I've been involved in an interesting discussion over on the commodity board about Bill 36 even although (as usual) the post started about the CWB. The post is entitled "Canadian ChoicesWheat Letter - December 2, 2010" and it gets interesting near the end.
It seems Bill 36 was developed by the Government in consultation with landowning groups - ABP were involved for example. But some of these anti-wheat board types are on there defending the act they helped develop - it's all about saving wetlands according to them. It's unbelievable that folks could be so deceived or so unaware of what is really going on. It seems our job to convince landowners to fight this just got a little harder - when you realise there are cwb bashing farmers who are actively behind this legislation. The irony is lost on them that the mantras of the cwb "enslaving them, stealing their crops, forced regulation" etc are mild compared to what they are supporting with Bill 36.
It seems Bill 36 was developed by the Government in consultation with landowning groups - ABP were involved for example. But some of these anti-wheat board types are on there defending the act they helped develop - it's all about saving wetlands according to them. It's unbelievable that folks could be so deceived or so unaware of what is really going on. It seems our job to convince landowners to fight this just got a little harder - when you realise there are cwb bashing farmers who are actively behind this legislation. The irony is lost on them that the mantras of the cwb "enslaving them, stealing their crops, forced regulation" etc are mild compared to what they are supporting with Bill 36.
Comment