Wheat and Barley marketing trial

[wd9]

Does the Alberta Provincial Government have the authourity and or power to create an open market 'test' of CWB grains. Does the Federal government have the power to stop it - or not.

[TOM4CWB]

WD9;

There is certainly legal constitutional debate on this specific issue.

The Ontario Wheat Producer’s Marketing Board (OWPMB) provides proof that a provincial marketing agency can operate and sell outside the CWB, as long as the legislation works within the federal system constitutionally.

The CWB claims that they have overriding authority over the provinces, however the courts have ruled numerous times against the position the CWB is taking. The Great Fallacy is well known by CDN Dept. of Justice legal council, as they taught it to me ten years ago. The OWPMB is a perfect example of the "Great Fallacy" judgement applied and at work today.

Further the Canadian Grain Commission retraction from regulation of the WCE futures which operate interprovincially and internationally proves the provinces do have authority to regulate international trade and commerce. It cannot be claimed by the federal government as exclusive jurisdiction.

Here is the precedence for a provincial trade and commerce marketing body:

The Great Fallacy, as the Honourable Court called it, was an important constitutional “trade and commerce” 91(2) ruling. It stated:

“…first, that, because in large part the grain trade is an export trade, you can regulate it locally in order to give your policy in relation to the regulation of that part of it which is export. Obviously that is not a principal the application of which can be ruled by percentages. If it is operative when the export trade is seventy percent of the whole, it must be equally operative when the percentage is only thirty; and such a principle in truth must postulate authority in the Dominion to assume the regulation of almost any trade in the country… Precisely the same thing was attempted in the Insurance Act 1910, unsuccessfully. … in a system involving a division of powers such as that set up by the British North America Act, it may often be that subsidiary legislation by the provinces or by the Dominion is required to give full effect to some beneficial and necessary scheme of legislation not entirely within the powers of either. ”

RE The Grain Marketing Act 1931, Page 285. The Honourable J. A. Turgeon ruled that the Provincial Jurisdiction has an important role to fulfill when dealing with Grain Monopolies

The Honourable J. A. Turgeon ruled: “Grain grown in Saskatchewan and ready for market is, of course, property in the province; and the owners of this grain enjoy in respect to it civil rights in the province and also civil rights outside the province (1).”( Citizens Insur. V. Parsons supra; Political arrangements required between the Provinces and the government of Canada.)

Since the Saskatchewan government wanted a grain marketing monopoly, the Honourable J. A. Turgeon further stated; “…If it were advisable or necessary to do so, there appears to be no reason,…why the two legislative bodies, each using the power conferred exclusively upon it, might not concur in attaining the object aimed at.”

The BNA Act 91: It shall be lawful for the Queen, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate and House of Commons, to make Laws for the Peace, Order, and good Government of Canada, in relation to all Matters not coming within the Classes of Subjects by this Act assigned exclusively to the Legislatures of the Provinces;
91(2) The Regulation of Trade and Commerce.

The BNA Act Section 92: In each Province the Legislature may exclusively make Laws in relation to Matters coming within the Classes of Subjects next hereinafter enumerated; that is to say,
92(13)Property and Civil Rights in the Province

(1) The Honourable Court all concurred by quoting Citizens Insur. V. Parsons supra; Political arrangements are required between the Provinces and the government of Canada.