• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Who decides when the CWB defends farmers?

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #13
    It is not Incognito LLB; however, in a past life, if LLB involved booze, it may have been correct.

    This is the guy you need Parsley:

    http://www.steptoe.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=ws.DspBio&id=992&site_id=380

    International Law and Trade
    Stewart Baker's practice includes issues relating to government regulation of international trade in high-technology products, and advice and practice under the antidumping and countervailing duty laws of United States, European Community, Canada and Australia. He also counsels clients on issues involving foreign sovereign immunity, and compliance with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

    Do like the rest of Canadian companies when it comes to trade law, hire an American lawyer.

    Comment


      #14
      Incognito,

      When farmers take out hail insurance, they read what the contract states. House insurance the same. Getting your replacement cell phone is the same. Reading, grunt work and time spent studying the manual, when you could be having a beer.

      Farmers can read the basics in NAFTA and for that an international lawyer is not needed.

      The basics are:
      1. According to the CWB Act, the CWB has to follow NAFTA .

      2. NAFTA does not allow an export tax to be slapped on (unless done domestically also)

      3. 14(b) states a fee must be paid to export (the CWB claims buy-backs are this fee)

      4. CWB legislation states a fee shall NOT be paid for a licence within Canada



      Actually it was a trade lawyer who wrote a book on NAFTA that first pointed out that CWB regulation 14(b) and 14.1 contravene the export tax prohibitions of NAFTA.

      But the reality is that 14(b) and 14.1 are both zero, because since NAFTA came in, there is no price difference inside and outside Canada. Thus there is no export tax violation.

      Lawyers reading legislation would not know that, but anyone watching what the CWB actually does can figure that out.

      The significant point is that the CWB has been giving false infornation when they claim 14(b) mandates the buy-backs.

      Contrary to CWB claims, the buy-backs have nothing to do with regulation 14(b) and the price difference inside and outside Canada. This means there is no monopoly mandated by the legislation.

      As Rod Flaman wrote: "The monopoly is a hoax." The truth then is still the truth, and remains unchanged by Flaman's opinion of the merits of a monopoly.

      He was even taking the CWB to court on the issue and "guaranteed" to the Western Producer that he would win , plus claiming a bunch of money for himself then.

      Now he loves the monopoly.

      Parsley

      Comment


        #15
        Good Morning grassfarmer,

        The CWB claim they get more money for farmers.

        The points I am making are:

        1. Agriculture in Canada has not progressed well in comparison to other manufacturing sectors.

        2. Any more money in farmers' pockets is due to more PRODUCTION (the farmers' efforts), not better prices and not better marketing.

        3. In Argentina, in the past, Agriculture was a money making industry and was targeted to be heavily taxed because it was doing so well. So here is one example where the "all over the world" does not apply.

        4. ****The CWB has already ably proven over six decades, that they are not the solution to farmers getting better returns. Time to move on with a different focus. The same old, same-old is not meeting anybody's needs.****

        5. My observation is that as more and more Governments all over the globe get more and more entwined with farming and agriculture, the poorer farmers become.

        6. In documents from Access to Information, the minutes from the "CABINET WHEAT COMMITTEE". December 5th, 1946state:

        "Dr. Wilson reported that in the present crop year distilleries would use 3 1/2 million bushels of wheat. About 50 per cent. of this quantity would be used in the production of potable alcohol and 50 per cent. in the productionn of industrial alcohol."

        $1.25 in 1946 (That was the export 'price control price' set in place). USA prices were over $5.00

        What would the quantities be today, grassfarmer? What is the price?

        Those distilleries still enjoy cheap, huge quantities of wheat from the West and the Government and the distilleries want it to remain that way.

        Parsley

        Comment

        • Reply to this Thread
        • Return to Topic List
        Working...