13.35 per tonne onto wheat sold in Western Canada. That can mean earning as much as $15,000 to $20,000 more on 988 acres of wheat.
Sopuck argues that removal of the wheat board's monopoly will spur more food processing in Western Canada, and that may very well be true. That would create jobs and benefit the economy. But why would doing away with the wheat board encourage more processing? Presumably because it would lower wheat prices to farmers.There are other realities to food processing. Most processing is done close to the markets where the end product is consumed. So flour millers congregate around places such as Buffalo, N.Y. Two reasons for that: it's cheaper to ship raw product than finished product, so you want to process foods close to major markets; it's easier to store raw product such as wheat down on the farm than finished product at production facilities.
"The question is whether the government can act in a lawless way," said Schafer. "But the question is also about the sovereignty of Parliament."
The crux of the dispute rests in Section 47.1 of the Canadian Wheat Board Act. The Act says that before government can add or subtract a crop from the wheat board, it must do two things: consult with the farmer-elected board of directors of the wheat board; and consult with growers of that crop by a vote.
The Harper government has done neither.
"Parliament passes a bill about how things should work in the future. And the new Parliament, the Harper Parliament, abolishes the wheat board without following the previous legislation and without repealing the previous legislation. Can they do it?" asked Schafer.
"In one sense, no Parliament can bind the future. In another sense, the government is supposed to abide by the rules. And the rules say you've got to consult the farmers, and they didn't."
Bill Toews, who farms near Kane in southern Manitoba, thinks the prime minister has underestimated farmers. Farmers have now launched no fewer than three court challenges against the federal government over its wheat board bill.
"I don't think the government anticipated farmers reacting the way we have," said Toews, one of eight farmer-elected board of directors removed from office by the Harper government last year. "I think the government wanted to do this thing quick and dirty and get it done."Only one of the three court challenges has a chance to stop the government before it terminates the wheat board -- the others will likely be decided after the fact -- and it is the one brought forward by the former wheat board directors, including Toews.
The farmer directors won their first judgment in November. Federal Court Judge Douglas Campbell ruled the Harper government broke the law by introducing Bill C-18 to end the wheat board's monopoly powers without consulting the wheat board or holding a plebiscite of Prairie grain growers.
The federal Conservatives ignored the ruling and pressed ahead anyway, passing Bill C-18, the Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act, the following month.
The eight farmer-elected directors of the wheat board are now seeking an injunction to stop Bill C-18 until the legality of the government's actions can be contested in court. A ruling from Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench Judge Shane Perlmutter is imminent.
The second case before courts is Ottawa's appeal of the Campbell decision, and responses from the board of directors and another group called Friends of the Canadian Wheat Board.
The third and most recent court action, again by Friends, challenges the constitutionality of the federal government's actions.
Toews said Prairie farmers are a tenacious group.
"Everybody I talked to says, 'we'll take it to the Supreme Court if we have to,' " he said. "It's too important a case, and not just important for the Canadian Wheat Board. As far as we're concerned, it's an issue of democracy that all Canadians should be concerned about."
If court actions fail, farmers like Bohdanovich predict the loss of the wheat board will accelerate the rate at which farmers leave the land. Farmers will be forced to own larger farms just to earn the same returns they made when the wheat board monopoly existed.You just have to drive through rural North Dakota, which has an open market system. North Dakota's countryside is empty. Farms have grown to 20,000 to 40,000 acres in size. Good-sized farms in Manitoba are now 10,000 to 20,000 acres. It means fewer people to support rural communities.
Bohdanovich says he will be forced to expand his land base just to maintain his current lifestyle.
But there will be one significant difference between farmers in Western Canada and the United States. The U.S. subsidizes its farmers to a much greater degree.
"American farmers are hugely subsidized, much more than we are. So if we get rid of all our infringements on the market, while the Americans keep theirs, as they surely will, it's a kind of suicide," said Schafer.
Brad McDonald, who farms near Strathclair, says the Harper government should have at least received something in return from the U.S. for giving up the wheat board. Americans have been bitterly opposed to the board for decades, saying it gives Canadian farmers an unfair advantage.
Another issue is that wheat is more complex to market. Canola, which has always been sold on the open market, has just eight degrading factors, for example frost damage. Wheat has 23 degrading factors including frost, ergot, fusarium and wheat midge.
Under the wheat board, farmers didn't have to worry so much about these factors. With its tremendous volumes, the board could often blend the wheat to make a higher grade. Under a private system, farmers will lock in a price and grade on the futures market before they know what kind of crop they have. They could lose value when they deliver it.
Certainly there is a deep divide among farmers. While 62 per cent support the wheat board, that leaves 38 per cent that oppose it, and that's a sizeable chunk. How do you balance the rights of the individual against those of the majority?
If there were a vote, the issue becomes what percentage of the vote is required to remove the wheat board. One place that tries to balance individual and group rights is labour union law. Under sections 49 and 50 of the Manitoba Labour Relations Act, a vote of 50 per cent or more is needed to decertify a union. Under those terms, anti-wheat board farmers wouldn't have enough support according to the poll.
Of course, there hasn't been a vote.
But unlike a union, once the wheat board is gone, it can't come back. That is stipulated in Canada's bilateral trade agreements. Another government can't come in and bring back a wheat board. That makes it imperative that any decision on the wheat board is made properly.
The Harper government claims it has a mandate because it won most rural Prairie ridings last election. And in the campaign, the PM made his intention known that he wanted to eliminate the wheat board.
Is that enough?
In response, wheat board supporters say a government runs an election campaign on dozens if not hundreds of different policies, not just one. As well, farmers have seen their political clout diminish over time to where they now represent just two per cent of the population.
Besides, the wheat board has its own elections. The wheat board is controlled by a farmer-elected board. If farmers want to end the wheat board, they can vote in candidates opposed to the board. Many people have run in wheat board elections representing the exact views that Harper holds, but few have been elected. If a majority of wheat board opponents were elected, they could end its mandate, but that's never come close to happening.
Some people question whether the Harper government would try similar actions against segments of society other than farmers.
"It's deeply disrespectful," said Schafer. "Farmers have a right to feel betrayed, not because the Conservatives did something they said they would do, but because the Conservatives are behaving in a lawless manner that treats the community with disrespect by failing to consult farmers before changing the law."
McBride can't claim her forefathers built the wheat board, but it was a deciding factor in her family's decision to move to Western Canada. Her fiancé, Justin Dutchyshen -- the couple will be married by the time this goes to print -- operates one of the largest farms in Manitoba along with his father, Wayne, near Gilbert Plains, just east of Dauphin. The Dutchyshens have deep roots in the area.
Although just 29, Dutchyshen has already seen farmers lose their grain elevators, rail branch lines, the wheat co-ops and now the wheat board. He thinks farmers must make a stand.
"My grandfather and great grandfather were advocates of the board and helped start the board. Those guys worked so hard to keep it. To see it now go out in a blaze..."
Former MP Mark is more direct."I believe that within five years, half the farmers here (in the riding) will be gone," said Mark."It's about turning rural Canada into a corporate farm," he maintained.
"I believe Harper will be known as the man who killed the family farm."
bill.redekop@freepress.mb.ca
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/
the-man-who-killed-the-family-farm-140405813.html?device=mobile
Roving rural columnist finds Harper's decision to dismantle the wheat board goes against the grain for many Manitoba farmers
By: Bill Redekop 02/25/2012 1:00 AM
GILBERT PLAINS -- Clare McBride has already lost her Irish accent, even though her farming family just emigrated from the Emerald Isle in 1998. Except when she gets angry.When asked what she thinks of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's decision not to let farmers vote on the future of the Canadian Wheat Board, her eyes dilate, her nostrils flare and that clipped, Irish tongue returns in all its glory.
"Stephen Harper's taking something that doesn't belong to him. It belongs to farmers," she fires back."It's like he sees a car and goes, 'That's a nice car. I'll just take it.' It's not his."
That feeling of betrayal is being expressed by farmers across the prairies over the Harper government's decision to dismantle the 69-year-old wheat board without allowing farmers a vote.
A recent poll found 62 per cent of farmers favoured keeping the wheat board's monopoly on wheat sales.
I hear the word "dictator" again and again, from farm to farm, as I travel this staunchly pro-wheat board region around Dauphin and to the south of Riding Mountain National Park.
"I remember when we were in the Reform Party together and we talked about direct democracy," recalled Inky Mark, the former MP for this area, about his days with Harper.
Direct democracy was where constituents would be allowed to vote on government policy initiatives and would even have a mechanism for recalling their MP.
Where's that direct democracy now? Mark asked. The federal government refuses to allow farmers to vote on the wheat board.
"It's because (Harper) knows he can't win it," growled McBride.
The Harper government has hardly discussed the issue. One can contrast this process with the intense debate over the Crow Rate rail subsidy in the 1990s.
Then, the government of the day held public meetings with farmers across the Prairies.
There's been none of that.
The Harper government's campaign has been tightly controlled, sticking to two main talking points.
One is the government believes in marketing freedom. Three generations of farmers have been forced to sell their wheat to the wheat board but will no longer after the board is gutted Aug. 1.
The other is the Harper government claims that it doesn't have to give farmers a vote because it was elected in most rural Prairie ridings that have farm constituents.More on these arguments later.
Mark's successor in the riding is Robert Sopuck (Dauphin-Swan River-Marquette). Sopuck recently sat with the PM in lower level seats at the Winnipeg Jets season opener -- a favour that never would have been afforded to Mark. Mark was shunned by the party for representing his constituents' wishes and voting against the government's motions on the wheat board.
Privately, Sopuck has told people he's "a team player" and will abide by his government's decision. Mark has always been a maverick. In an interview with the Free Press, Sopuck denied his region is staunchly pro-wheat board. He maintained farmers in his riding are "split 50-50" on the issue.
"A 50-50 split?" people here reply. "Are you kidding?"
Informed estimates show 80 to 90 per cent of farmers in this riding favour the wheat board.
"People out here think co-operatively. My grandfather said many times the reason he survived was because he could turn to his neighbours," said Larry Bohdanovich, who farms 2,500 acres of crop land south of Grandview and supports the wheat board.
It's a highly ethnic community with a history of pulling together, he continued.
"It's the Ukrainians and Germans and French guys that want the board the most. We tend to co-operate more as a community.
"They are also staunch wheat board supporters simply due to logistics. They are too distant from the Canada-U.S. boundary to benefit from an open border with the U.S. -- that is, if the U.S. keeps its border open after the wheat board's gone.
Some here go so far as to say the government's discourse has tried to mislead. An example is a parliamentary communication sent by MP Merv Tweed (Brandon-Souris) to constituents that said the wheat board was "imposed" on farmers by government. That's a false statement.
The wheat board has been the sole seller of Prairie wheat since 1943, when a Liberal government agreed to farmers' demand to make the wheat board their mandatory seller. Under pressure from farmers, Manitoba later allowed votes to add oats and barley to the wheat board sellers' monopoly, which farmers passed with a majority of about 90 per cent. Saskatchewan and Alberta quickly followed Manitoba's lead.
"I was there. I remember," said Gerald Pederson, 79, who still farms with his son, Delbert, near Newdale.
"It wasn't imposed on us. Farmers were on their knees begging for the wheat board."
Someone who has taken an interest in the wheat board case is Arthur Schafer, Director of the University of Manitoba's Centre for Professional and Applied Ethics.
"The facts seem pretty clear," Schafer maintained. "One is that Western farmers have benefited significantly by selling their wheat through this monopolistic, collective marketing system. It's given them power vis-a-vis the huge grain companies and the international marketplace.
"Dick Dawson, a former senior vice-president of Cargill Canada, once told the Free Press, in a candid moment after his retirement that farmers would be "dumb" to give up the wheat board.
"It's worked bloody well," Dawson said. "The overall scorecard for the wheat board would be a strong one."
To its credit, the Harper government hasn't argued very strenuously that marketing freedom will translate into greater prosperity for farmers. More money isn't going to magically appear in the markets. In fact, money will likely disappear. The wheat board doesn't take a profit from selling farmers' wheat. It merely pays its administration costs, which amount to about two per cent of gross sales. The rest of the money is returned to farmers.
Actually, the wheat board was allowed to borrow money at government rates and sell wheat on loan. For example, borrowing money at two per cent interest and loaning money at perhaps four per cent to a foreign buyer earned enough money in some years to pay all the board's administrative costs. So farmers had their grain marketed for free.
Private industry doesn't work that way. Private industry will definitely take profits.
The problem, maintained Schafer, is that "not all farmers have benefited equally" from the wheat board. For example, some who live along the border might be able to truck their grain into North Dakota and sell at a higher, spot price -- often a short-lived price opportunity -- on their own. Other farmers think they can do a better job of marketing their wheat than the wheat board."
The ideology of liberty is very powerful," said Schafer. "So these farmers fly under the banner of liberty. How can you force everyone into the system? They wrap themselves in the banner of farmer autonomy and individual liberty. And this government is ideologically very sympathetic to appeals to individual liberty. The end result is the government is going to abolish the wheat board.
"But it will be at a price. Schafer contends."
Western farmers collectively will be heavy losers and so will Western Canadian agribusinesses. Huge American multinationals will benefit greatly. Some individual farmers near the border may benefit," Schafer said.
"What they're doing is going to seriously undermine, if it doesn't destroy, many smaller communities in Western Canada, and it's going to transfer power and wealth to gigantic American multinational corporations, and out of the hands of small family farms."
In Canada, Viterra has already said its operating profit should rise by up to $50 million by 2014, with the wheat board out of the way. Where will that profit come from? McBride knows.
"We get to tighten our belts, and they get to loosen theirs," she said.
It isn't likely to help Winnipeg. The Canadian Wheat Board had 435 employees at the time of the federal government's announcement, most of them working in downtown Winnipeg. Sources at the board say staff will be just 50 to 80 employees by Aug. 1 when the board officially loses its selling monopoly. (It will try to survive as a voluntary board -- Canadian Wheat Board 2.0, people are calling it -- even though it has no country elevators or port facilities to compete against private companies.)
Supporters say the wheat board monopoly has given farmers marketing clout, instead of tens of thousands of wheat growers "trying to undercut each other like in a Dutch auction," as farmer Doug Gamey of Strathclair put it. The wheat board has operated for almost seven decades with really only one asset but it's a powerful one: its monopoly to sell all Prairie farmers' wheat and barley. But that's the asset being taken away.
It's like a labour union in some ways, to put it in terms an urban audience might understand. Once that union becomes voluntary, its bargaining power falls apart pretty fast. The solidarity of labour unions -- a kind of monopoly of worker services, if you will -- earns employees seven to 14 per cent higher earnings over non-unionized employees, according to a recent Learning Curve essay in the Free Press by David Camfield, who teaches labour studies at the University of Manitoba.
Probably the most reputable study on whether the wheat board's monopoly benefits farmers was conducted in 1996 by respected farm economists Daryl Kraft, Ed Tyrchniewicz and Hartley Furtan.
The economists were allowed to compare the wheat board's actual sale prices, which are normally kept strictly confidential, versus open market returns over a period of years. They found the wheat board's monopoly added an average $13.35 per tonne onto wheat sold in Western Canada. That can mean earning as much as $15,000 to $20,000 more on 988 acres of wheat.
Sopuck argues that removal of the wheat board's monopoly will spur more food processing in Western Canada, and that may very well be true. That would create jobs and benefit the economy. But why would doing away with the wheat board encourage more processing? Presumably because it would lower wheat prices to farmers.There are other realities to food processing. Most processing is done close to the markets where the end product is consumed. So flour millers congregate around places such as Buffalo, N.Y. Two reasons for that: it's cheaper to ship raw product than finished product, so you want to process foods close to major markets; it's easier to store raw product such as wheat down on the farm than finished product at production facilities.
"The question is whether the government can act in a lawless way," said Schafer. "But the question is also about the sovereignty of Parliament."
The crux of the dispute rests in Section 47.1 of the Canadian Wheat Board Act. The Act says that before government can add or subtract a crop from the wheat board, it must do two things: consult with the farmer-elected board of directors of the wheat board; and consult with growers of that crop by a vote.
The Harper government has done neither.
"Parliament passes a bill about how things should work in the future. And the new Parliament, the Harper Parliament, abolishes the wheat board without following the previous legislation and without repealing the previous legislation. Can they do it?" asked Schafer.
"In one sense, no Parliament can bind the future. In another sense, the government is supposed to abide by the rules. And the rules say you've got to consult the farmers, and they didn't."
Bill Toews, who farms near Kane in southern Manitoba, thinks the prime minister has underestimated farmers. Farmers have now launched no fewer than three court challenges against the federal government over its wheat board bill.
"I don't think the government anticipated farmers reacting the way we have," said Toews, one of eight farmer-elected board of directors removed from office by the Harper government last year. "I think the government wanted to do this thing quick and dirty and get it done."Only one of the three court challenges has a chance to stop the government before it terminates the wheat board -- the others will likely be decided after the fact -- and it is the one brought forward by the former wheat board directors, including Toews.
The farmer directors won their first judgment in November. Federal Court Judge Douglas Campbell ruled the Harper government broke the law by introducing Bill C-18 to end the wheat board's monopoly powers without consulting the wheat board or holding a plebiscite of Prairie grain growers.
The federal Conservatives ignored the ruling and pressed ahead anyway, passing Bill C-18, the Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act, the following month.
The eight farmer-elected directors of the wheat board are now seeking an injunction to stop Bill C-18 until the legality of the government's actions can be contested in court. A ruling from Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench Judge Shane Perlmutter is imminent.
The second case before courts is Ottawa's appeal of the Campbell decision, and responses from the board of directors and another group called Friends of the Canadian Wheat Board.
The third and most recent court action, again by Friends, challenges the constitutionality of the federal government's actions.
Toews said Prairie farmers are a tenacious group.
"Everybody I talked to says, 'we'll take it to the Supreme Court if we have to,' " he said. "It's too important a case, and not just important for the Canadian Wheat Board. As far as we're concerned, it's an issue of democracy that all Canadians should be concerned about."
If court actions fail, farmers like Bohdanovich predict the loss of the wheat board will accelerate the rate at which farmers leave the land. Farmers will be forced to own larger farms just to earn the same returns they made when the wheat board monopoly existed.You just have to drive through rural North Dakota, which has an open market system. North Dakota's countryside is empty. Farms have grown to 20,000 to 40,000 acres in size. Good-sized farms in Manitoba are now 10,000 to 20,000 acres. It means fewer people to support rural communities.
Bohdanovich says he will be forced to expand his land base just to maintain his current lifestyle.
But there will be one significant difference between farmers in Western Canada and the United States. The U.S. subsidizes its farmers to a much greater degree.
"American farmers are hugely subsidized, much more than we are. So if we get rid of all our infringements on the market, while the Americans keep theirs, as they surely will, it's a kind of suicide," said Schafer.
Brad McDonald, who farms near Strathclair, says the Harper government should have at least received something in return from the U.S. for giving up the wheat board. Americans have been bitterly opposed to the board for decades, saying it gives Canadian farmers an unfair advantage.
Another issue is that wheat is more complex to market. Canola, which has always been sold on the open market, has just eight degrading factors, for example frost damage. Wheat has 23 degrading factors including frost, ergot, fusarium and wheat midge.
Under the wheat board, farmers didn't have to worry so much about these factors. With its tremendous volumes, the board could often blend the wheat to make a higher grade. Under a private system, farmers will lock in a price and grade on the futures market before they know what kind of crop they have. They could lose value when they deliver it.
Certainly there is a deep divide among farmers. While 62 per cent support the wheat board, that leaves 38 per cent that oppose it, and that's a sizeable chunk. How do you balance the rights of the individual against those of the majority?
If there were a vote, the issue becomes what percentage of the vote is required to remove the wheat board. One place that tries to balance individual and group rights is labour union law. Under sections 49 and 50 of the Manitoba Labour Relations Act, a vote of 50 per cent or more is needed to decertify a union. Under those terms, anti-wheat board farmers wouldn't have enough support according to the poll.
Of course, there hasn't been a vote.
But unlike a union, once the wheat board is gone, it can't come back. That is stipulated in Canada's bilateral trade agreements. Another government can't come in and bring back a wheat board. That makes it imperative that any decision on the wheat board is made properly.
The Harper government claims it has a mandate because it won most rural Prairie ridings last election. And in the campaign, the PM made his intention known that he wanted to eliminate the wheat board.
Is that enough?
In response, wheat board supporters say a government runs an election campaign on dozens if not hundreds of different policies, not just one. As well, farmers have seen their political clout diminish over time to where they now represent just two per cent of the population.
Besides, the wheat board has its own elections. The wheat board is controlled by a farmer-elected board. If farmers want to end the wheat board, they can vote in candidates opposed to the board. Many people have run in wheat board elections representing the exact views that Harper holds, but few have been elected. If a majority of wheat board opponents were elected, they could end its mandate, but that's never come close to happening.
Some people question whether the Harper government would try similar actions against segments of society other than farmers.
"It's deeply disrespectful," said Schafer. "Farmers have a right to feel betrayed, not because the Conservatives did something they said they would do, but because the Conservatives are behaving in a lawless manner that treats the community with disrespect by failing to consult farmers before changing the law."
McBride can't claim her forefathers built the wheat board, but it was a deciding factor in her family's decision to move to Western Canada. Her fiancé, Justin Dutchyshen -- the couple will be married by the time this goes to print -- operates one of the largest farms in Manitoba along with his father, Wayne, near Gilbert Plains, just east of Dauphin. The Dutchyshens have deep roots in the area.
Although just 29, Dutchyshen has already seen farmers lose their grain elevators, rail branch lines, the wheat co-ops and now the wheat board. He thinks farmers must make a stand.
"My grandfather and great grandfather were advocates of the board and helped start the board. Those guys worked so hard to keep it. To see it now go out in a blaze..."
Former MP Mark is more direct."I believe that within five years, half the farmers here (in the riding) will be gone," said Mark."It's about turning rural Canada into a corporate farm," he maintained.
"I believe Harper will be known as the man who killed the family farm."
bill.redekop@freepress.mb.ca
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9102
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
KURTENBACH: Democracy, according to Harper
by Oscar » Fri Mar 30, 2012 7:50 am
KURTENBACH: Democracy, according to Harper
Sent for publishing on March 29, 2012
To the Editor,
Thanks to the Harper Conservatives for the arbitrary destruction the CWB and the sale of Vittera to the largest commodity trader in the world, Glencore of Switzerland.
Glencore was founded in the 1970's. Getting to the top of the commodity trading groups gave Glencore some checkered experiences - - like tax evasion, fraud and corruption. In 2011, Reuters reviewed Glencore's "opportunist, contrarian and well funded investments" so that in the same year, Glencore organized an"Initial Public Offering", valuing the business at $61 billion. In the process they created five new billionaires.
The people on the prairies have been relegated to the status of "hewers of wood and drawers of water." This was the situation that did exist prior to 1924 - - a time when the moguls of the Winnipeg Grain Exchange made the decisions of the grade, the price, and the dockage deducted that they decided to leave for the producer
But the families who settled on the prairies in the early 1900's were people of great courage, determination, vision and hope for the future. Sick and tired of a situation where they had no control over the crops they sold, they organized one of the greatest democratic grain cooperatives in the world, the prairie Pools. All this was fiercely opposed by the grain traders in Winnipeg.
Throughout the years, this Cooperative experienced many challenges including the "dirty thirties" and then followed the establishment of a CWB by the Conservative government of Prime Minister R. B. Bennet through an Act of Parliament, which was supported by all political parties.
Primary producers have lost any control of the return they receive from the produce of the land. However, the people and financial interests who approved the elimination of the CWB and Vittera are being appropriately financially rewarded. Mayo Schmidt, who was the CEO of Vittera at the time of the sell-out, is apparently receiving the tidy sum of $37.5 million. The directors of Vittera, and a recent director from Glencore, are receiving the minuscule sum of $20 million each!
Leo Kurtenbach,
Saskatoon.
Phone: (306) 652- 5129.
Sent for publishing on March 29, 2012
To the Editor,
Thanks to the Harper Conservatives for the arbitrary destruction the CWB and the sale of Vittera to the largest commodity trader in the world, Glencore of Switzerland.
Glencore was founded in the 1970's. Getting to the top of the commodity trading groups gave Glencore some checkered experiences - - like tax evasion, fraud and corruption. In 2011, Reuters reviewed Glencore's "opportunist, contrarian and well funded investments" so that in the same year, Glencore organized an"Initial Public Offering", valuing the business at $61 billion. In the process they created five new billionaires.
The people on the prairies have been relegated to the status of "hewers of wood and drawers of water." This was the situation that did exist prior to 1924 - - a time when the moguls of the Winnipeg Grain Exchange made the decisions of the grade, the price, and the dockage deducted that they decided to leave for the producer
But the families who settled on the prairies in the early 1900's were people of great courage, determination, vision and hope for the future. Sick and tired of a situation where they had no control over the crops they sold, they organized one of the greatest democratic grain cooperatives in the world, the prairie Pools. All this was fiercely opposed by the grain traders in Winnipeg.
Throughout the years, this Cooperative experienced many challenges including the "dirty thirties" and then followed the establishment of a CWB by the Conservative government of Prime Minister R. B. Bennet through an Act of Parliament, which was supported by all political parties.
Primary producers have lost any control of the return they receive from the produce of the land. However, the people and financial interests who approved the elimination of the CWB and Vittera are being appropriately financially rewarded. Mayo Schmidt, who was the CEO of Vittera at the time of the sell-out, is apparently receiving the tidy sum of $37.5 million. The directors of Vittera, and a recent director from Glencore, are receiving the minuscule sum of $20 million each!
Leo Kurtenbach,
Saskatoon.
Phone: (306) 652- 5129.
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9102
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
PARKER: Our bread basket is being compromised
by Oscar » Mon Apr 02, 2012 10:43 am
PARKER: Our bread basket is being compromised
Northumberland Today.com
Fri Mar 30 2012
Page: 4 Section: Editorial/Opinion Column: Letters to the Editor
Our bread basket is being compromised
The Harper Government should have to walk a mile in farmers' shoes before deciding to stick their nose in farmers' business. They probably don't know, or care, that before the seed goes in the ground, the farmer is already facing disasters of frosts, droughts, hail, grasshoppers, uncertain prices, high input costs, and corporate threats of losing their farms and assets, if a small amount of genetically modified seed or pollen is detected on their farm that may have blown there, unknown to the farmer.
Government members whose knowledge of grain production is probably limited to munching on a sandwich, are forcing grains to be marketed 'their' way, which will likely be of most benefit to a few corporations. That's our bread basket that's being compromised.
The announcement by the newly elected Harper government to end the Canadian Wheat Board (CWB) came with gleeful, unprecedented haste, May 2, 2011, along with the report that a majority government had been elected. With a majority, they would be able to do as they wished and nobody could stop them.
Farmers were denied a vote on CWB changes, as required in Section 47.1 of the Canadian Wheat Board Act. By the end of Nov. 2011, Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz was trumpeting the end of the CWB with the passage of Bill C-18. The CWB will cease to exist Aug. 1, 2012, in time to put the farmers' 2012 incomes in jeopardy.
The federal governments ending of the CWB was marked with undue speed and the use of every Parliamentary tool possible to advance Bill C- 18. "Time allocation or closure, was used at every stage possible to limit debate. Second reading was not done through the normal process of sending the Bill to the Standing Committee on Agriculture where witnesses could be called and amendments could be introduced," said Terry Boehm, president of the National Farmers Union, as quoted in the Union Farmer (winter 2011-2012). "Instead," said Boehm, "a Special Legislative Committee was created, which could not amend the Bill and only had 5 minutes per clause allotted to it to discuss the technical nature of the clauses." This was $5 billion of someone else's income being discussed. Why the rush? Farmers will probably find the answer if they follow the money.
The Bill, when it comes into effect, will immediately dismiss the farmer elected Board of Directors and replace them with five appointed directors. "In addition, the government is confiscating $200 million of farmers' money as well as other assets of the CWB," said Boehm. "The $200 million will mean $10,000 to $20,000 of lost income per farm in Western Canada," stated Boehm, "the money will theoretically be used to finance a new entity that does not have a single desk to market grain."
On Dec. 7, 2011, Federal Court Justice Campbell ruled, by not giving the farmers their vote, the agriculture minister had violated the law. To quote Justice Campbell, "the second and most important effect is that the Minister will be held accountable for his disregard of the law." The response of the minister and the government, both before and after the ruling, has been to the effect that they are the government and they can do as they want.
Alarm bells should be ringing, when farmers who rely on supply management for stable income, learn of what happened to the western farmers CWB. Will their marketing systems and assets be confiscated too, or traded away in a trade agreement that farmers had no say in? Canadians have been questioning our loss of democracy in past weeks.
From the above comments, I would say it's no longer a question, it's already gone.
Elma Parker
Cobourg, ON
Northumberland Today.com
Fri Mar 30 2012
Page: 4 Section: Editorial/Opinion Column: Letters to the Editor
Our bread basket is being compromised
The Harper Government should have to walk a mile in farmers' shoes before deciding to stick their nose in farmers' business. They probably don't know, or care, that before the seed goes in the ground, the farmer is already facing disasters of frosts, droughts, hail, grasshoppers, uncertain prices, high input costs, and corporate threats of losing their farms and assets, if a small amount of genetically modified seed or pollen is detected on their farm that may have blown there, unknown to the farmer.
Government members whose knowledge of grain production is probably limited to munching on a sandwich, are forcing grains to be marketed 'their' way, which will likely be of most benefit to a few corporations. That's our bread basket that's being compromised.
The announcement by the newly elected Harper government to end the Canadian Wheat Board (CWB) came with gleeful, unprecedented haste, May 2, 2011, along with the report that a majority government had been elected. With a majority, they would be able to do as they wished and nobody could stop them.
Farmers were denied a vote on CWB changes, as required in Section 47.1 of the Canadian Wheat Board Act. By the end of Nov. 2011, Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz was trumpeting the end of the CWB with the passage of Bill C-18. The CWB will cease to exist Aug. 1, 2012, in time to put the farmers' 2012 incomes in jeopardy.
The federal governments ending of the CWB was marked with undue speed and the use of every Parliamentary tool possible to advance Bill C- 18. "Time allocation or closure, was used at every stage possible to limit debate. Second reading was not done through the normal process of sending the Bill to the Standing Committee on Agriculture where witnesses could be called and amendments could be introduced," said Terry Boehm, president of the National Farmers Union, as quoted in the Union Farmer (winter 2011-2012). "Instead," said Boehm, "a Special Legislative Committee was created, which could not amend the Bill and only had 5 minutes per clause allotted to it to discuss the technical nature of the clauses." This was $5 billion of someone else's income being discussed. Why the rush? Farmers will probably find the answer if they follow the money.
The Bill, when it comes into effect, will immediately dismiss the farmer elected Board of Directors and replace them with five appointed directors. "In addition, the government is confiscating $200 million of farmers' money as well as other assets of the CWB," said Boehm. "The $200 million will mean $10,000 to $20,000 of lost income per farm in Western Canada," stated Boehm, "the money will theoretically be used to finance a new entity that does not have a single desk to market grain."
On Dec. 7, 2011, Federal Court Justice Campbell ruled, by not giving the farmers their vote, the agriculture minister had violated the law. To quote Justice Campbell, "the second and most important effect is that the Minister will be held accountable for his disregard of the law." The response of the minister and the government, both before and after the ruling, has been to the effect that they are the government and they can do as they want.
Alarm bells should be ringing, when farmers who rely on supply management for stable income, learn of what happened to the western farmers CWB. Will their marketing systems and assets be confiscated too, or traded away in a trade agreement that farmers had no say in? Canadians have been questioning our loss of democracy in past weeks.
From the above comments, I would say it's no longer a question, it's already gone.
Elma Parker
Cobourg, ON
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9102
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
Former wheat board directors appeal court ruling over future
by Oscar » Wed Apr 04, 2012 5:43 pm
Former wheat board directors appeal court ruling over future of industry
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/
former-wheat-board-directors-appeal-court-ruling-over-future-of-industry-145980985.html
By: Steve Lambert, The Canadian Press
WINNIPEG - Eight former directors of the Canadian Wheat Board fired another legal salvo Tuesday in the ongoing war over wheat and barley production in Western Canada.
The former directors announced plans to appeal a court ruling regarding the federal government's move to strip the board of its monopoly over wheat and barley sales in the four provinces. It's the latest in a string of court battles between those who say the monopoly helps keep prices high and those who say farmers deserve the right to sell to whomever they want.
"Farmers are telling us to keep fighting for our rights," Bill Toews, a farmer and former wheat board director, said in a written statement.
The federal government has already moved to strip the wheat board's six-decade-old control over western wheat and barley sales for the start of the new crop year Aug. 1. The government passed a law in December to open up sales to the free market, and changed the wheat board to a voluntary agency for producers.
The eight former directors, who were elected by producers, have continued to fight the government's move.
In December, Federal Court Justice Douglas Campbell ruled Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz violated the original Canadian Wheat Board Act, which required a plebiscite among farmers before any major changes were made.
But Campbell also made it clear that his ruling was just a statement on the government's actions. He said he would not interfere with the legislative process and did not order the government to reverse its decision.
Armed with that ruling, the former directors then asked Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench Justice Shane Perlmutter to suspend the government law until a full hearing on its validity could be held. But Perlmutter rejected the request in February, saying the directors failed to prove that they would suffer harm under the open market.
It is that decision that the directors are now appealing.
Federal Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz called the appeal "unfortunate". [ . . . ]
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/
former-wheat-board-directors-appeal-court-ruling-over-future-of-industry-145980985.html
By: Steve Lambert, The Canadian Press
WINNIPEG - Eight former directors of the Canadian Wheat Board fired another legal salvo Tuesday in the ongoing war over wheat and barley production in Western Canada.
The former directors announced plans to appeal a court ruling regarding the federal government's move to strip the board of its monopoly over wheat and barley sales in the four provinces. It's the latest in a string of court battles between those who say the monopoly helps keep prices high and those who say farmers deserve the right to sell to whomever they want.
"Farmers are telling us to keep fighting for our rights," Bill Toews, a farmer and former wheat board director, said in a written statement.
The federal government has already moved to strip the wheat board's six-decade-old control over western wheat and barley sales for the start of the new crop year Aug. 1. The government passed a law in December to open up sales to the free market, and changed the wheat board to a voluntary agency for producers.
The eight former directors, who were elected by producers, have continued to fight the government's move.
In December, Federal Court Justice Douglas Campbell ruled Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz violated the original Canadian Wheat Board Act, which required a plebiscite among farmers before any major changes were made.
But Campbell also made it clear that his ruling was just a statement on the government's actions. He said he would not interfere with the legislative process and did not order the government to reverse its decision.
Armed with that ruling, the former directors then asked Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench Justice Shane Perlmutter to suspend the government law until a full hearing on its validity could be held. But Perlmutter rejected the request in February, saying the directors failed to prove that they would suffer harm under the open market.
It is that decision that the directors are now appealing.
Federal Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz called the appeal "unfortunate". [ . . . ]
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9102
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
August 1, 2012 Marks a Year of Infamy in Agricultural Policy
by Oscar » Wed Jul 25, 2012 6:47 pm
August 1, 2012 Marks a Year of Infamy in Agricultural Policy With the Destruction of the CWB Single Desk
July 25, 2012 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
SASKATOON, SK—Today, Bill Gehl, Chair of the Canadian Wheat Board Alliance, and Terry Boehm, President of the National Farmers Union, are in Saskatoon to speak to the media about a year of infamy in Canadian agricultural policy and for Canadian democracy.
“Since the Harper government took office with a majority government in May of 2011, we have seen unprecedented attacks on farmers and democratic process with the destruction of the CWB as the goal,” said Terry Boehm, NFU President. “In spite of knowing full well that the majority of farmers wanted and understood the advantages that single-desk selling brings them and ultimately to the whole economy, Gerry Ritz and Stephen Harper rammed through Bill C-18, destroying the single-desk CWB this August 1st,” stated Bill Gehl. “All farmers expected to be able to vote on this issue, and Ritz and Harper denied them this right stated in Section 47.1 of the old CWB Act," he added.
“Farmers, as well as all Canadians, have seen Gerry Ritz and Stephen Harper use every tactic in the book to ram through Bill C-18 including using closure, not allowing any amendments, and not allowing the Bill to go to the Agriculture Committee but creating a special Legislative Committee to rubber-stamp this Bill, which is one of the most fundamental changes to agricultural policy in three generations. It is bad public policy, bad economic policy, and offensive to how Canadians believe democratic process should be conducted,” added Boehm. “Farmers have seen before what happens when the single desk is gone - right after the First World War and with the removal of oats several years ago, and prices and returns always drop except in periods of extreme shortages,” he added.
“August 1, 2012 will be a sad day for farmers and one of jubilation for multinational grain companies, and we can thank Gerry Ritz for that,” declared Gehl. “Farmers know that democracy and their economic well-being are in peril with this government but they also know that Harper will not be in power forever and we will fight in the courts and start rebuilding another day,” stated Boehm. “Meanwhile, the year full of dirty tricks will be remembered as a betrayal and sellout of western farmers,” concluded Boehm. - 30 -
For more information, contact:
Terry Boehm, NFU President (306) 255-2880
Bill Gehl, Chair, CWB Alliance (306) 543-5090
Cathy Holtslander, NFU Director of Research & Policy (306) 652-9465
Ed Sagan, NFU Region 6 (Sask.) Coordinator (306) 728-3760 or (306) 728-9050
Glenn Tait, NFU Region 6 (Sask.) Board Member (306) 892-4342 or (306) 481-4449
Doug Scott, NFU Region 7 (Alta.) Board Member (780) 358-2376 or (780) 650-1336
Ian Robson, NFU Region 5 (Man.) Coordinator (204) 858-2479
Darrell Stokes, Treasurer, CWB Alliance (403) 787-3776
Ken Larsen, NFU Member (Alta.) (403) 746-5792
July 25, 2012 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
SASKATOON, SK—Today, Bill Gehl, Chair of the Canadian Wheat Board Alliance, and Terry Boehm, President of the National Farmers Union, are in Saskatoon to speak to the media about a year of infamy in Canadian agricultural policy and for Canadian democracy.
“Since the Harper government took office with a majority government in May of 2011, we have seen unprecedented attacks on farmers and democratic process with the destruction of the CWB as the goal,” said Terry Boehm, NFU President. “In spite of knowing full well that the majority of farmers wanted and understood the advantages that single-desk selling brings them and ultimately to the whole economy, Gerry Ritz and Stephen Harper rammed through Bill C-18, destroying the single-desk CWB this August 1st,” stated Bill Gehl. “All farmers expected to be able to vote on this issue, and Ritz and Harper denied them this right stated in Section 47.1 of the old CWB Act," he added.
“Farmers, as well as all Canadians, have seen Gerry Ritz and Stephen Harper use every tactic in the book to ram through Bill C-18 including using closure, not allowing any amendments, and not allowing the Bill to go to the Agriculture Committee but creating a special Legislative Committee to rubber-stamp this Bill, which is one of the most fundamental changes to agricultural policy in three generations. It is bad public policy, bad economic policy, and offensive to how Canadians believe democratic process should be conducted,” added Boehm. “Farmers have seen before what happens when the single desk is gone - right after the First World War and with the removal of oats several years ago, and prices and returns always drop except in periods of extreme shortages,” he added.
“August 1, 2012 will be a sad day for farmers and one of jubilation for multinational grain companies, and we can thank Gerry Ritz for that,” declared Gehl. “Farmers know that democracy and their economic well-being are in peril with this government but they also know that Harper will not be in power forever and we will fight in the courts and start rebuilding another day,” stated Boehm. “Meanwhile, the year full of dirty tricks will be remembered as a betrayal and sellout of western farmers,” concluded Boehm. - 30 -
For more information, contact:
Terry Boehm, NFU President (306) 255-2880
Bill Gehl, Chair, CWB Alliance (306) 543-5090
Cathy Holtslander, NFU Director of Research & Policy (306) 652-9465
Ed Sagan, NFU Region 6 (Sask.) Coordinator (306) 728-3760 or (306) 728-9050
Glenn Tait, NFU Region 6 (Sask.) Board Member (306) 892-4342 or (306) 481-4449
Doug Scott, NFU Region 7 (Alta.) Board Member (780) 358-2376 or (780) 650-1336
Ian Robson, NFU Region 5 (Man.) Coordinator (204) 858-2479
Darrell Stokes, Treasurer, CWB Alliance (403) 787-3776
Ken Larsen, NFU Member (Alta.) (403) 746-5792
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9102
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
How to celebrate the death of the family farm . . .
by Oscar » Thu Aug 02, 2012 9:04 am
QUOTE: "“Degrading democracy, misleading Parliament, and transferring wealth and influence away from farmers add up to a very dark day for Canada and Canadians,” concluded Wells. “Sure, Stephen Harper can hold a celebratory event at Kindersley, but he has to do it under tight security at an event that is not open to the public.”" - Harper Transfers Wealth and Influence Away from Farmers
http://friendsofcwb.ca/news/news-releases/
105-harper-transfers (...article below)
= = = = = = = =
VOTE NOW!!! - scroll down to Poll . . .
- - - - - -
Harper pardons farmers arrested under old wheat board law
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/08/01/
pol-wheat-board-monopoly-over.html?ref=fh,www.mymanitoba.com
Prime Minister Stephen Harper in Saskatchewan to celebrate end of Canadian Wheat Board monopoly
By Laura Payton, CBC News Posted: Aug 1, 2012 2:06 PM ET Last Updated: Aug 2, 2012 9:23 AM ET
Read 939 comments 939
Related Stories (Links are on original webpage)
Canadian Wheat Board monopoly nears its end
Federal appeal court quashes wheat board ruling
Feds put up $349M to help wheat board in open market
Cargill strikes deal with revamped wheat board
Farmers launch wheat board class action
= = = = = = =
The Day the Wheat Board Died
http://www.socialistproject.ca/bullet/671.php
Gavin Fridell
A Socialist Project e-bulletin .... No. 671 .... July 27, 2012
On August 1, 2012, the Conservative government will bring an end to a major Canadian institution and one of the world's largest, longest-standing, and most successful "state trading enterprises." After 70 years as the state-mandated monopoly seller of most Western Canadian wheat, the Canadian Wheat Board will officially become "voluntary," meaning the death of anything resembling what it has been.
The board has been widely praised and defended by many grain farmers and progressive supporters, as well as relentlessly attacked, even despised, by others. In the end, those opposed to the Board, although highly vocal and backed by powerful corporate interests, would appear to be in the minority. This minority, however, has won the day. The Canadian Conservative government of Stephen Harper legislated the end of the board in December 2011 without holding a vote among prairie grain farmers even though it is required by the Canadian Wheat Board Act. Despite a recent Wheat Board plebiscite in which the majority of farmers voted in favour of maintaining the Board's status, and despite a Federal court ruling at the end of 2011 that determined the government's actions were illegal, the Conservatives have continued unabated in their moves to dismantle the Board, with Harper arguing that when western farmers voted Conservative in the last election (which the majority did) they voted for "marketing freedom."
The government has appealed the court ruling and by the time the issue is cleared up, the Board as it has been known will be long gone. Friends of the Canadian Wheat Board, a coalition of Canadian farmer groups, including the National Farmers Union (a founding member of La Via Campesina, an international peasant movement opposed to corporate control of the global food system) have taken a lead role in the class action suit against the government and are now seeking billions of dollars in compensation for prairie farmers rather than the return of the Board.
MORE:
http://www.socialistproject.ca/bullet/671.php
Share on Facebook
= = = = = =
Stephen Harper celebrates end to wheat board monopoly
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatche ... 012/08/01/
pol-wheat-board-monopoly-over.html
Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party are going all out to celebrate the end to the Canadian Wheat Board's monopoly, as poor crops in the rest of the world will likely lead to higher prices for Canadian grain.
Harper and Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz will be at a farm just outside Kindersley, Sask., around 2:30 p.m. ET Monday to mark the first official day in which prairie wheat and barley farmers can sell their products to whomever they choose. [ . . . ]
= = = = = =
New wheat board opens: Protesters lament loss of its monopoly
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/
new-wheat-board-opens-164551016.html
"Citizens need to take (the board) back, people need to take it back and recognize their role to speak out," said Dean Harder, the protest's organizer and a farmer from Lowe Farm, about 85 kilometres south of Winnipeg. "We want to explain what the decision means and make it clearer to citizens."
Click on the link for a video as well.
= = = = = =
Harper Transfers Wealth and Influence Away from Farmers
http://friendsofcwb.ca/news/news-releas ... -transfers
(Swift Current – August 1, 2012) “By destroying the world’s largest marketer of wheat and barley, Stephen Harper has transferred a tremendous amount of wealth and influence away from farmers,” says Stewart Wells, Chair of Friends of the Canadian Wheat Board (FCWB).
“Harper and Ritz have effectively erected barriers manned by the private trade between western farmers and our former customers,” added Wells who was a farmer elected Director to the old Canadian Wheat Board and was dismissed by Minister Ritz over the objections of farmers.
“There is no longer any meaningful influence by farmers inside the grain trade. Building on 65 years of expertise, the farmer-controlled CWB created in 1998 was a strong advocate for farmers on all of the questions of the day. Whether it was railway revenue caps, the need for a railway costing review, producer cars, equitable access, Canadian Grain Commission issues, the introduction of genetically modified wheat, or a host of other issues, the farmer-controlled CWB had the resources to be a strong voice for farmers,” continued Wells.
Bill Gehl, Vice-Chair of the FCWB, added that it was the farmer-controlled Wheat Board that respected consumer wishes and opposed the introduction of genetically modified wheat into Canada. “We are already hearing calls from the United States to lower Canadian quality standards to their level and I expect there will soon be another push to introduce
genetically modified wheat here as well. We have lost all our market power and influence in the international grain trade, and Harper’s crippled Wheat Board will soon have no credibility with either farmers or our international customers.”
“In its haste to kill the CWB, the Harper government also degraded basic democracy in Canada, first by refusing to let farmers vote on this important issue, and secondly by short-circuiting Parliamentary procedures in the fall of 2011 in order to pass Bill C-18 without proper scrutiny. The only reason that the government refused to let farmers vote is that the government knew the majority of farmers supported the single desk selling advantages of the CWB,” continued Gehl.
Just six months ago the government was telling farmers that the voluntary Board would always be there for them. On July 31, 2012, the Minister of Agriculture was openly talking about selling the new Board outright.
“Degrading democracy, misleading Parliament, and transferring wealth and influence away from farmers add up to a very dark day for Canada and Canadians,” concluded Wells. “Sure, Stephen Harper can hold a celebratory event at Kindersley, but he has to do it under tight security at an event that is not open to the public.” --30--
For further information:
Stewart Wells: (306) 741-7694 or 306-773-6852
Bill Gehl: (306) 537-3899
= = = = = = = =
Suitors eyeing CWB but too soon for takeover -Canada ag minister
http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/07/31/
canada-wheatboard-takeover-idINL2E8IVEFE20120731
Wed Aug 1, 2012 12:37am IST By Rod Nickel
* CWB was one of biggest wheat traders, loses monopoly
* Prized for global marketing contacts
WINNIPEG, Manitoba, July 31 (Reuters) - Canadian Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz said on Tuesday he is aware of interest from "a couple of entities" in taking over the CWB, just as the company previously known as the Canadian Wheat Board tries to survive without its long-held grain monopoly.
"We've already had a couple of entities come forward saying they would love to buy up the CWB already," Ritz said at a news conference to mark the last day of the CWB's 69-year-old grain marketing monopoly in Western Canada. "They have a tremendous Rolodex of marketing (contacts) around the world and (prospective buyers) wanted to capture that."
But Ritz said it is too soon to consider a takeover of the CWB, which will give up its marketing monopoly on the region's wheat and barley sales for export or human consumption on Wednesday, under Canadian law.
"We're not prepared to entertain that takeover that quickly."
He did not say if the suitors approached the Canadian government, which controls the CWB, or the CWB itself.
The CWB does not own any grain storage or transportation assets, however, it has long been one of the world's biggest wheat traders. In 2011/12, the last year of its government-granted monopoly, CWB exported 18.1 million tonnes of wheat and barley combined.
Earlier on Tuesday, CWB's Chief Executive Ian White said the company sees a bright future but did not offer details of its plans or suggest there was takeover interest.
A sale of the Winnipeg-based CWB would mirror the fate of the former Australian Wheat Board, which gave up its wheat monopoly in 2008 and was later bought by Cargill Inc. [ . . . ]
= = = = = =
Ex-CWB Director Discusses Supreme Court Appeal
http://www.portageonline.com/
index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=28115&Itemid=35
Written by Colin Powers/Kelvin Heppner Monday, 30 July 2012 05:06
Just days before the end of the Canadian Wheat Board's single desk, eight former farmer-elected CWB directors and the Friends of the CWB have announced they plan to take their case against federal Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz to the Supreme Court of Canada.
The group alleges Ritz broke the law when introducing legislation stripping the board of its single desk monopoly on grain sales without holding a binding producer plebiscite. A Federal Court judge ruled in their favour in December, but that decision was overturned by the Federal Court of Appeal last month.
"The question really is 'does the government have the divine right of kings, or does the government have to follow the laws of the country and respect the rulings of the Federal Court just like everyone else does?'" says spokesperson and former CWB director Stewart Wells.
"We decided it wouldn't be appropriate just to leave the process where it is here now, with one strong ruling from the Federal Court being overturned by the Federal Court of Appeal," he says.
It remains to be seen whether the Supreme Court will take the case. [ . . . ]
= = = = = = =
'The man who killed the family farm'
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/
the-man-who-killed-the-family-farm-140405813.html?device=mobile
Roving rural columnist finds Harper's decision to dismantle the wheat board goes against the grain for many Manitoba farmers
By: Bill Redekop 02/25/2012 1:00 AM
GILBERT PLAINS -- Clare McBride has already lost her Irish accent, even though her farming family just emigrated from the Emerald Isle in 1998. Except when she gets angry.When asked what she thinks of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's decision not to let farmers vote on the future of the Canadian Wheat Board, her eyes dilate, her nostrils flare and that clipped, Irish tongue returns in all its glory.
"Stephen Harper's taking something that doesn't belong to him. It belongs to farmers," she fires back."It's like he sees a car and goes, 'That's a nice car. I'll just take it.' It's not his."
That feeling of betrayal is being expressed by farmers across the prairies over the Harper government's decision to dismantle the 69-year-old wheat board without allowing farmers a vote.
A recent poll found 62 per cent of farmers favoured keeping the wheat board's monopoly on wheat sales.
I hear the word "dictator" again and again, from farm to farm, as I travel this staunchly pro-wheat board region around Dauphin and to the south of Riding Mountain National Park. [ . . . ]
http://friendsofcwb.ca/news/news-releases/
105-harper-transfers (...article below)
= = = = = = = =
VOTE NOW!!! - scroll down to Poll . . .
- - - - - -
Harper pardons farmers arrested under old wheat board law
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/08/01/
pol-wheat-board-monopoly-over.html?ref=fh,www.mymanitoba.com
Prime Minister Stephen Harper in Saskatchewan to celebrate end of Canadian Wheat Board monopoly
By Laura Payton, CBC News Posted: Aug 1, 2012 2:06 PM ET Last Updated: Aug 2, 2012 9:23 AM ET
Read 939 comments 939
Related Stories (Links are on original webpage)
Canadian Wheat Board monopoly nears its end
Federal appeal court quashes wheat board ruling
Feds put up $349M to help wheat board in open market
Cargill strikes deal with revamped wheat board
Farmers launch wheat board class action
= = = = = = =
The Day the Wheat Board Died
http://www.socialistproject.ca/bullet/671.php
Gavin Fridell
A Socialist Project e-bulletin .... No. 671 .... July 27, 2012
On August 1, 2012, the Conservative government will bring an end to a major Canadian institution and one of the world's largest, longest-standing, and most successful "state trading enterprises." After 70 years as the state-mandated monopoly seller of most Western Canadian wheat, the Canadian Wheat Board will officially become "voluntary," meaning the death of anything resembling what it has been.
The board has been widely praised and defended by many grain farmers and progressive supporters, as well as relentlessly attacked, even despised, by others. In the end, those opposed to the Board, although highly vocal and backed by powerful corporate interests, would appear to be in the minority. This minority, however, has won the day. The Canadian Conservative government of Stephen Harper legislated the end of the board in December 2011 without holding a vote among prairie grain farmers even though it is required by the Canadian Wheat Board Act. Despite a recent Wheat Board plebiscite in which the majority of farmers voted in favour of maintaining the Board's status, and despite a Federal court ruling at the end of 2011 that determined the government's actions were illegal, the Conservatives have continued unabated in their moves to dismantle the Board, with Harper arguing that when western farmers voted Conservative in the last election (which the majority did) they voted for "marketing freedom."
The government has appealed the court ruling and by the time the issue is cleared up, the Board as it has been known will be long gone. Friends of the Canadian Wheat Board, a coalition of Canadian farmer groups, including the National Farmers Union (a founding member of La Via Campesina, an international peasant movement opposed to corporate control of the global food system) have taken a lead role in the class action suit against the government and are now seeking billions of dollars in compensation for prairie farmers rather than the return of the Board.
MORE:
http://www.socialistproject.ca/bullet/671.php
Share on Facebook
= = = = = =
Stephen Harper celebrates end to wheat board monopoly
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatche ... 012/08/01/
pol-wheat-board-monopoly-over.html
Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party are going all out to celebrate the end to the Canadian Wheat Board's monopoly, as poor crops in the rest of the world will likely lead to higher prices for Canadian grain.
Harper and Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz will be at a farm just outside Kindersley, Sask., around 2:30 p.m. ET Monday to mark the first official day in which prairie wheat and barley farmers can sell their products to whomever they choose. [ . . . ]
= = = = = =
New wheat board opens: Protesters lament loss of its monopoly
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/
new-wheat-board-opens-164551016.html
"Citizens need to take (the board) back, people need to take it back and recognize their role to speak out," said Dean Harder, the protest's organizer and a farmer from Lowe Farm, about 85 kilometres south of Winnipeg. "We want to explain what the decision means and make it clearer to citizens."
Click on the link for a video as well.
= = = = = =
Harper Transfers Wealth and Influence Away from Farmers
http://friendsofcwb.ca/news/news-releas ... -transfers
(Swift Current – August 1, 2012) “By destroying the world’s largest marketer of wheat and barley, Stephen Harper has transferred a tremendous amount of wealth and influence away from farmers,” says Stewart Wells, Chair of Friends of the Canadian Wheat Board (FCWB).
“Harper and Ritz have effectively erected barriers manned by the private trade between western farmers and our former customers,” added Wells who was a farmer elected Director to the old Canadian Wheat Board and was dismissed by Minister Ritz over the objections of farmers.
“There is no longer any meaningful influence by farmers inside the grain trade. Building on 65 years of expertise, the farmer-controlled CWB created in 1998 was a strong advocate for farmers on all of the questions of the day. Whether it was railway revenue caps, the need for a railway costing review, producer cars, equitable access, Canadian Grain Commission issues, the introduction of genetically modified wheat, or a host of other issues, the farmer-controlled CWB had the resources to be a strong voice for farmers,” continued Wells.
Bill Gehl, Vice-Chair of the FCWB, added that it was the farmer-controlled Wheat Board that respected consumer wishes and opposed the introduction of genetically modified wheat into Canada. “We are already hearing calls from the United States to lower Canadian quality standards to their level and I expect there will soon be another push to introduce
genetically modified wheat here as well. We have lost all our market power and influence in the international grain trade, and Harper’s crippled Wheat Board will soon have no credibility with either farmers or our international customers.”
“In its haste to kill the CWB, the Harper government also degraded basic democracy in Canada, first by refusing to let farmers vote on this important issue, and secondly by short-circuiting Parliamentary procedures in the fall of 2011 in order to pass Bill C-18 without proper scrutiny. The only reason that the government refused to let farmers vote is that the government knew the majority of farmers supported the single desk selling advantages of the CWB,” continued Gehl.
Just six months ago the government was telling farmers that the voluntary Board would always be there for them. On July 31, 2012, the Minister of Agriculture was openly talking about selling the new Board outright.
“Degrading democracy, misleading Parliament, and transferring wealth and influence away from farmers add up to a very dark day for Canada and Canadians,” concluded Wells. “Sure, Stephen Harper can hold a celebratory event at Kindersley, but he has to do it under tight security at an event that is not open to the public.” --30--
For further information:
Stewart Wells: (306) 741-7694 or 306-773-6852
Bill Gehl: (306) 537-3899
= = = = = = = =
Suitors eyeing CWB but too soon for takeover -Canada ag minister
http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/07/31/
canada-wheatboard-takeover-idINL2E8IVEFE20120731
Wed Aug 1, 2012 12:37am IST By Rod Nickel
* CWB was one of biggest wheat traders, loses monopoly
* Prized for global marketing contacts
WINNIPEG, Manitoba, July 31 (Reuters) - Canadian Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz said on Tuesday he is aware of interest from "a couple of entities" in taking over the CWB, just as the company previously known as the Canadian Wheat Board tries to survive without its long-held grain monopoly.
"We've already had a couple of entities come forward saying they would love to buy up the CWB already," Ritz said at a news conference to mark the last day of the CWB's 69-year-old grain marketing monopoly in Western Canada. "They have a tremendous Rolodex of marketing (contacts) around the world and (prospective buyers) wanted to capture that."
But Ritz said it is too soon to consider a takeover of the CWB, which will give up its marketing monopoly on the region's wheat and barley sales for export or human consumption on Wednesday, under Canadian law.
"We're not prepared to entertain that takeover that quickly."
He did not say if the suitors approached the Canadian government, which controls the CWB, or the CWB itself.
The CWB does not own any grain storage or transportation assets, however, it has long been one of the world's biggest wheat traders. In 2011/12, the last year of its government-granted monopoly, CWB exported 18.1 million tonnes of wheat and barley combined.
Earlier on Tuesday, CWB's Chief Executive Ian White said the company sees a bright future but did not offer details of its plans or suggest there was takeover interest.
A sale of the Winnipeg-based CWB would mirror the fate of the former Australian Wheat Board, which gave up its wheat monopoly in 2008 and was later bought by Cargill Inc. [ . . . ]
= = = = = =
Ex-CWB Director Discusses Supreme Court Appeal
http://www.portageonline.com/
index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=28115&Itemid=35
Written by Colin Powers/Kelvin Heppner Monday, 30 July 2012 05:06
Just days before the end of the Canadian Wheat Board's single desk, eight former farmer-elected CWB directors and the Friends of the CWB have announced they plan to take their case against federal Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz to the Supreme Court of Canada.
The group alleges Ritz broke the law when introducing legislation stripping the board of its single desk monopoly on grain sales without holding a binding producer plebiscite. A Federal Court judge ruled in their favour in December, but that decision was overturned by the Federal Court of Appeal last month.
"The question really is 'does the government have the divine right of kings, or does the government have to follow the laws of the country and respect the rulings of the Federal Court just like everyone else does?'" says spokesperson and former CWB director Stewart Wells.
"We decided it wouldn't be appropriate just to leave the process where it is here now, with one strong ruling from the Federal Court being overturned by the Federal Court of Appeal," he says.
It remains to be seen whether the Supreme Court will take the case. [ . . . ]
= = = = = = =
'The man who killed the family farm'
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/
the-man-who-killed-the-family-farm-140405813.html?device=mobile
Roving rural columnist finds Harper's decision to dismantle the wheat board goes against the grain for many Manitoba farmers
By: Bill Redekop 02/25/2012 1:00 AM
GILBERT PLAINS -- Clare McBride has already lost her Irish accent, even though her farming family just emigrated from the Emerald Isle in 1998. Except when she gets angry.When asked what she thinks of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's decision not to let farmers vote on the future of the Canadian Wheat Board, her eyes dilate, her nostrils flare and that clipped, Irish tongue returns in all its glory.
"Stephen Harper's taking something that doesn't belong to him. It belongs to farmers," she fires back."It's like he sees a car and goes, 'That's a nice car. I'll just take it.' It's not his."
That feeling of betrayal is being expressed by farmers across the prairies over the Harper government's decision to dismantle the 69-year-old wheat board without allowing farmers a vote.
A recent poll found 62 per cent of farmers favoured keeping the wheat board's monopoly on wheat sales.
I hear the word "dictator" again and again, from farm to farm, as I travel this staunchly pro-wheat board region around Dauphin and to the south of Riding Mountain National Park. [ . . . ]
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9102
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
How to celebrate the death of the family farm . . .
by Oscar » Thu Aug 02, 2012 9:16 am
QUOTE: "“Degrading democracy, misleading Parliament, and transferring wealth and influence away from farmers add up to a very dark day for Canada and Canadians,” concluded Wells. “Sure, Stephen Harper can hold a celebratory event at Kindersley, but he has to do it under tight security at an event that is not open to the public.”" - Harper Transfers Wealth and Influence Away from Farmers
http://friendsofcwb.ca/news/news-releases/
105-harper-transfers (...article below)
= = = = = = = =
VOTE NOW!!! - scroll down to Poll . . .
- - - - - -
Harper pardons farmers arrested under old wheat board law
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/08/01/
pol-wheat-board-monopoly-over.html?ref=fh,www.mymanitoba.com
Prime Minister Stephen Harper in Saskatchewan to celebrate end of Canadian Wheat Board monopoly
By Laura Payton, CBC News Posted: Aug 1, 2012 2:06 PM ET Last Updated: Aug 2, 2012 9:23 AM ET
Read 939 comments 939
Related Stories (Links are on original webpage)
Canadian Wheat Board monopoly nears its end
Federal appeal court quashes wheat board ruling
Feds put up $349M to help wheat board in open market
Cargill strikes deal with revamped wheat board
Farmers launch wheat board class action
= = = = = = =
The Day the Wheat Board Died
http://www.socialistproject.ca/bullet/671.php
Gavin Fridell
A Socialist Project e-bulletin .... No. 671 .... July 27, 2012
On August 1, 2012, the Conservative government will bring an end to a major Canadian institution and one of the world's largest, longest-standing, and most successful "state trading enterprises." After 70 years as the state-mandated monopoly seller of most Western Canadian wheat, the Canadian Wheat Board will officially become "voluntary," meaning the death of anything resembling what it has been.
The board has been widely praised and defended by many grain farmers and progressive supporters, as well as relentlessly attacked, even despised, by others. In the end, those opposed to the Board, although highly vocal and backed by powerful corporate interests, would appear to be in the minority. This minority, however, has won the day. The Canadian Conservative government of Stephen Harper legislated the end of the board in December 2011 without holding a vote among prairie grain farmers even though it is required by the Canadian Wheat Board Act. Despite a recent Wheat Board plebiscite in which the majority of farmers voted in favour of maintaining the Board's status, and despite a Federal court ruling at the end of 2011 that determined the government's actions were illegal, the Conservatives have continued unabated in their moves to dismantle the Board, with Harper arguing that when western farmers voted Conservative in the last election (which the majority did) they voted for "marketing freedom."
The government has appealed the court ruling and by the time the issue is cleared up, the Board as it has been known will be long gone. Friends of the Canadian Wheat Board, a coalition of Canadian farmer groups, including the National Farmers Union (a founding member of La Via Campesina, an international peasant movement opposed to corporate control of the global food system) have taken a lead role in the class action suit against the government and are now seeking billions of dollars in compensation for prairie farmers rather than the return of the Board.
MORE:
http://www.socialistproject.ca/bullet/671.php
Share on Facebook
= = = = = =
Stephen Harper celebrates end to wheat board monopoly
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatche ... 012/08/01/
pol-wheat-board-monopoly-over.html
Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party are going all out to celebrate the end to the Canadian Wheat Board's monopoly, as poor crops in the rest of the world will likely lead to higher prices for Canadian grain.
Harper and Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz will be at a farm just outside Kindersley, Sask., around 2:30 p.m. ET Monday to mark the first official day in which prairie wheat and barley farmers can sell their products to whomever they choose. [ . . . ]
= = = = = =
New wheat board opens: Protesters lament loss of its monopoly
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/
new-wheat-board-opens-164551016.html
"Citizens need to take (the board) back, people need to take it back and recognize their role to speak out," said Dean Harder, the protest's organizer and a farmer from Lowe Farm, about 85 kilometres south of Winnipeg. "We want to explain what the decision means and make it clearer to citizens."
Click on the link for a video as well.
= = = = = =
Harper Transfers Wealth and Influence Away from Farmers
http://friendsofcwb.ca/news/news-releas ... -transfers
(Swift Current – August 1, 2012) “By destroying the world’s largest marketer of wheat and barley, Stephen Harper has transferred a tremendous amount of wealth and influence away from farmers,” says Stewart Wells, Chair of Friends of the Canadian Wheat Board (FCWB).
“Harper and Ritz have effectively erected barriers manned by the private trade between western farmers and our former customers,” added Wells who was a farmer elected Director to the old Canadian Wheat Board and was dismissed by Minister Ritz over the objections of farmers.
“There is no longer any meaningful influence by farmers inside the grain trade. Building on 65 years of expertise, the farmer-controlled CWB created in 1998 was a strong advocate for farmers on all of the questions of the day. Whether it was railway revenue caps, the need for a railway costing review, producer cars, equitable access, Canadian Grain Commission issues, the introduction of genetically modified wheat, or a host of other issues, the farmer-controlled CWB had the resources to be a strong voice for farmers,” continued Wells.
Bill Gehl, Vice-Chair of the FCWB, added that it was the farmer-controlled Wheat Board that respected consumer wishes and opposed the introduction of genetically modified wheat into Canada. “We are already hearing calls from the United States to lower Canadian quality standards to their level and I expect there will soon be another push to introduce
genetically modified wheat here as well. We have lost all our market power and influence in the international grain trade, and Harper’s crippled Wheat Board will soon have no credibility with either farmers or our international customers.”
“In its haste to kill the CWB, the Harper government also degraded basic democracy in Canada, first by refusing to let farmers vote on this important issue, and secondly by short-circuiting Parliamentary procedures in the fall of 2011 in order to pass Bill C-18 without proper scrutiny. The only reason that the government refused to let farmers vote is that the government knew the majority of farmers supported the single desk selling advantages of the CWB,” continued Gehl.
Just six months ago the government was telling farmers that the voluntary Board would always be there for them. On July 31, 2012, the Minister of Agriculture was openly talking about selling the new Board outright.
“Degrading democracy, misleading Parliament, and transferring wealth and influence away from farmers add up to a very dark day for Canada and Canadians,” concluded Wells. “Sure, Stephen Harper can hold a celebratory event at Kindersley, but he has to do it under tight security at an event that is not open to the public.” --30--
For further information:
Stewart Wells: (306) 741-7694 or 306-773-6852
Bill Gehl: (306) 537-3899
= = = = = = = =
Suitors eyeing CWB but too soon for takeover -Canada ag minister
http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/07/31/
canada-wheatboard-takeover-idINL2E8IVEFE20120731
Wed Aug 1, 2012 12:37am IST By Rod Nickel
* CWB was one of biggest wheat traders, loses monopoly
* Prized for global marketing contacts
WINNIPEG, Manitoba, July 31 (Reuters) - Canadian Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz said on Tuesday he is aware of interest from "a couple of entities" in taking over the CWB, just as the company previously known as the Canadian Wheat Board tries to survive without its long-held grain monopoly.
"We've already had a couple of entities come forward saying they would love to buy up the CWB already," Ritz said at a news conference to mark the last day of the CWB's 69-year-old grain marketing monopoly in Western Canada. "They have a tremendous Rolodex of marketing (contacts) around the world and (prospective buyers) wanted to capture that."
But Ritz said it is too soon to consider a takeover of the CWB, which will give up its marketing monopoly on the region's wheat and barley sales for export or human consumption on Wednesday, under Canadian law.
"We're not prepared to entertain that takeover that quickly."
He did not say if the suitors approached the Canadian government, which controls the CWB, or the CWB itself.
The CWB does not own any grain storage or transportation assets, however, it has long been one of the world's biggest wheat traders. In 2011/12, the last year of its government-granted monopoly, CWB exported 18.1 million tonnes of wheat and barley combined.
Earlier on Tuesday, CWB's Chief Executive Ian White said the company sees a bright future but did not offer details of its plans or suggest there was takeover interest.
A sale of the Winnipeg-based CWB would mirror the fate of the former Australian Wheat Board, which gave up its wheat monopoly in 2008 and was later bought by Cargill Inc. [ . . . ]
= = = = = =
Ex-CWB Director Discusses Supreme Court Appeal
http://www.portageonline.com/
index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=28115&Itemid=35
Written by Colin Powers/Kelvin Heppner Monday, 30 July 2012 05:06
Just days before the end of the Canadian Wheat Board's single desk, eight former farmer-elected CWB directors and the Friends of the CWB have announced they plan to take their case against federal Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz to the Supreme Court of Canada.
The group alleges Ritz broke the law when introducing legislation stripping the board of its single desk monopoly on grain sales without holding a binding producer plebiscite. A Federal Court judge ruled in their favour in December, but that decision was overturned by the Federal Court of Appeal last month.
"The question really is 'does the government have the divine right of kings, or does the government have to follow the laws of the country and respect the rulings of the Federal Court just like everyone else does?'" says spokesperson and former CWB director Stewart Wells.
"We decided it wouldn't be appropriate just to leave the process where it is here now, with one strong ruling from the Federal Court being overturned by the Federal Court of Appeal," he says.
It remains to be seen whether the Supreme Court will take the case. [ . . . ]
= = = = = = =
'The man who killed the family farm'
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/
the-man-who-killed-the-family-farm-140405813.html?device=mobile
Roving rural columnist finds Harper's decision to dismantle the wheat board goes against the grain for many Manitoba farmers
By: Bill Redekop 02/25/2012 1:00 AM
GILBERT PLAINS -- Clare McBride has already lost her Irish accent, even though her farming family just emigrated from the Emerald Isle in 1998. Except when she gets angry.When asked what she thinks of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's decision not to let farmers vote on the future of the Canadian Wheat Board, her eyes dilate, her nostrils flare and that clipped, Irish tongue returns in all its glory.
"Stephen Harper's taking something that doesn't belong to him. It belongs to farmers," she fires back."It's like he sees a car and goes, 'That's a nice car. I'll just take it.' It's not his."
That feeling of betrayal is being expressed by farmers across the prairies over the Harper government's decision to dismantle the 69-year-old wheat board without allowing farmers a vote.
A recent poll found 62 per cent of farmers favoured keeping the wheat board's monopoly on wheat sales.
I hear the word "dictator" again and again, from farm to farm, as I travel this staunchly pro-wheat board region around Dauphin and to the south of Riding Mountain National Park. [ . . . ]
http://friendsofcwb.ca/news/news-releases/
105-harper-transfers (...article below)
= = = = = = = =
VOTE NOW!!! - scroll down to Poll . . .
- - - - - -
Harper pardons farmers arrested under old wheat board law
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/08/01/
pol-wheat-board-monopoly-over.html?ref=fh,www.mymanitoba.com
Prime Minister Stephen Harper in Saskatchewan to celebrate end of Canadian Wheat Board monopoly
By Laura Payton, CBC News Posted: Aug 1, 2012 2:06 PM ET Last Updated: Aug 2, 2012 9:23 AM ET
Read 939 comments 939
Related Stories (Links are on original webpage)
Canadian Wheat Board monopoly nears its end
Federal appeal court quashes wheat board ruling
Feds put up $349M to help wheat board in open market
Cargill strikes deal with revamped wheat board
Farmers launch wheat board class action
= = = = = = =
The Day the Wheat Board Died
http://www.socialistproject.ca/bullet/671.php
Gavin Fridell
A Socialist Project e-bulletin .... No. 671 .... July 27, 2012
On August 1, 2012, the Conservative government will bring an end to a major Canadian institution and one of the world's largest, longest-standing, and most successful "state trading enterprises." After 70 years as the state-mandated monopoly seller of most Western Canadian wheat, the Canadian Wheat Board will officially become "voluntary," meaning the death of anything resembling what it has been.
The board has been widely praised and defended by many grain farmers and progressive supporters, as well as relentlessly attacked, even despised, by others. In the end, those opposed to the Board, although highly vocal and backed by powerful corporate interests, would appear to be in the minority. This minority, however, has won the day. The Canadian Conservative government of Stephen Harper legislated the end of the board in December 2011 without holding a vote among prairie grain farmers even though it is required by the Canadian Wheat Board Act. Despite a recent Wheat Board plebiscite in which the majority of farmers voted in favour of maintaining the Board's status, and despite a Federal court ruling at the end of 2011 that determined the government's actions were illegal, the Conservatives have continued unabated in their moves to dismantle the Board, with Harper arguing that when western farmers voted Conservative in the last election (which the majority did) they voted for "marketing freedom."
The government has appealed the court ruling and by the time the issue is cleared up, the Board as it has been known will be long gone. Friends of the Canadian Wheat Board, a coalition of Canadian farmer groups, including the National Farmers Union (a founding member of La Via Campesina, an international peasant movement opposed to corporate control of the global food system) have taken a lead role in the class action suit against the government and are now seeking billions of dollars in compensation for prairie farmers rather than the return of the Board.
MORE:
http://www.socialistproject.ca/bullet/671.php
Share on Facebook
= = = = = =
Stephen Harper celebrates end to wheat board monopoly
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatche ... 012/08/01/
pol-wheat-board-monopoly-over.html
Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party are going all out to celebrate the end to the Canadian Wheat Board's monopoly, as poor crops in the rest of the world will likely lead to higher prices for Canadian grain.
Harper and Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz will be at a farm just outside Kindersley, Sask., around 2:30 p.m. ET Monday to mark the first official day in which prairie wheat and barley farmers can sell their products to whomever they choose. [ . . . ]
= = = = = =
New wheat board opens: Protesters lament loss of its monopoly
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/
new-wheat-board-opens-164551016.html
"Citizens need to take (the board) back, people need to take it back and recognize their role to speak out," said Dean Harder, the protest's organizer and a farmer from Lowe Farm, about 85 kilometres south of Winnipeg. "We want to explain what the decision means and make it clearer to citizens."
Click on the link for a video as well.
= = = = = =
Harper Transfers Wealth and Influence Away from Farmers
http://friendsofcwb.ca/news/news-releas ... -transfers
(Swift Current – August 1, 2012) “By destroying the world’s largest marketer of wheat and barley, Stephen Harper has transferred a tremendous amount of wealth and influence away from farmers,” says Stewart Wells, Chair of Friends of the Canadian Wheat Board (FCWB).
“Harper and Ritz have effectively erected barriers manned by the private trade between western farmers and our former customers,” added Wells who was a farmer elected Director to the old Canadian Wheat Board and was dismissed by Minister Ritz over the objections of farmers.
“There is no longer any meaningful influence by farmers inside the grain trade. Building on 65 years of expertise, the farmer-controlled CWB created in 1998 was a strong advocate for farmers on all of the questions of the day. Whether it was railway revenue caps, the need for a railway costing review, producer cars, equitable access, Canadian Grain Commission issues, the introduction of genetically modified wheat, or a host of other issues, the farmer-controlled CWB had the resources to be a strong voice for farmers,” continued Wells.
Bill Gehl, Vice-Chair of the FCWB, added that it was the farmer-controlled Wheat Board that respected consumer wishes and opposed the introduction of genetically modified wheat into Canada. “We are already hearing calls from the United States to lower Canadian quality standards to their level and I expect there will soon be another push to introduce
genetically modified wheat here as well. We have lost all our market power and influence in the international grain trade, and Harper’s crippled Wheat Board will soon have no credibility with either farmers or our international customers.”
“In its haste to kill the CWB, the Harper government also degraded basic democracy in Canada, first by refusing to let farmers vote on this important issue, and secondly by short-circuiting Parliamentary procedures in the fall of 2011 in order to pass Bill C-18 without proper scrutiny. The only reason that the government refused to let farmers vote is that the government knew the majority of farmers supported the single desk selling advantages of the CWB,” continued Gehl.
Just six months ago the government was telling farmers that the voluntary Board would always be there for them. On July 31, 2012, the Minister of Agriculture was openly talking about selling the new Board outright.
“Degrading democracy, misleading Parliament, and transferring wealth and influence away from farmers add up to a very dark day for Canada and Canadians,” concluded Wells. “Sure, Stephen Harper can hold a celebratory event at Kindersley, but he has to do it under tight security at an event that is not open to the public.” --30--
For further information:
Stewart Wells: (306) 741-7694 or 306-773-6852
Bill Gehl: (306) 537-3899
= = = = = = = =
Suitors eyeing CWB but too soon for takeover -Canada ag minister
http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/07/31/
canada-wheatboard-takeover-idINL2E8IVEFE20120731
Wed Aug 1, 2012 12:37am IST By Rod Nickel
* CWB was one of biggest wheat traders, loses monopoly
* Prized for global marketing contacts
WINNIPEG, Manitoba, July 31 (Reuters) - Canadian Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz said on Tuesday he is aware of interest from "a couple of entities" in taking over the CWB, just as the company previously known as the Canadian Wheat Board tries to survive without its long-held grain monopoly.
"We've already had a couple of entities come forward saying they would love to buy up the CWB already," Ritz said at a news conference to mark the last day of the CWB's 69-year-old grain marketing monopoly in Western Canada. "They have a tremendous Rolodex of marketing (contacts) around the world and (prospective buyers) wanted to capture that."
But Ritz said it is too soon to consider a takeover of the CWB, which will give up its marketing monopoly on the region's wheat and barley sales for export or human consumption on Wednesday, under Canadian law.
"We're not prepared to entertain that takeover that quickly."
He did not say if the suitors approached the Canadian government, which controls the CWB, or the CWB itself.
The CWB does not own any grain storage or transportation assets, however, it has long been one of the world's biggest wheat traders. In 2011/12, the last year of its government-granted monopoly, CWB exported 18.1 million tonnes of wheat and barley combined.
Earlier on Tuesday, CWB's Chief Executive Ian White said the company sees a bright future but did not offer details of its plans or suggest there was takeover interest.
A sale of the Winnipeg-based CWB would mirror the fate of the former Australian Wheat Board, which gave up its wheat monopoly in 2008 and was later bought by Cargill Inc. [ . . . ]
= = = = = =
Ex-CWB Director Discusses Supreme Court Appeal
http://www.portageonline.com/
index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=28115&Itemid=35
Written by Colin Powers/Kelvin Heppner Monday, 30 July 2012 05:06
Just days before the end of the Canadian Wheat Board's single desk, eight former farmer-elected CWB directors and the Friends of the CWB have announced they plan to take their case against federal Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz to the Supreme Court of Canada.
The group alleges Ritz broke the law when introducing legislation stripping the board of its single desk monopoly on grain sales without holding a binding producer plebiscite. A Federal Court judge ruled in their favour in December, but that decision was overturned by the Federal Court of Appeal last month.
"The question really is 'does the government have the divine right of kings, or does the government have to follow the laws of the country and respect the rulings of the Federal Court just like everyone else does?'" says spokesperson and former CWB director Stewart Wells.
"We decided it wouldn't be appropriate just to leave the process where it is here now, with one strong ruling from the Federal Court being overturned by the Federal Court of Appeal," he says.
It remains to be seen whether the Supreme Court will take the case. [ . . . ]
= = = = = = =
'The man who killed the family farm'
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/
the-man-who-killed-the-family-farm-140405813.html?device=mobile
Roving rural columnist finds Harper's decision to dismantle the wheat board goes against the grain for many Manitoba farmers
By: Bill Redekop 02/25/2012 1:00 AM
GILBERT PLAINS -- Clare McBride has already lost her Irish accent, even though her farming family just emigrated from the Emerald Isle in 1998. Except when she gets angry.When asked what she thinks of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's decision not to let farmers vote on the future of the Canadian Wheat Board, her eyes dilate, her nostrils flare and that clipped, Irish tongue returns in all its glory.
"Stephen Harper's taking something that doesn't belong to him. It belongs to farmers," she fires back."It's like he sees a car and goes, 'That's a nice car. I'll just take it.' It's not his."
That feeling of betrayal is being expressed by farmers across the prairies over the Harper government's decision to dismantle the 69-year-old wheat board without allowing farmers a vote.
A recent poll found 62 per cent of farmers favoured keeping the wheat board's monopoly on wheat sales.
I hear the word "dictator" again and again, from farm to farm, as I travel this staunchly pro-wheat board region around Dauphin and to the south of Riding Mountain National Park. [ . . . ]
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9102
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
FRIDELL: The Day the Wheat Board Died
by Oscar » Wed Mar 13, 2013 10:30 am
The Day the Wheat Board Died
http://www.watershedsentinel.ca/content ... board-died
by Gavin Fridell
in Mar-Apr-2013-Vol23-No2
In 2012, the Conservatives ended the 70-year monopoly seller status of the Canadian Wheat Board, one of the world’s largest and most successful “state trading enterprises.” The government decision came without a vote among prairie grain farmers, required by the Canadian Wheat Board Act, and despite a 2011 plebiscite in which a majority of farmers voted to maintain the Board’s status. The matter is now before the courts, but the Board cannot simply be revived after having been dismantled. Instead, a coalition of farmer groups has launched a class action suit against the government seeking billions of dollars in compensation.
Despite giving hundreds of millions of dollars each year in subsidies to tar sands companies, to cite just one example, the Conservative government fashions itself as libertarian, opposed to state intervention, and has long virulently opposed the Board, favouring the interests of giant agribusiness and anti-Board grain farmers. The future of the Board has long been tenuous in the face of declining numbers of smaller farms, the rise of ever-larger ones, and the global expansion of giant transnational corporations that dominate the world’s food system. It is estimated that between 70 and 90 per cent of the entire global grain trade is controlled by just four corporations: the “ABCD group,” composed of ADM, Bunge, Cargill, and (Louis) Dreyfus. These giant grain traders have been rubbing their hands in anticipation of seizing control of the multi-billion dollar market once managed by the Board.
Against these odds, the persistence and long history of the Board is all that more remarkable. In the first half of the twentieth century, poor prairie farmers mobilized against powerful corporate rail, banking, and elevator monopolies, driving a tide of radical agrarian reform that, amidst the chaos and uncertainty of the Great Depression and the Second World War, led to the decision by the federal government in 1943 to authorize the Canadian Wheat Board to act as the “single-desk seller” for all Western Canadian wheat, durum, and barley sold internationally and for human consumption domestically. Although originally envisioned as a temporary measure, the Board proved to be highly successful and popular, and was continually renewed and expanded over the next several decades, frequently receiving support from all major federal parties. During this time, Canada emerged as a leader in the international grain trade and today accounts for around 14 per cent of the world’s wheat.
The Board’s main activities centered on collectively managing prairie wheat, resulting in higher and steadier prices due to price pooling, stringent quality controls, and the ability of the Board to use its immense weight to offer coveted large contracts to major wheat importing nations for an additional price premium. The Board also offered farmers indirect benefits, promoting new innovations and acting as a representative of farmers in disputes with powerful corporate interests. For example, the Board played a central role in blocking the introduction of Monsanto GM modified wheat in 2004, and in recent years initiated an organic program that has made Canada one of the world’s top growers of organic grain.
Throughout its history, the Board has brought countless gains to prairie farmers and served as a model example of effective collective marketing in action, defending the livelihoods of smaller grain farmers against the relentless tide of “free trade” rhetoric, which frames corporate monopolies as “market freedom.” This is no small feat in a world where libertarian fantasies so often rule the day (in rhetoric, not in practice as the recent trillion dollar Wall Street bailout so powerfully reveals). Against the preponderance of a political culture that celebrates individualism and selfishness, the moral force and cooperative ethos of the Wheat Board will be missed.
***
Gavin Fridell is a Canada Research Chair at Saint Mary’s University and author of the forthcoming book, Alternative Trade (2013), which features a chapter on the Wheat Board.
http://www.watershedsentinel.ca/content ... board-died
by Gavin Fridell
in Mar-Apr-2013-Vol23-No2
In 2012, the Conservatives ended the 70-year monopoly seller status of the Canadian Wheat Board, one of the world’s largest and most successful “state trading enterprises.” The government decision came without a vote among prairie grain farmers, required by the Canadian Wheat Board Act, and despite a 2011 plebiscite in which a majority of farmers voted to maintain the Board’s status. The matter is now before the courts, but the Board cannot simply be revived after having been dismantled. Instead, a coalition of farmer groups has launched a class action suit against the government seeking billions of dollars in compensation.
Despite giving hundreds of millions of dollars each year in subsidies to tar sands companies, to cite just one example, the Conservative government fashions itself as libertarian, opposed to state intervention, and has long virulently opposed the Board, favouring the interests of giant agribusiness and anti-Board grain farmers. The future of the Board has long been tenuous in the face of declining numbers of smaller farms, the rise of ever-larger ones, and the global expansion of giant transnational corporations that dominate the world’s food system. It is estimated that between 70 and 90 per cent of the entire global grain trade is controlled by just four corporations: the “ABCD group,” composed of ADM, Bunge, Cargill, and (Louis) Dreyfus. These giant grain traders have been rubbing their hands in anticipation of seizing control of the multi-billion dollar market once managed by the Board.
Against these odds, the persistence and long history of the Board is all that more remarkable. In the first half of the twentieth century, poor prairie farmers mobilized against powerful corporate rail, banking, and elevator monopolies, driving a tide of radical agrarian reform that, amidst the chaos and uncertainty of the Great Depression and the Second World War, led to the decision by the federal government in 1943 to authorize the Canadian Wheat Board to act as the “single-desk seller” for all Western Canadian wheat, durum, and barley sold internationally and for human consumption domestically. Although originally envisioned as a temporary measure, the Board proved to be highly successful and popular, and was continually renewed and expanded over the next several decades, frequently receiving support from all major federal parties. During this time, Canada emerged as a leader in the international grain trade and today accounts for around 14 per cent of the world’s wheat.
The Board’s main activities centered on collectively managing prairie wheat, resulting in higher and steadier prices due to price pooling, stringent quality controls, and the ability of the Board to use its immense weight to offer coveted large contracts to major wheat importing nations for an additional price premium. The Board also offered farmers indirect benefits, promoting new innovations and acting as a representative of farmers in disputes with powerful corporate interests. For example, the Board played a central role in blocking the introduction of Monsanto GM modified wheat in 2004, and in recent years initiated an organic program that has made Canada one of the world’s top growers of organic grain.
Throughout its history, the Board has brought countless gains to prairie farmers and served as a model example of effective collective marketing in action, defending the livelihoods of smaller grain farmers against the relentless tide of “free trade” rhetoric, which frames corporate monopolies as “market freedom.” This is no small feat in a world where libertarian fantasies so often rule the day (in rhetoric, not in practice as the recent trillion dollar Wall Street bailout so powerfully reveals). Against the preponderance of a political culture that celebrates individualism and selfishness, the moral force and cooperative ethos of the Wheat Board will be missed.
***
Gavin Fridell is a Canada Research Chair at Saint Mary’s University and author of the forthcoming book, Alternative Trade (2013), which features a chapter on the Wheat Board.
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9102
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
Farm group calls for preservation of CWB library and archive
by Oscar » Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:27 am
Farm group calls for preservation of CWB library and archives
NEWS RELEASE Canadian Wheat Board Alliance
www.cwbafacts.ca
(Regina, March 18, 2013)
The Canadian Wheat Board Alliance (CWBA) has called on Library and Archives Canada to use its legal authority to catalogue and archive the library holdings, documents, and other artifacts of the Canadian Wheat Board (CWB) contained in its downtown Winnipeg office building and its offices in Tokyo, Japan, Beijing, China, Vancouver, and Regina.
Bill Gehl, a Regina area wheat and durum producer and chairperson of the CWBA said “we have reports that in spite of a preliminary assessment by Library and Archives Canada substantial portions of the CWB’s library and archives have already been picked over or put in the trash including very valuable market analysis information, and we fear that documents, customer gifts, and other antiquities relevant to the Friends of the CWB class action law suit are being lost.” Gehl went on to say “this is completely unacceptable and we have asked Library and Archives to redouble their work to document and preserve the remaining documentary heritage of our Wheat Board for Canadians.”
Referring to ongoing legal action Gehl said “we fully support the recently filed Friends of the Canadian Wheat Board class action law suit to recover the value of our Wheat Board which was seized and nationalized without compensation by the Harper Conservatives.”
Gehl concluded “the Library and Archives of Canada Act gives Library and Archives Canada both the legal responsibility and authority to immediately take possession of the documents and other archival material of our farmer owned Wheat Board and we expect them to make a priority of doing so in spite of the fact their budget has been substantially reduced by the Harper Conservatives as a part of their project to cripple the Canadian state.” - 30 –
For further information call: Bill Gehl at (306) 537-3899
Who We Are: The Alliance is a politically non-partisan organization focused specifically on the Canadian Wheat Board. Members of the Alliance recognize the advantages the Board brought to producers through the single desk and price pooling, quality assurance through the Canadian Grain Commission (CGC), as well as the important role the CWB played as an advocate for farmers in transportation, producer cars, and on the world stage in trade disputes and negotiations. The Alliance draws memberships throughout the west.
NEWS RELEASE Canadian Wheat Board Alliance
www.cwbafacts.ca
(Regina, March 18, 2013)
The Canadian Wheat Board Alliance (CWBA) has called on Library and Archives Canada to use its legal authority to catalogue and archive the library holdings, documents, and other artifacts of the Canadian Wheat Board (CWB) contained in its downtown Winnipeg office building and its offices in Tokyo, Japan, Beijing, China, Vancouver, and Regina.
Bill Gehl, a Regina area wheat and durum producer and chairperson of the CWBA said “we have reports that in spite of a preliminary assessment by Library and Archives Canada substantial portions of the CWB’s library and archives have already been picked over or put in the trash including very valuable market analysis information, and we fear that documents, customer gifts, and other antiquities relevant to the Friends of the CWB class action law suit are being lost.” Gehl went on to say “this is completely unacceptable and we have asked Library and Archives to redouble their work to document and preserve the remaining documentary heritage of our Wheat Board for Canadians.”
Referring to ongoing legal action Gehl said “we fully support the recently filed Friends of the Canadian Wheat Board class action law suit to recover the value of our Wheat Board which was seized and nationalized without compensation by the Harper Conservatives.”
Gehl concluded “the Library and Archives of Canada Act gives Library and Archives Canada both the legal responsibility and authority to immediately take possession of the documents and other archival material of our farmer owned Wheat Board and we expect them to make a priority of doing so in spite of the fact their budget has been substantially reduced by the Harper Conservatives as a part of their project to cripple the Canadian state.” - 30 –
For further information call: Bill Gehl at (306) 537-3899
Who We Are: The Alliance is a politically non-partisan organization focused specifically on the Canadian Wheat Board. Members of the Alliance recognize the advantages the Board brought to producers through the single desk and price pooling, quality assurance through the Canadian Grain Commission (CGC), as well as the important role the CWB played as an advocate for farmers in transportation, producer cars, and on the world stage in trade disputes and negotiations. The Alliance draws memberships throughout the west.
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9102
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
Ottawa must compensate western farmers for CWB assets
by Oscar » Mon Feb 17, 2014 10:26 am
Ottawa must compensate western farmers for CWB assets
[ http://www.cwbafacts.ca/constitutional-and-classaction/ ]
A Statement by the Plaintiffs in the CWB Class Action Lawsuit
February 17, 2014
As the four representative plaintiffs named in the class action lawsuit seeking to recover $17 billion in damages on behalf of western Canadian wheat and barley farmers stemming from the decision by the Government of Canada to end the Canadian Wheat Board (CWB), we have assessed the federal court’s ruling on the government’s motion to dismiss our lawsuit and here is why we have decided to press ahead with an appeal.
At the time the CWB single desk was dissolved, and the farmer board of directors dismissed, there were hard and soft assets owned by the CWB which had been paid for entirely by farmers. Hard assets include the building, rail cars, grain ships, and information systems. The large value soft assets include the customer relationships, quality premiums, staff development, and the CWB brand.
For each of the hard assets, pool accounts in the years following the purchase were charged a depreciation charge to pay for these assets. Thus, farmers paid directly out of their own pockets for these assets. In the final years of farmer control, these purchases were made by farmers under the understanding that all farmers would receive an income stream which more than offset the costs of the assets.
The case on the soft assets is similar. The decision to invest in branding western Canadian wheat and barley and their products was an investment strategy to move farmers higher up the value chain. Each of these investments was paid for by farmers. Decisions were always made based on the business case that the future stream of benefits to farmers would outweigh the costs of these investments. The branding contributed to Canadian grains topping the price charts during the price rally in 2008.
The process of farmers investing in their future was ramped up following the move to a new corporate structure with farmer control in 1998. The computer information system was rebuilt and completely modernized; the building was renovated; and a major branding initiative was developed to raise Canadian wheat and barley prices above the basic commodity values for these crops. One reason for this increase in investment was that the 1998 legislation made the investment climate clear. The value of investments depended on the future of the single desk. The future of the single desk was to be determined by a farmer vote. Thus, according to legislation at the time, the future stream of income from these investments would belong to farmers unless farmers voted to give them up.
The case that farmers deserve compensation for the seizure of assets at the time the single desk was ended and the farmer board replaced by government appointees thus deserves further review for at least two reasons. First, farmers bought and paid for the assets. Second, farmers made these investments in a business and legislated environment in which farmers were assured that farmers would capture the stream of benefits from these investments. The only way farmers would lose the benefits is if they chose to vote to give them up. The government not only seized the assets, they also made the change in the investment environment without the required farmer vote.
It is particularly important that the laws on future benefits of investments be reviewed in light of the recent developments to establish wheat and barley commissions. These commissions will allegedly be allowed to invest in new varieties and other research which will make western Canadian farmers more competitive in the long term. To be successful, farmers must know that these varieties will not be seized and turned over to the seed companies with which the varieties were developed to compete.
Most international trade and investment agreements provide assurances that investors will be compensated if national rules are changed. It is imperative that Canadians test if we can be assured parallel treatment in the event that assets which we have purchased in one legislated environment are seized by a subsequent government.
Harold Bell: Fort St. John, British Columbia - 250-785-8996
Andrew Dennis: Brookdale, Manitoba - 204-476-6498
Nathan Macklin: DeBolt, Alberta - 780-957-2583
Ian McCreary: Bladworth, Saskatchewan - 306-567-2099
[ http://www.cwbafacts.ca/constitutional-and-classaction/ ]
A Statement by the Plaintiffs in the CWB Class Action Lawsuit
February 17, 2014
As the four representative plaintiffs named in the class action lawsuit seeking to recover $17 billion in damages on behalf of western Canadian wheat and barley farmers stemming from the decision by the Government of Canada to end the Canadian Wheat Board (CWB), we have assessed the federal court’s ruling on the government’s motion to dismiss our lawsuit and here is why we have decided to press ahead with an appeal.
At the time the CWB single desk was dissolved, and the farmer board of directors dismissed, there were hard and soft assets owned by the CWB which had been paid for entirely by farmers. Hard assets include the building, rail cars, grain ships, and information systems. The large value soft assets include the customer relationships, quality premiums, staff development, and the CWB brand.
For each of the hard assets, pool accounts in the years following the purchase were charged a depreciation charge to pay for these assets. Thus, farmers paid directly out of their own pockets for these assets. In the final years of farmer control, these purchases were made by farmers under the understanding that all farmers would receive an income stream which more than offset the costs of the assets.
The case on the soft assets is similar. The decision to invest in branding western Canadian wheat and barley and their products was an investment strategy to move farmers higher up the value chain. Each of these investments was paid for by farmers. Decisions were always made based on the business case that the future stream of benefits to farmers would outweigh the costs of these investments. The branding contributed to Canadian grains topping the price charts during the price rally in 2008.
The process of farmers investing in their future was ramped up following the move to a new corporate structure with farmer control in 1998. The computer information system was rebuilt and completely modernized; the building was renovated; and a major branding initiative was developed to raise Canadian wheat and barley prices above the basic commodity values for these crops. One reason for this increase in investment was that the 1998 legislation made the investment climate clear. The value of investments depended on the future of the single desk. The future of the single desk was to be determined by a farmer vote. Thus, according to legislation at the time, the future stream of income from these investments would belong to farmers unless farmers voted to give them up.
The case that farmers deserve compensation for the seizure of assets at the time the single desk was ended and the farmer board replaced by government appointees thus deserves further review for at least two reasons. First, farmers bought and paid for the assets. Second, farmers made these investments in a business and legislated environment in which farmers were assured that farmers would capture the stream of benefits from these investments. The only way farmers would lose the benefits is if they chose to vote to give them up. The government not only seized the assets, they also made the change in the investment environment without the required farmer vote.
It is particularly important that the laws on future benefits of investments be reviewed in light of the recent developments to establish wheat and barley commissions. These commissions will allegedly be allowed to invest in new varieties and other research which will make western Canadian farmers more competitive in the long term. To be successful, farmers must know that these varieties will not be seized and turned over to the seed companies with which the varieties were developed to compete.
Most international trade and investment agreements provide assurances that investors will be compensated if national rules are changed. It is imperative that Canadians test if we can be assured parallel treatment in the event that assets which we have purchased in one legislated environment are seized by a subsequent government.
Harold Bell: Fort St. John, British Columbia - 250-785-8996
Andrew Dennis: Brookdale, Manitoba - 204-476-6498
Nathan Macklin: DeBolt, Alberta - 780-957-2583
Ian McCreary: Bladworth, Saskatchewan - 306-567-2099
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9102
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
Re: KILLING THE CANADIAN WHEAT BOARD: Harper
by Oscar » Mon Dec 01, 2014 4:18 pm
Canadian Wheat Board set for corporate takeover
[ http://canadians.org/blog/canadian-whea ... e-takeover ]
December 1, 2014 - 9:42 am
Barlow speaks at a rally in Winnipeg against the dismantling of the Canadian Wheat Board, October 2011.The Council of Canadians has long supported the Canadian Wheat Board.
In 2005, we said, "The Government of Canada should maintain the Canadian Wheat Board and supply-management mechanisms that support family farms, protecting them from the prejudiced impact of international trade agreements." In 2011, we joined with the Public Service Alliance of Canada, ETC Group, and Food Secure Canada as interveners in a Friends of the Canadian Wheat Board court challenge that argued Section 47 of the Canadian Wheat Board Act required a vote by grain producers to remove the single-desk marketing authority of the Canadian Wheat Board.
But despite the efforts of many, by August 2012 the Harper government had effectively dismantled the institution that had benefited family farmers since 1935.
Today, CBC News reports, "Under a sort of reverse-nationalization plan now taking shape behind closed doors, a private-sector investor will assume control [of the Canadian Wheat Board] without reimbursing the federal treasury for assets Canadians paid for, or at least indirectly financed." [ http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadia ... -1.2853874 ]
In terms of a timeline, "2011's Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act gave a revamped CWB — purged of farmer-elected directors and now run by a board of Harper government appointees — until 2016 to come up with a privatization plan and until 2017 to implement it. ...President Ian White wants to accelerate the process... Fast-tracking could [mean] a deal before the election [in October 2015]."
The likelihood is that the CWB will soon be foreign owned. "The CWB wants a large, international player as its majority partner. ...Grain farmers participating in a new farmer equity plan will have only a minority stake. ...The search for a partner is down to a 'very short list', [federal Agriculture minister Gerry] Ritz [recently] told the [agriculture] committee. Chicago-based Archer Daniels Midland Company, [is] said to be a serious contender... Ritz says of control passing into foreign hands [says], 'I'd leave that final decision up to the wheat board itself.'"
And on the sale itself, the article notes, "A class action lawsuit seeking leave to appeal at the Supreme Court of Canada next spring claims the value of CWB's cash and hard assets in 2011 was over $200 million. [But Ritz says], 'You can get cash from the sale of something, or you can get a return over the years as the economy grows. That's more the long term look that this government is interested in.' [NDP agriculture critic Malcolm Allen says], 'I don't expect anything to come back to farmers.'"
At an October 2011 rally in front of the Canadian Wheat Board office in Winnipeg, Council of Canadians chairperson Maude Barlow told the large crowd assembled there, "Stephen Harper doesn't like democracy, and you know what? I don't think he likes farmers very much either."
Further reading
Outcome of our 2011 court challenge in defence of the Canadian Wheat Board (January 2013 blog)
[ http://canadians.org/node/9143 ]
Council of Canadians campaign actions to defend the Canadian Wheat Board (November 2011 blog)
[ http://canadians.org/node/7914 ]
LISTEN: The Canadian Wheat Board explained (November 2011 blog)
[ http://canadians.org/node/7929 ]
Brent Patterson's blog
[ http://canadians.org/blogs/brent-patterson ]
[ http://canadians.org/blog/canadian-whea ... e-takeover ]
December 1, 2014 - 9:42 am
Barlow speaks at a rally in Winnipeg against the dismantling of the Canadian Wheat Board, October 2011.The Council of Canadians has long supported the Canadian Wheat Board.
In 2005, we said, "The Government of Canada should maintain the Canadian Wheat Board and supply-management mechanisms that support family farms, protecting them from the prejudiced impact of international trade agreements." In 2011, we joined with the Public Service Alliance of Canada, ETC Group, and Food Secure Canada as interveners in a Friends of the Canadian Wheat Board court challenge that argued Section 47 of the Canadian Wheat Board Act required a vote by grain producers to remove the single-desk marketing authority of the Canadian Wheat Board.
But despite the efforts of many, by August 2012 the Harper government had effectively dismantled the institution that had benefited family farmers since 1935.
Today, CBC News reports, "Under a sort of reverse-nationalization plan now taking shape behind closed doors, a private-sector investor will assume control [of the Canadian Wheat Board] without reimbursing the federal treasury for assets Canadians paid for, or at least indirectly financed." [ http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadia ... -1.2853874 ]
In terms of a timeline, "2011's Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act gave a revamped CWB — purged of farmer-elected directors and now run by a board of Harper government appointees — until 2016 to come up with a privatization plan and until 2017 to implement it. ...President Ian White wants to accelerate the process... Fast-tracking could [mean] a deal before the election [in October 2015]."
The likelihood is that the CWB will soon be foreign owned. "The CWB wants a large, international player as its majority partner. ...Grain farmers participating in a new farmer equity plan will have only a minority stake. ...The search for a partner is down to a 'very short list', [federal Agriculture minister Gerry] Ritz [recently] told the [agriculture] committee. Chicago-based Archer Daniels Midland Company, [is] said to be a serious contender... Ritz says of control passing into foreign hands [says], 'I'd leave that final decision up to the wheat board itself.'"
And on the sale itself, the article notes, "A class action lawsuit seeking leave to appeal at the Supreme Court of Canada next spring claims the value of CWB's cash and hard assets in 2011 was over $200 million. [But Ritz says], 'You can get cash from the sale of something, or you can get a return over the years as the economy grows. That's more the long term look that this government is interested in.' [NDP agriculture critic Malcolm Allen says], 'I don't expect anything to come back to farmers.'"
At an October 2011 rally in front of the Canadian Wheat Board office in Winnipeg, Council of Canadians chairperson Maude Barlow told the large crowd assembled there, "Stephen Harper doesn't like democracy, and you know what? I don't think he likes farmers very much either."
Further reading
Outcome of our 2011 court challenge in defence of the Canadian Wheat Board (January 2013 blog)
[ http://canadians.org/node/9143 ]
Council of Canadians campaign actions to defend the Canadian Wheat Board (November 2011 blog)
[ http://canadians.org/node/7914 ]
LISTEN: The Canadian Wheat Board explained (November 2011 blog)
[ http://canadians.org/node/7929 ]
Brent Patterson's blog
[ http://canadians.org/blogs/brent-patterson ]
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9102
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
50 posts
• Page 2 of 4 • 1, 2, 3, 4
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest