And this from a former NDP Cabinet Minister. Maybe the voices of reason and reality do have a chance to prevail.
Wheat board has no authority to fight Ottawa
Tue Oct 17 2006
SIDNEY GREEN
IF the CEO of Manitoba Public Insurance started a campaign using the company funds urging the privatization of the corporation, this fact would not go unnoticed by the minister to whom the insurance company reports.
If the CEO of Manitoba Hydro started a campaign to privatize the Crown corporation and used its treasury to publicize his position, this fact would not go unnoticed by the minister to whom Hydro reported. In these cases, do you think that the ministers involved would use whatever power they had available to stop these executives?
You're darn tootin' they would.
They would immediately use their power, and they have the power to see to it that the executives involved ceased such activity and minded their proper business. The MPI directors are mandated to administer an insurance program: They have no mandate to engage in a political pursuit that is contrary to the interests of the government by whose authority they exist.
In these hypothetical cases, there would be no sensational headlines suggesting that the government had gagged the heads of these corporations. Irresponsible members of Parliament would not refer to the Doer government as being "fascist."
The same parameters should be applied with respect to the Canadian Wheat Board. If the government did indeed request the directors of the wheat board to co-operate with the government by supporting a proposal to effectively dismantle the wheat board, it was wrong to do so. But when the government prohibits the wheat board from using the wheat board treasury to fight against the government position, it is perfectly right to do so.
The mandate of the directors of the wheat board is to market grain. It has no mandate to engage in political propaganda extolling its own existence and attempting to perpetuate itself. To direct it not to do so in no way stifles debate or silences proponents of the wheat board. No persons, farmers or others who believe in the continued operation of the wheat board have been silenced. The government order does not silence anybody, not even the wheat board directors. The government order only prohibits the use of the wheat board treasury for political purposes and this prohibition is perfectly justified.
The wheat board is not a privately operated organization that is entitled to use its treasury as it deems advisable. The wheat board is an organization that was created by a democratically elected government. Absent government creation, the wheat board would not exist. It is important to remember that what a democratically elected government createth, a democratically elected government can taketh away.
Supporters of the wheat board have to marshal their support within the democratic system. Since a large majority of the farmers voted for a Conservative government, it can only be assumed that those same farmers supported the policies enunciated by the Conservative party leadership and candidates. One of those articulated policies was directed towards reassessing the monopoly status of the wheat board. If the Conservative government has miscalculated the position of the farmers with respect to the wheat board, they run a serious risk of losing some of their best supporters. If they are right in believing that their wheat board policy meets with approval of the farmers, then their action with regard to the wheat board would have been democratically approved.
Opponents of the Harper government will have to resign themselves to the fact that this government is intending to change things. It is hardly legitimate to complain that the Conservatives are failing to maintain and refusing to implement Liberal and NDP policies.
Sidney Green is a Winnipeg lawyer and former NDP cabinet minister.
Wheat board has no authority to fight Ottawa
Tue Oct 17 2006
SIDNEY GREEN
IF the CEO of Manitoba Public Insurance started a campaign using the company funds urging the privatization of the corporation, this fact would not go unnoticed by the minister to whom the insurance company reports.
If the CEO of Manitoba Hydro started a campaign to privatize the Crown corporation and used its treasury to publicize his position, this fact would not go unnoticed by the minister to whom Hydro reported. In these cases, do you think that the ministers involved would use whatever power they had available to stop these executives?
You're darn tootin' they would.
They would immediately use their power, and they have the power to see to it that the executives involved ceased such activity and minded their proper business. The MPI directors are mandated to administer an insurance program: They have no mandate to engage in a political pursuit that is contrary to the interests of the government by whose authority they exist.
In these hypothetical cases, there would be no sensational headlines suggesting that the government had gagged the heads of these corporations. Irresponsible members of Parliament would not refer to the Doer government as being "fascist."
The same parameters should be applied with respect to the Canadian Wheat Board. If the government did indeed request the directors of the wheat board to co-operate with the government by supporting a proposal to effectively dismantle the wheat board, it was wrong to do so. But when the government prohibits the wheat board from using the wheat board treasury to fight against the government position, it is perfectly right to do so.
The mandate of the directors of the wheat board is to market grain. It has no mandate to engage in political propaganda extolling its own existence and attempting to perpetuate itself. To direct it not to do so in no way stifles debate or silences proponents of the wheat board. No persons, farmers or others who believe in the continued operation of the wheat board have been silenced. The government order does not silence anybody, not even the wheat board directors. The government order only prohibits the use of the wheat board treasury for political purposes and this prohibition is perfectly justified.
The wheat board is not a privately operated organization that is entitled to use its treasury as it deems advisable. The wheat board is an organization that was created by a democratically elected government. Absent government creation, the wheat board would not exist. It is important to remember that what a democratically elected government createth, a democratically elected government can taketh away.
Supporters of the wheat board have to marshal their support within the democratic system. Since a large majority of the farmers voted for a Conservative government, it can only be assumed that those same farmers supported the policies enunciated by the Conservative party leadership and candidates. One of those articulated policies was directed towards reassessing the monopoly status of the wheat board. If the Conservative government has miscalculated the position of the farmers with respect to the wheat board, they run a serious risk of losing some of their best supporters. If they are right in believing that their wheat board policy meets with approval of the farmers, then their action with regard to the wheat board would have been democratically approved.
Opponents of the Harper government will have to resign themselves to the fact that this government is intending to change things. It is hardly legitimate to complain that the Conservatives are failing to maintain and refusing to implement Liberal and NDP policies.
Sidney Green is a Winnipeg lawyer and former NDP cabinet minister.
Comment