conservative victory & the CWB

[Jman]

The conservatives say they will unilaterally make CWB voluntary, effectively doing away with it .
Shouldnt this done thru normal CWB elections, or at least,a plebicite.
If the CWB goes, shouldnt supply mgnt also go. Perhaps this will give grain farmers a chance to add value to their grain by feeding it to layers, broilers, trukeys, dairy cattle,etc. Why should grain farmers not have the FREEDOM OF CHOICE to produce these commodities, after all, we already own the land and produce the feedstocks.

[agstar77]

It's not the conservative/reform/alliance way to give people choice unless it suits their purpose. They have decided what is best for us poor downtrodden grain farmers since they believe they already have our votes.

[Incognito]

QUOTE FROM THE CWB WEBSITE
At first, deliveries to the CWB were voluntary, and it handled only wheat. Then, during World War II, the CWB was empowered to market all Canadian grains, including oilseeds and Ontario corn. Wheat futures trading was suspended in 1943 in the conditions of wartime and deliveries to the CWB became compulsory.

In 1949, Parliament amended the Canadian Wheat Board Act to extend the CWB's marketing responsibility to encompass oats and barley, but retained a clause that required the Act's renewal by Parliament every five years. In 1966, this clause was removed and the Canadian Wheat Board Act became permanent legislation. In 1974, inter-provincial sales of wheat, oats and barley for use in animal feeds within Canada were removed from the sole authority of the CWB. In 1989, the marketing of oats was also removed from the authority of the Board, leaving it responsible only for the marketing of wheat and barley both for export and for human consumption domestically.

UNQUOTE


Governments of the day:
1943 - LIBERAL - PRIME MINISTER KING
1949 - LIBERAL - PM ST. LAURENT
1966 - LIBERAL - PM PEARSON
1974 - LIBERAL - PM TRUDEAU
1989 - CONSERVATIVE - PM MULRONEY

Where in 1943,1949,1966,1974 and 1989 did any farmer to get to vote on the future of their industry?

Why would you think farmers should get to vote on it today? There is precedence galore above.


1943, in the conditions of wartime and deliveries to the CWB became compulsory
(Who decided?)
1943 - LIBERAL - PRIME MINISTER KING

1949, Parliament amended the Canadian Wheat Board Act to extend the CWB's marketing responsibility to encompass oats and barley
(Who decided?)
1949 - LIBERAL - PM ST. LAURENT

In 1966, this clause was removed and the Canadian Wheat Board Act became permanent legislation.
(Who decided?)
1966 - LIBERAL - PM PEARSON

In 1974, inter-provincial sales of wheat, oats and barley for use in animal feeds within Canada were removed from the sole authority of the CWB.
(Who decided?)
1974 - LIBERAL - PM TRUDEAU

In 1989, the marketing of oats was also removed from the authority of the Board, leaving it responsible only for the marketing of wheat and barley both for export and for human consumption domestically.
(Who decided?)
1989 - CONSERVATIVE - PM MULRONEY

How many farmer votes was there to decide the history above?


Don't give me the unilateral BS.

Why do you think there should be a free vote on the CWB today given the above? Just askin. Looking for some intelligent answers.

[silverback]

You are hilarious agstar!

[agstar77]

So you think we should not have a vote now because we did not have one before? Well that cetainly is logical but is it Fair or does that matter?

[Incognito]

QUOTE:

It's not the conservative/reform/alliance way to give people choice unless it suits their purpose.

UNQUOTE

Where was the Liberal choice Agstar? or did it suit their purpose at the time?

[agstar77]

Liberals are no better or worse at being politically expedient, but does that make it right to overide democratically elected CWB directors?

[silverback]

How about a question on a ballot that would say "Do you want the CWB to be the only one to market your wheat and malt barley?"

Yes or No.

Would that satisfy your ideals? That idea is coming from someone who is going to support the conservatives this year.

[agstar77]

THIS WOULD PROBABLY PREFERABLE AS DUAL MARKETING WILL NOT WORK WITHOUT THE CWB BUYING GRAIN HANDLING FACILITIES. What the Conservatives are proposing will cause chaos in the marketing system until the CWB is destroyed.

[lakenheath]

Brilliant idea. Let's let urbanites in Toronto decide the fate of the CWB. Or are you suggesting we spend extra money revamping the ballots for CWB permit book holders?

[Incognito]

Question to lakenheath and Agstar? As you are the defenders of the faith - how is your history?

How did the CBW compete marketing barley during the 40 days of the dual market?

What happened to prices?

What happened to exports?

They have no business having a monopoly in barley - wheat, I can and will give them the benefit of the doubt out of respect for Ken Beswick, who said and I quote: "No one can extrapolate the premium in wheat from the marketplace, that we can" And Tom, he would have told you the same thing, outside in your tandem that fateful day @ 423 Main.

Barley - if the CWB/SWP/MPE/AWP would have let it go in 1993, the CWB would not be in this mess today. Lest we all forget, Beswick quit over barley marketing and the money that the CWB was leaving on the table and costing western Canadian farmers.

From the all or nothing approach in 1994/95 - what has changed?

But by taking an all or nothing approach - they will end up with nothing. The current BOD has chosen this route - no one else ...well, they and the 23-25% voter turnout of the 50% who hauled less than 40 MT in the past two years. Confused? You should be.

Democracy?

Lets have a Federal ballot thats weighted to vote First choice, Second choice and third choice to see how many minority governments there are.

Who set up the above parameters?

Aas it really done on a napkin at Lowe Farm?

Vader last one is for you:


QUOTE - January 27, 2004

The CWB employs 500 people. 15 of them are farm business reps. The Globe and Mail reported that the cuts will amount to, "135 positions, with the job reductions scheduled to be completed by July".

UNQUOTE

Does that mean there are only 365 employees/staff left at the CWB? Did the cuts REALLY happen?

[silverback]

For gods sakes! I am suggesting we let the people who ship grain to the CWB would vote on it. What is it like to be so afraid of a little change all the time?? For all you know it might be better, but that is too scary to consider hey?

[cropduster]

Incog...... aren`t you supposed to be resting on the sabbath????Excellent history info!!Agstar and kind are done like dinner if they don`t adapt.Can`t wait for the 23/24!!!!!!!Hopefully Ritter can get a job as pest control officer for his RM @ Major!It takes one to know one so he should be able to slow down the progression of rats to Alberta!!

[Incognito]

Nevermind I found it:

QUOTE:
It is commendable that the CWB has conducted this corporate review, and that they have taken steps to reduce costs. However, it seems that the CWB’s promise of down sizing by 135 jobs has only materialized into a reduction of 53 positions from the previous year.

UNQUOTE

http://www.choicematters.gov.ab.ca/files/pdf/CWB%20Employee%20vs.Tonnes%20Marketed-%20With%20Graph1.pdf

And the song and dance to the CWB directors was?

[wd9]

JMAN, you ask the question that are on the hearts and minds of many farmers. How does a government choose what to do given it seems both sides of the debate are fully justified and fully supported by the majority?

Simple, the group with the most dollars for lobbying and the best at it. What happend at the ministerial WTO meetings in HK is proof, 9% of agriculture held 91% of agriculture ransom to its protectionistic ways. How can a grains and oilseeds industry spending about $200,000 on lobbying ever compete with SM5 spending somewhere between 50 to 100 million $$.

Votes, majority, leader, party color have almost nothing to do with it other than coincidence. The way the game is played, always has, and probably always will.