Question on Bill C-18 for cpallet

[dmlfarmer]

I am concerned about clause 46 in part 4 of Bill C-18 dealing with the dissolution of the CWB. The clause states:
46. This Part applies only if the Corporation is not continued under Part 3 within five years, or any shorter period specified by the Governor in Council, after the day on which that Part comes into force

The minister has repeatedly stated that the CWB will continue to exist for 5 years, however this clause dealing with the dissolution of the CWB seems to give the option to the Governor in Council to disolve the CWB any time it wants, even within the 5 year time period. Am I reading the Bill correctly? If not, why are the words "or any shorter period specified by the Governor in Council" included in this part?

[wilagro]

Always read the fine print...that's where the truth hides.

[Integrity_Farmer]

Ritz just put that in there as an easter egg. It probably
doesn't mean anything, since laws are meant to be
broken anyway.

[sumdumguy]

In other words,"shise or get off the pot bozos "

[cpallett]

dmlfarmer,

We must not be reading from the same script. In the version of Bill C-18 passed on November 28, 2011 that is posted at:

http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Docid=5285088&file=4

there is no such clause. Instead, under Part 2 it says:

"Continuation of the Corporation

4. (1) The Canadian Wheat Board continued by subsection 3(1) of the Canadian Wheat Board Act is continued as a corporation.

Headquarters

(2) The headquarters of the Corporation are in the city of Winnipeg in Manitoba."

So, at least for the time being the Canadian Wheat Board will continue to exist. Any more questions on that subject are best directed to Minister Ritz.

[dmlfarmer]

I am referring to Part 4 of Bill C-18 of the lastest publication of Bill:

http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=2&DocId=5285088&F ile=189

(NOT PART 2 which you refer to) and it says:

PART 4

DISSOLUTION OF THE CANADIAN WHEAT BOARD

Application of Part

46. This Part applies only if the Corporation is not continued under Part 3 within five years, or any shorter period specified by the Governor in Council, after the day on which that Part comes into force.

Does this clause give the minister and/or the power to dissolve the CWB is less than 5 years if they see fit? That is how I read it.

[cpallett]

Yes it does. Pursuant to Part 3 the CWB must submit an application for continuance "within four years, or any shorter period specified by the Minister". If the continuance is not granted, then the provisions of Part 4 concerning the dissolution of the Canadian Wheat Board come into effect.

Given the combined wording of sections 42 and 46 it would appear that Minister Ritz can dissolve the CWB whenever he sees fit once Bill C-18 is proclaimed into law.

[dmlfarmer]

Wow! Thanks cpallett for confirming my suspicion. Apparently Goodale is not the only politican capable of hiding a poison pill in legislation.

[Braveheart]

Thanks for bringing that to light you two. We'll have to start a new lobby group to make sure dissolution happens.

[Kodiak]

I am all in favour of dismantling the single desk, and like many other farmers had hoped the CWB would continue as a viable option.

I no longer do. The CWB and their fanatical supporters have poured so much salt on the ground, I really don't think there is any value in leaving it even as an option. Yes, Oberg & Co. will have their money cut off and they'll have to either pay for their campaign with their own money or find another sugar daddy. And the "friends" and the "alliance" will have to find other money as well. Once the board of directors is fired, there will no longer be reason or creative ways for the CWB to fund 'outside' organizations.

But the arguments are going to persist. The voluntary CWB will be what it will be, but it will never satisfy the hard core collectivists.

Like you Craig, I just want this to be over and from what I see, it never will be unless its dead and buried. I don't want to hear any more ideolocially based arguments about some supposed value or the evils of the private trade. It's time to move on, and the cleanest and best way is to just close it down and liquidate every asset it has a claim to. Give the funds from the liquidated assets to sick kids hospitals.

[bucket]

At least the language of the clause is clear.

Not like 47.1 which can apparently have many meanings.