Not a lawyer BUT!

[Braveheart]

Malta, I agree. Blame the judge. He made a mistake. All the reasons you gave are right.

I just don't know why a lot of people on here are conceding to a vote of some kind. It's only a delaying tactic. The commies know the end for the board is a real possibilty under a Harper majority and delaying is the best hope.

Email your MP again. Tell them they have support, and full speed ahead. Email senators urging passage. Write op eds decrying the prejudice of LIBERAL APPOINTED JUDGES.

Never surrender.

[Braveheart]

Malta, I agree. Blame the judge. He made a mistake. All the reasons you gave are right.

I just don't know why a lot of people on here are conceding to a vote of some kind. It's only a delaying tactic. The commies know the end for the board is a real possibilty under a Harper majority and delaying is the best hope.

Email your MP again. Tell them they have support, and full speed ahead. Email senators urging passage. Write op eds decrying the prejudice of LIBERAL APPOINTED JUDGES.

Never surrender.

[oneoff]

Simple solution. Repeal the CWB Act. Legitimately create any desired new laws. Live with fallout and consequences. Do it all legally; and you'll find that on application to any court the judge will agree (else the matter will be overturned on appeal).
Have patience (and "faith")

Reprtedly; in earlier days there were severe consequences for "treasonous acts"; and pointedly questioning the authority of ones rulers. Perhaps there still are penalties of some sort.

[cpallett]

You are right, oneoff. Had Minister Ritz followed proper protocol the issue would have never been before Justice Campbell in the first place.

Justice Campbell was asked a simple question:

"The Applicants each request a Declaration that the Minister’s conduct is an affront to the rule of law. For the reasons that follow, I have no hesitation in granting this request."

He was only asked to rule on the legal legitimacy of the government actions at issue, not to provide a remedy. He found that Minister Ritz's attempt to dissolve the CWB without a vote in favour by producers to be a violation of s. 47.1 of the Canadian Wheat Board Act which reads:

"47.1 The Minister shall not cause to be introduced in Parliament a bill that would exclude any kind, type, class or grade of wheat or barley, or wheat or barley produced in any area in Canada, from the provisions of Part IV, either in whole or in part, or generally, or for any period, or that would extend the application of Part III or Part IV or both Parts III and IV to any other grain, unless
(a) the Minister has consulted with the board about the exclusion or extension; and
(b) the producers of the grain have voted in favour of the exclusion or extension, the voting process having been determined by the Minister."

All Minister Ritz had to do was repeal s. 47.1 first and the whole issue would have never come up. One wonders whether this was a case of gross incompetence or deliberate.

Interesting to note what the Chief Justice of the Federal Court had to say about the rule of law in a free and democratic society:

“The starting point is this. The greatest achievement through the centuries in the evolution of democratic governance has been constitutionalism and the rule of law. The rule of law is not the rule by laws where citizens are bound to comply with the laws but
government is not. Or where one level of government chooses not to enforce laws binding another. Under the rule of law, citizens have the right to come to the courts to enforce the law as against the executive branch. And courts have the right to review actions by the executive branch to determine whether they are in compliance with the law and, where warranted, to declare government action unlawful. This right in the hands of the people is not a threat to democratic governance but its very assertion. Accordingly, the executive branch of government is not its own exclusive arbiter on whether it or its delegatee is acting within the limits of the law. The detrimental consequences of the executive branch of government defining for itself – and by itself – the scope of its lawful power have been revealed, often bloodily, in the tumult of history.
When government does not comply with the law, this is not merely non-compliance with a particular law, it is an affront to the rule of law itself.”

we are extremely fortunate in Canada to have a very competent and independent judiciary. Whether Justice Campbell was right in his interpretation of the law will doubtless be determined by the Federal Court of Ap[peal and/or the Supreme Court of Canada.

Should Minister Ritz proceed with the legislation to abolish the CWB as planned, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to predict that it will be challenged in the Courts and, if Justice Campbell is right, be struck down as a violation of the fundamental principles of Canadian democracy. All of which could have been avoided by a simple procedural step.

I may not be qualified to pass judgment on Justice campbell, but as a voter I do not believe Minister Ritz has covered himself with glory on this one.

Full text of the judgment can be found at:

http://cas-ncr-nter03.cas-satj.gc.ca/rss/Wheat%20Board%20T-1735-11%20and%20T-1057-11%20reasons.pdf

semper ad meliora

[Burbert]

Duhhhh! Maybe it would be better if'n
we had judges that were accountable to
the gobermont. Like lets say in Nazi
Germany in the old days, or in some
third world nations, er even in Chine,
where when the death penalty is applied,
after organ removal, nok must pay fer
the bullet(s) used ta carry out the
execution before gettin the remains.
Now that is a Progressive Conservative
gobermont, like Comedian farmers deserve
and want. Ta heck wit Liberal, pinko
judges, ifn they wasn't guilty they
wouldn't be charged. Butt wait, what
about crooked authorities. Butt wait,
no repeat offenders. IN THIS CASE THE
RITZ CRACKER IS LUCKY, THOUGH SINCE HE
LIVES AND WORKS IN COMEDIA. Hence
nothing will happen cause he IS THE
CROWN, and protected from everthin!!!!

[mustardman]

cpallet good post, All the board supporter I know Have said if the Vote came in favour of the Open market they would abide by it. Most are just pissed at the way this was handled by Harper and his handpuppet ritz.

Ironic that the tough on crime guys seem to think they can break the law and its ok.

[liberty]

My final question in this forum: in what way does the present bill "dissolve" the CWB? I repeat, removing the single desk does not dissolve anything.

[Braveheart]

Perhaps the Chief Justice of the Federal Court conveniently forgot that a government cannot enact legislation which binds a future gov't and prevents it from action.

As the Liberal party believes it is entitled to govern Canada, they do believe their legislation is entitled to bind future differing governing parties.

[Fransisco]

Mono's would never support an actual vote. They would disagree with everything, the voters list, the question, the definition of a farmer and ultimately the outcome.

The Barley plebiscite proved that one.

[wilagro]

The judge was right...Ritz got reprimanded for trying to RAM this whole "transition" to an "open market" down farmer's throats without their approval. Ritzes confrontational approach ensured resistance and his fuzzy thinking was quite evident resulting in this historical injunction.