CWB Bank

[Vader]

I don't know where you would find a concise definition of the mandate of the directors of the CWB that would include or exclude farmer advocacy.

I would suggest the need for farmer advocacy is driven by the demands of the majority of the farmers. Who would you suggest is a better advocate on behalf of farmers?

[Incognito]

Vader:

Doing nothing is still taking a position.

[charliep]

I should stay out but is too interesting avoid.

Perhaps the CWB wears too many hats. Managing pool accounts/sales activities, providing payment forecasts, running farmer risk management alternatives, advocacy for farm policy, etc. There are many conflicts between these different areas.

Perhaps some of the last comment comes to governace issues. Right now, the directors are elected for 4 years but there is no formal mechanism for communication/accoutability. Examples from other organizations include a formal delegate/annual constituency meeting process at the local level for feed back. Similarly, other organizations have annual meetings where resolutions are brought forward/relevent issues are debated.

[Vader]

There have been many Corporate Accountability meetings held over the last four years. This past year those meetings evolved to a format where the CEO, Chairman and other executives attended meetings and made themselves available for question and answer. Attendance was poor!

What would be the most appropriate (and cost effective) format for these communication/accountability exercises? One meeting per District was a waste. Should the move be to one annual meeting? One meeting per province? Timing? Resolutions from the floor? Quorum? Voting priveleges? Proxy? Many questions to be answered.

[boone]

Charlie: When you say too interesting to avoid, is that your 'MODERATOR HAT'?
Or is that your ALBERTA AGRICULTURE PROVINCIAL CROPS MARKET ANALYST @ECONOMICS and COMPETIVENESS DIVISION ,(TECHNOCRAT) HAT? Now don't take offence here I haven't.

[charliep]

We all wear different hats. Just some of us are more visible than others.

[boone]

Touche mon ami!

[Everest]

Man oh man can we ever be distracted easily. I am yet to be convinced that the CWB has authority (moral or legal) to risk farmer’s pool account funds by providing forgivable loans to anyone, no matter how worthy the cause.

I understand Mr. McCreary from the CWB is before the Ag Committee today promoting and defending the FRCC proposal to acquire the government hopper cars. Perhaps he is doing this out of a sense of responsibility he feels to actually recoup these funds. For now that he has loaned out my money, the only chance he has of getting it back for me is if he can convince the government to give the cars to the FRCC.

[freenorth]

Charlie has struck a chord here if the members/ stakeholders of an organization do not have a method of providing policy for the organization through some kind of annual meeting voting structure process, should the organization pursue policy initiatives outside it's marketing mandate
or should it be silent (as incognito puts it). Is it all knowing? If it does pursue policy initiatives, and it is, what does it say about the org's faith in it's supporters to not allow them to verify it's direction on individual policy
initiatives?

How many votes are held at these accountability meetings Vader?
How is the stakeholder allowed to vote representing his ownership?

One day the future will be so bright I'll have to wear shades.

[boone]

Charlie; maybe you can give an unbiased explanation of the difference between an elected board and a marionette. Freenorth listen up, and take note there could be a snap chapter test.

[freenorth]

Boone make sure I take my shades off and wake up for it I might be
dreaming of a better time in the not too distant future.