CWB vs Farmers...

[TOM4CWB]

Charlie,

A great justice has just occured....

To have a Justice rule the CWB was protected by the Charter was totally absurd... and now the Supreme Court has ruled on the matter!

God bless Canada!

A Winnipeg Free Press Article...

Supreme Court allows muzzle on wheat board
By: Mia Rabson
22/01/2010 1:00 AM
OTTAWA -- A federal government directive preventing the Canadian Wheat Board from pushing a pro-monopoly stance will stand after a Supreme Court of Canada denied the board leave to appeal Thursday. It ended a battle of more than three years between Ottawa and the Winnipeg-based grain marketing agency over a federally imposed order that all wheat board communications should reflect the government policy.

The current policy of the federal Conservative government is to eliminate the wheat board's monopoly on prairie wheat and barley sales, and allow farmers to choose where to sell their grain.

"Certainly it's disappointing but we have to accept the fact," said wheat board chair Larry Hill.
The court does not give reasons when it denies leave to appeal. It dismissed the case with costs, though what financial hit that will put on the wheat board is yet unknown.

The original directive order the wheat board to clam up came in October 2006. In June 2008, a federal judge struck down the directive at the request of the wheat board. The judge said it contravened the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

But a federal appeals court subsequently overturned the ruling, saying the board was the creation of a federal statute and therefore it had no rights or freedoms beyond those laid out in the statute.

The Supreme Court finally put the issue to rest Thursday by deciding not to hear the appeal.
Hill said he was surprised the court wouldn't hear the case, and said it will mean the board has to check with lawyers before it puts out communications to make sure it's abiding by the directive.

Spokespeople for Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz were unavailable yesterday.
The Conservative government and the wheat board have been at war since the Conservatives took office on a platform that included eliminating the board's monopoly. Numerous court cases have resulted.

The wheat board won one of them when the courts said Ottawa could only eliminate the monopoly through legislation, not by cabinet decree as the government originally tried to do.

Legislation to open up barley sales was introduced in 2008 but was never raised for debate and died on the order paper when Prime Minister Stephen Harper called the 2008 election. It has not been reintroduced.

Manitoba NDP MP Pat Martin said he wouldn't be surprised if Thursday's court decision propelled that legislation back to the table.

"I'm worried this court decision may motivate them to regroup and come at it again," said Martin. "They will see this as a big victory."

Martin plans to combat the Harper policy on the wheat board with a private member's bill to expand the powers of the wheat board's elected board. Among other things, the legislation would increase the number of board members who are elected rather than appointed by Ottawa.

"It would put the power back into the hands of farmers," said Martin.
The bill would have been introduced next week but due to Harper's decision to prorogue, Martin will now have to wait until Parliament reconvenes in March.

mia.rabson@freepress.mb.ca
Republished from the Winnipeg Free Press print edition January 22, 2010 A10

[Raven]

Putting an end to the CWB taking money out of the pooling accounts to pay for the CWB's political propaganda is certainly good, but in its self does not give producers marketing freedom. Naturally the CWB will focus on this point as Hill already has started.

However, the Supreme Court's endorsement of the Court of Appeal Court's ruling has important ramifications that can provide producer marketing freedom. For example, in their ruling they stated:

"subsection 18(1) [of the Act] is very broad. As noted, it authorizes the government through the auspices of the Governor in Council to direct the Wheat Board with respect to the full range of activity conducted by the Wheat Board."

"when these [1998] amendments were brought, subsection 18(1) was not only preserved but strengthened. Beyond subsection 3.12(2) which sets out the director's duty to comply with any direction given pursuant to subsection 18(1), subsection 18(1.2) was added to provide that compliance with a direction is 'deemed' to be in the best interests of the Wheat Board."

"subsection 18(1) was intended to provide the Governor in Council with the authority to direct the Wheat Board on any matter of governance"

However, the Goverments orders and regulations cannot be in contradiction with the Act which the courts ruled they were when they tried to remove barley.

The solution is simple. The Act requires all exporters to have an export licence. The CWB arbitrarly grants licences both outside and inside the designated area. The Government should order the CWB to grant export licences to producers without discrimination. Surely after their crushing loss at the Supreme Court, no one can believe that the CWB can pick who gets licences but the government can't.

[cchurch]

The gag order should apply to all agribusiness, they should not be allowed to put ads in the paper, or send junk mail promoting their crappy chemicals or seed.

They should also be denied all charter rights.

[Raven]

Hey Cchurch, trying to divert the discussion back to the gag order?

Meanwhile, regarding broad Government control, this is what Justice Rothstein (now on the Supreme court) said in Jackson v. Canada (1997):

"the Canadian Wheat Board can be characterized as a corporation with significant public aspects which involve the carrying out of government policy"

"Under these [Part IV] provisions, the Canadian Wheat Board is granted significant regulatory power."

"A regulatory power such as the granting of licences is by nature public ... Regulatory power is one of the hallmarks of public, as opposed to private commercial activity."

This new ruling means that nothing has changed except new management who must "carry out government policy".

[Jay-mo]

One small victory in the right direction.
Maybe this will get rid of the CWB banners on this site!! lol

[Raven]

I agree with Tom4CWB that to have the Supreme Court endorse the broad control of the government is a big victory.

I welcome the "CWB banners" comments!

[haveapulse]

Raven, are you saying that the Government could then advise the BOD to issue export licenses and they would have to comply?

As I understand this is what was done in Ontario, but in that instance by the BOD not the Government?

Advise please.

[Raven]

Yes, national licencing applies equally across all Canada. Clearly an area for the government and not prairie farmers and Winnipeg bureaucrats.

Regarding Ontario and the other areas ouside the designated area, they are granted export licences simply by swearing an affidavit as to the origin of the grain.

Nothing in the national licencing Part IV of the Act differentiates between regions of Canada or authorizes discrimination. That's why the CWB Act withstands Charter challenges.

I think that after the years and years of complicating by propaganda, people can't believe it is so simple.

Pressure needs to be put on the Conservatives. Clearly the Goverment can provide freedom to prairie producers by ordering export licences. If they won't order the CWB to treat Prairie farmers the same as all others, why would anyone trust them to change the Act with a majority?

One other point is that there is nothing in the Act that requires the CWB to be the issuers of the licences. Customs Canada could do export licences for example, as I believe they already do for imports of wheat and barley.

[tipsy]

Raven you are quite right when you say pressure has to be applied to the conservatives. The million dollar question is HOW??? I myself chose financially to quit supporting the Harper government because of their lack of interest and seriousness on this cwb issue.In fact they seem to be in no hurry to do anything except to collect their pay cheque and rush to the bank every second Friday, but thats another issue. I know for a fact that others have done the same. Unfortunately as of now the p.c. party has a pretty comfortable bank account,so they don't miss our donations.
Now that the appeal and supreme court has exposed and reinforced what some of us have known for a long time, that Goodale and Easter are a pair of deceiving and mischievous frauds. Maybe the liberals will consider a new direction on their ag policy. If they do I could maybe begrudgedly, financially support them for awhile.
Even though the cwb is a P.C. platform issue, and a majority of their support comes from the west they lack a serious passion for this issue, and I really don't see them doing much if anything on this issue in the near future.
SO Raven if you or anybody has an idea on how we can apply pressure to the PC's, PLEASE start a post-in.

[Fransisco]

Just back from some much needed family holidays and trying to catch up. I don't see to be able to find any kind of press release from the CWB or Ritz on this. Has anyone else found any more official comments?

I agree with Raven, this is significant and goes way beyond just the gag order. The Conservatives have no more excuses, the courts have made it crystal clear who is in control and who has final say. The feds can order the board to give us no-buyback export licenses tomorrow, no legislation would be required for that. And the board couldn't say boo about it.

It's time to start hounding them again about delivering on their election promises. Letter's, phone calls, emails, etc.

[Fransisco]

I did find this...

WINNIPEG, Manitoba (Reuters) - A Supreme Court decision that backed the Canadian government's move to prevent the Canadian Wheat Board from spending money on lobbying to maintain its grain marketing monopoly shows the CWB wasted farmers' money, Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz said Friday.
"This government has always maintained that the CWB should stick to its mandate of marketing grain, not spending farmers' money on lobbying for their own political purposes," Ritz said in a statement. "The decision to dismiss with costs proves the wheat board wasted farmers' money to bring forward a frivolous court action."

...not exactly what I wanted to hear.

[Raven]

Media Release
For Immediate Release: January 22, 2010

Wheat Growers seek marketing freedom in wake of Supreme Court decision

The Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association urges the Canadian government to move forward quickly in providing prairie farmers with greater marketing freedom, following yesterday’s announcement by the Supreme Court of Canada that it will not be hearing the Canadian Wheat Board’s appeal of a lower court ruling.

In June 2009, the Federal Court of Appeal upheld a government order directing the CWB to not spend money promoting its monopoly. In a unanimous decision, the appeal court judges ruled that the federal government has the power “to direct the Wheat Board with respect to the full range of activity conducted by the Wheat Board.”

Now that the CWB has exhausted all appeals, the Wheat Growers urge the federal government to use its authority to direct the CWB on a number of operational matters including the issuance of orders that:

Direct the CWB to provide export licenses to all prairie wheat and barley producers on the same terms and conditions, regardless of their method of production. Currently, the CWB board of directors gives preferential buyback rates to organic grain producers and discriminates against those farmers who produce wheat and barley in a conventional manner.

Increase and expand the processor exemption. In 2006, the CWB board of directors authorized an exemption from the CWB monopoly to niche prairie grain processors by allowing them to purchase up to 500 tonnes of wheat and barley direct from prairie farmers. The Wheat Growers would like to see this amount progressively increased and expanded to include all processors.

Instruct the CWB to provide no-cost export licenses for any contracted grain that it refuses to accept. In the 2008/09 crop year, the CWB accepted only 74% of durum wheat contracted by prairie producers, refusing to accept the remainder. In the current crop year, the CWB is expected to accept even less of the durum wheat offered.

Instruct the CWB to provide export licenses to prairie producers on the same terms and conditions as now offered to wheat and barley producers in the rest of Canada. Currently, the CWB provides no cost export licenses to farmers in Ontario, Quebec, Atlantic Canada and all of British Columbia except the Peace River district. Farmers in the prairie region who wish to export their wheat and barley are required to buy back their grain on terms that often make the export sale prohibitive.
“This court ruling gives the federal government the opportunity to make good on its campaign promise to provide us with marketing freedom,” says Kevin Bender, President of the Wheat Growers. “In effect, the ruling provides the federal government with the authority to introduce a voluntary Wheat Board, where each and every farmer will have the right to decide how best to market their grain.”

[Raven]

I believe we should congratulate and encourage the Conservatives. Under Liberal government, there would have been no Supreme Court, Court of Appeal, or federal Court rulings. And especially no gag order. My observation is that the Conservatives have tried to do what was recommended to them by our farmer spokespersons. As well as the gag order, they changed appointed directors, tried to remove barley by regulation, fired the CWB CEO and have tried to make the elections more fair. All things that they were advised to do in my opinion.

Let's now ask for export licences for producers in the west, the same as eastern producers already get.

[dmlfarmer]

Contrary to what Tom posted, the Supreme Court of Canada did not rule on this case. Rather they refused to hear the case. This is not an endorsement of the Federal court ruling as Tom and others state, rather a statement by the court (for reasons which have not and likely will not be given) that they will not hear the case.
This is not usual. About 600 applications are made every year for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada and about 520 of these cases are denied leave to appeal.

Many are denied leave to appeal because the Supreme court does not consider the question to be of "public importance." And really other than for farmers who are a small percentage of the population, is this question really important? The other criteria which this question likely fails but which it must meet for the Supreme Court to hear the case is: Does the ruling go beyond just the parties seeking appeal?

The other thing people should consider before making a big deal out of a denial to leave to appeal is that the CWB has been sued a number of times in the past by farmers who lost in lower courts and each time the Supreme Court also denied leave to appeal. Anyone claiming this denial of appeal is a victory, must then also acknowledge that the CWB won cases such as that brought forward by M-Jay farms regarding export licencing and Ron Archibald re the CWB monopoly. By making this decision more than it actually is, you are in fact increasing the importance of these previous denial decisions as well and weakening your case for export licences and the monopoly.

And to make a big deal out of "with costs" shows how little you know about the supreme court and law. The "costs" are likely to be in the range of $1000.00 to $2000.00 only.

Without question, the leave was a setback to the board, and had the posts on this thread limited statements to this setback something positive may have happened. But by trying to overplay and propagandizing this decision, all you have done is bring past ruling in favor of the board back into play.

[tipsy]

I believe we should congratulate and encourage the conservatives. Congratulate them for what? Regardless of which government appoints the directors I can't remember a appointed director making a public statement or having a view or opinion about the cwb. Most if not all the directors that have been appointed are highly educated, and, or have been involved in big business. One would think they would have some thoughts about the cwb,but, be dammed if I've heard one. In my opinion appointed directors are inert!
The firing of Messner, what benefit or gain was done by that action?
The removal of several thousand names off the voters list,yes I'll give'em credit there. In a real election most of the names would not have been there to start with.
The gag order that was a good one and long over due idea.
The barley fiasco,well we all know how that was handled and fumbled.
Yes I know in a minority government what you want and can do has limitations but the gains that have made by the pcs on this cwb file could not be measured with a micrometer!
Congratulations,for the the gains the pcs have made on this file. I can guarantee you don't see me standing up jumping and clapping for joy.
Encouragement, dam-straight,although I'm running low and tank is just about empty, lets get moving on this issue and make some meaningful changes.