Adam Smith, its important to correct your statement that the CWB Act was "written and enacted during the height of WWII".
Actually, the CWB Act which was written in 1935 was voluntary, and it was Regulation P.C. 7942 under the war Measures Act which gave the CWB a monopoly control during the war. I have the regulation. I also have a January 8, 1946 letter written by the CWB lawyer telling the government that the powers granted in wartime would not hold up in peacetime.
The Act you are referring to was actually made in 1947 and the significance is that it added Part IV to the Act. Is it important? Well the first clue should be that the CWB excludes it in its website "History". (just checked again- nothing, they skip from 1943 to 1948).
Part IV is the so called monopoly part of the Act and remains essentially unchanged since 1947. From access to information the purpose was to act as a national export/import tax.
I suggest that if export licences which have worked for eastern farmers for years and could be implemented immediately by regulation, are not good enough for you, that rather than demand nothing less than a total repeal of the Act from a government whose policy is to keep the Act that you consider the suggestion of a repeal of Part IV of the Act.
Like you, I love the thought of total destruction, but its just not going to happen.
Actually, the CWB Act which was written in 1935 was voluntary, and it was Regulation P.C. 7942 under the war Measures Act which gave the CWB a monopoly control during the war. I have the regulation. I also have a January 8, 1946 letter written by the CWB lawyer telling the government that the powers granted in wartime would not hold up in peacetime.
The Act you are referring to was actually made in 1947 and the significance is that it added Part IV to the Act. Is it important? Well the first clue should be that the CWB excludes it in its website "History". (just checked again- nothing, they skip from 1943 to 1948).
Part IV is the so called monopoly part of the Act and remains essentially unchanged since 1947. From access to information the purpose was to act as a national export/import tax.
I suggest that if export licences which have worked for eastern farmers for years and could be implemented immediately by regulation, are not good enough for you, that rather than demand nothing less than a total repeal of the Act from a government whose policy is to keep the Act that you consider the suggestion of a repeal of Part IV of the Act.
Like you, I love the thought of total destruction, but its just not going to happen.
Comment