PR War

[vvalk]

Wilagro and stubble. So according to your
thinking on 47.1, all a gov't has to do is attach a
section to all legislation that you have to have a
plebiscite to change any act In the future? What's
your thoughts on this?

[vvalk]

Separating the wheat from the chaff in CWB
debate
 
 
By Les MacPherson, The StarPhoenixDecember
10, 2011
 
 
Comparisons of the Harper government to a
dictatorship would be funny if they didn't trivialize
the horrors of dictatorships.

The Conservatives are getting it this time for
dismantling the Canadian Wheat Board monopoly
in violation of a court ruling. Except there is no
ruling. Rather, the Federal Court issued a
declaration, which, apparently, is quite a different
thing from a ruling.

The presiding judge said the government is acting
illegally but, also, that he is not going to do
anything about it. He could have ordered a
binding referendum by farmers on the Wheat
Board's future, as the law strictly requires, but he
very deliberately did not.

That probably is because the illegality here is the
product of a perverse technicality bestowed by a
Liberal government, since voted out. Among the
Liberals' regrettable legacies is a Wheat Board
Act that says, in effect, that Parliament cannot
change the Wheat Board Act. But the act is
entirely a creation of Parliament. To give farmers,
or any other interest group, supremacy over
Parliament and its acts would not only be absurd,
but undemocratic in the extreme.

Had the court issued an order in this case, it
would have invited more of the same. The
governing Conservatives could then make it illegal
for future governments to resurrect the long gun
registry, say, without a vote by duck hunters. They
could bring in legislation forbidding future
governments from interfering with oilsands
development without the approval of oil
companies. They could close down the CBC and
require a vote by private broadcasters to bring it
back. We then would hear quite a different tune
from those who now, in defence of the Wheat
Board, embrace exactly this kind of nonsense.

Likewise overlooked by defenders of the Wheat
Board, as well as by the courts, is the larger
public interest. This is not an issue of concern to
only farmers. They might be the only ones directly
affected by the Wheat Board monopoly, but they
do not enforce it. Rather, it is the justice system
that fines and imprisons those dissidents who
illegally sell their wheat to the highest bidder.
Since the justice system belongs to all of us, we
all should have a say on how it is used.

And so we do. In this case, we elected a majority
government that openly campaigned against the
Wheat Board monopoly. That's about as
democratic as it gets. What is undemocratic is
letting farmers or any other interest group tell an
elected Parliament what to do. What is perverse is
using freedom and democracy and now the courts
as sticks to beat on farmers who only want to
work the free market like everyone else in the
country.

So twisted are Harper's critics that they would
have honest farmers thrown in jail for exercising
rights they themselves take for granted, just to
make a debating point.

Lawrence Martin, a national columnist wellknown
for his loathing of the Harper Conservatives,
accuses them of using the tactics of a banana
republic. His hyperbole is an insult to those who
have known the brutality of a real banana
republics. Harper was elected to give western
farmers marketing freedom. Now he's going to do
it. The folks in real banana republics are dying for
a chance of such governance.

Just as theatrically indignant was the Liberal MP
who said of the Harper Conservatives, "They'll
stop at nothing!" Never mind that we have seen
quite clearly where they will stop. The
Conservatives will stop at prosecuting farmers for
violating a Soviet-style monopoly. If there is a
better stopping place, I can't think of it.

Most inflammatory of the Conservatives' critics is
NDP MP Pat Martin. His complaints about
Harper's "jackboots" invite comparisons with the
Nazi Gestapo. This for limiting debate in
Parliament on a budget that was just debated
from coast to coast during a 35-day election
campaign. Everything to be said about the budget
has been said, repeatedly. To claim there has not
been enough debate is like comparing closure in
Parliament with Nazi death camps.

What Martin and his comrades in opposition really
don't like is to see is Stephen Harper keeping his
promises. It's driving them crazy.

[pgluca]

vvalk, That is an excellent description of events. We need more writers like Les MacPherson in the western media, and more people to actually read what he wrote. Thank you for the post.

[sumdumguy]

If we let judges run the country, we are in big
trouble. Governments are elected to make the
rules, not some appointed politico. Democracy is
at stake.

Get going guys, hit the press, make a splash and
make the cameras follow you instead of the
loonie tunes. A convoy is needed now.

[Burbert]

Ya lets let the rule of the jungle apply
in future. Only big dogs are allowed to
play and git there way. My way er the
highway. Greed is good! Shoot shovel
and shut up if'n yer not on side yer off
side, get ready ta be buried. Chislers
and marketeers rule. I/we kin run the
world from our home PC and tech gadgets,
insteada wankin while driving our
tracktor! Hey guys/gals, here is some
advice fer yeah, wait for it, wait for
it, DON'T EAT THE YELLOW SNOW!!!!!

[Tom4Wildrose]

Burbert,

Talk about the rule of law being put in perverse disrepute... the CWB 8 Directors stealing our farms money while breaking the law in total disrespect and disregard to our interests and needs.

You are a hypocrite... if you don't see how Chairman Oberg is going directly against my farms interests by sabotageing and depreciating the CWB's good will value... against our interests and disrespecting our needs.

[craig]

Now I understand why Burbert is so against changes to the wheat board. He currently enjoys wankin while driving his tractor and feels the change may impact his ability to continue to enjoy himself while farming.