henbent,
The CWB's Jim Thompson is often called upon to be one of the CWB's expert witnesses because he has worked at the CWB for so many years and is thoroughly familiar with buybacks.
During the farmer trials in Regina 1998-99, Thompson testified before Judge Henning as an expert from the CWB. The judge wanted to understand how the buybacks worked. The CWB claimed the buybacks were a requirement to getting a license and were situated in 46(d)/14b). They claimed that farmers had to do a buyback in order to export.
At this point, the judge needed to know if buybacks were required by the CWB for interprovincial sales because, of course, 14.1 in the regulations state that the Corporation may grant interprovincial licences but NO FEE MAY BE CHARGED.
To require a domestic buyback would fly in the face of the CWB's own 14.1
This presented a problem for Thompson. Either the buyback in 46/14 covering both export/interprovincial actually wasn't required OR the CWB was ignoring it's own regulation
This is how Thompson finally answered the Court, under oath, after a whole series of related questions which are too lengthy for this thread:
From the transcripts, p. 383:
The Court: ".... so therefore, by definition, virtually the buy-back price only can apply to grain going outside of Canada."
Witness: "That's right, yes."
This evidence was NOT correct because the buyback is required for all interprovincial sales pertaining to human consumption not made to agents of the CWB.
I call that lying. Its either that or incompetence. I welcome your questions, Henbent.
Parsley
The CWB's Jim Thompson is often called upon to be one of the CWB's expert witnesses because he has worked at the CWB for so many years and is thoroughly familiar with buybacks.
During the farmer trials in Regina 1998-99, Thompson testified before Judge Henning as an expert from the CWB. The judge wanted to understand how the buybacks worked. The CWB claimed the buybacks were a requirement to getting a license and were situated in 46(d)/14b). They claimed that farmers had to do a buyback in order to export.
At this point, the judge needed to know if buybacks were required by the CWB for interprovincial sales because, of course, 14.1 in the regulations state that the Corporation may grant interprovincial licences but NO FEE MAY BE CHARGED.
To require a domestic buyback would fly in the face of the CWB's own 14.1
This presented a problem for Thompson. Either the buyback in 46/14 covering both export/interprovincial actually wasn't required OR the CWB was ignoring it's own regulation
This is how Thompson finally answered the Court, under oath, after a whole series of related questions which are too lengthy for this thread:
From the transcripts, p. 383:
The Court: ".... so therefore, by definition, virtually the buy-back price only can apply to grain going outside of Canada."
Witness: "That's right, yes."
This evidence was NOT correct because the buyback is required for all interprovincial sales pertaining to human consumption not made to agents of the CWB.
I call that lying. Its either that or incompetence. I welcome your questions, Henbent.
Parsley
Comment