CWB Election... should people be allowed to vote twice or more?

[rbrunel]

I have know idea Vader, but to me that is wrong....we farm as one unit and file income tax as one unit. as far as the gov"t is concerned I am not a farmer but a wage earner and a shareholder.

[TOM4CWB]

Vader;

Good question on who can vote.

I had a long discussion with our corporate secretary... and posed this question;

If I own a part of 5 different corporations, that each own different land... and grow grain... would the 5 corporations be entitled to be 5 entities

Therefore be 5different producers... and be sent 5 Ballots?

Of course by the definition in the CWB Act... they each qualify as a producer.

To change this... there would need to be an actual change to the CWB Act... and change the definition of a "producer".

If 5 persons, are each entitled to a share of the grain and revenue in a corporation... of course according to the CWB Act of "producer" each one is a producer... and is entitled to a ballot.

I realise this is the first election since 1998 that everyone who is really involved in growing grain will be entitled to vote... but isn't it about time?

Send my ballot, every person in my family that by the blood sweat and tears grows grain on our farm... a ballot as well...

Why not!?

Is this a democratic election... or just a bad joke?

Do we live in Canada...

or some backwater banana republic...

with bullies deciding who should or shouldn't vote?

Now we need a series of meetings... paid for by the CWB... to give everyone the opportunity to vote!

[Vader]

But Tom,

The act says that a producer who is an individual. It does not say a producer who is a person. It also says that the individual must have reached the age of 18. How can a corporation be and individual who has reached the age of 18? You did a good job of defining "person". Now give us your good definition of "individual".

You posted the relevant portion of the CWB Act.

"5. (1) A producer who is an individual may vote if they have attained the age of 18 years by the last day of the election period or, if under 18 years of age the producer has designated a cosignatory of a permit book who is at least 18 years old on that day and who has consented to vote on behalf of the producer".

[Vader]

Conversely, a producer who is a corporation may not vote. To prove eligibility an individual should provide a Social Insurance Number (proving their status as an individual) and a birth certificate (proving their age).

[wd9]

And according to the Anti Volpe Act on eligibility, alive.

[TOM4CWB]

Vader;

You missed it.

Let's have a go again:

"6. (1) Subject to subsection (2), every producer is entitled to be included in the voters list in respect of the electoral district in which they produce grain."

In this section... the word "producer" has it's definition drawn from;

CWB Act 2(1)in this Act

"Actual Producer" means a producer actually engaged in the production of grain;

"Producer" includes, as well as an actual producer, any [PERSON] (emphasis added) entitled, as landlord, vendor or mortgagee, to the grain grown by an actual producer or to any share therein;"

Person IS therefore in the definition.

Now we must go to the definition of "Person" in the Interpretation Act
since the CWB Act and the Canada Grain Act do not specifically define "person".
Included are Legal Dictionary Definitions:

"In the Dictionary of Canadian law (2nd Ed.) (1995), a "person" is a "natural person"' and "includes a body corporate or politic" Blackstone himself made the same distinction between natural and artificial persons and treated them all as persons in the eyes of the law (see para. [11] above).

[17] These definitions taken from dictionaries including dictionaries of legal terms are uniform and clear. A "person" in its ordinary meaning includes a human being or a natural person as well as an artificial person such as a corporation. The primary sense of the word is a natural person; the secondary sense, an artificial person such as a corporation.

[18] The Interpretation Act (Canada) is consistent with this ordinary meaning. Section 35 of that Act defines a "person" as follows:

"person" or any word or expression, descriptive of a person includes a corporation.

The use of the verb "includes" extends the definition to include a corporation. The definition does not exclude a human being. In the French text of the Act, the meaning is even clearer:

"personne" Personne physique ou morale; l'une ou l'autre notions sont visées dans des formulations générales, impersonnelles ou comportant des pronoms ou adjectifs indéfinis.

A "personne physique" is a natural person; a "personne morale" is a corporation""

This is drawn from the legal decision quoted above.

Where do you get that only a live human being can vote Vader? You know estates and Co's by the thousands are on the CWB voter's lists!

[Vader]

Tom,

I am not saying that a person (aka corporation) cannot be a producer.

I am simply quoting the election rule in the CWB Act which states that only producers can vote but it qualifies that statement to say that those producers must also be "individuals.

I think you have missed the point.

[TOM4CWB]

Vader;

I assume this is the section that bothers you;

CWB Act "VOTERS


"5. (1) A producer who is an individual may vote if they have attained the age of 18 years by the last day of the election period or, if under 18 years of age the producer has designated a cosignatory of a permit book who is at least 18 years old on that day and who has consented to vote on behalf of the producer."

Why this provision?

IMHO this section clarifies that a "proxy" vote by a representitive of a producer under 18, is allowed in this election by a "cosignatory" of a permit book. I would strongly argue it in no way excludes artificial persons from voting... it actually strengthens the position that artifical people can vote by providing a method for those who are normally not able to vote because they are too young.

Why does the CWB have this obligation to allow under age people to vote?

Because they are "Producers".

CWB Act 26(1) gives the "right" to require the CWB issue a permit book to an "actual producer", or be listed as a producer or "interested party" in grain produced on the land discribed in a permit book.

CWB Act 26(2) gives the "actual producer" the prior right to possession of the permit book;

But,

This "actual producer" is required to make the permit book avaliable to any other producer entitled to deliver grain thereunder because they have any share of grain produced on the land listed.

Clearly a "producer" is not required to take out a permit book to grow grain. Therefore a Statutory Declaration allow persons who don't sell the CWB grain, or deliver grain themselves to the grain handling system... the right to a ballot as a "producer" as defined in the CWB Act.

Does this help Vader?

[TOM4CWB]

Vader,

If I remember correctly, if a permit book applicant... is a person under 18, then they must get a "cosignatory" to make the application for them... as they are not allowed to sign for themselves.

Further,

When I sign for the partnership that holds our permit book... I am required by the CWB to sign as an officer... "president" is what they want!

This is because the CWB knows that an artifical person is involved... not just one natural person.

when more than one natural "person" are involved in an incorporation... as the "producer" or "actual producer" in the permit book.

[Vader]

In all of this intense examination of the wording and supposition of the intent of the wording how can you continue to ignore the use of the word "individual"

My understanding of legal interpretation is that no words are to be ignored. Proper legal drafting is done such that every word counts and the courts are to give meaning to all words used.

[Vader]

I have no problem with the individuals who control the corporation exercising their voting rights. In fact there should be allowance for more than one owner/shareholder to vote if they are producers.

[TOM4CWB]

Vader;

5(1) Is for "A Producer who is an individual". This 5(1) section tells the voter what they must do to vote IF they are under 18 years old.

For "A producer" who is not an individual, there is no age restiction.
Does this help?

[TOM4CWB]

Vader;

Interpretation Act

Enactments Remedial

Enactments deemed remedial
12. Every enactment is deemed remedial, and shall be given such fair, large and liberal construction and interpretation as best ensures the attainment of its objects.

R.S., c. I-23, s. 11.

The Satutory Declaration is just the instrument you speak of, which allows growers the opportunity to vote if they have not voted on behalf of the corporation... being true to voteing only once.

[Vader]

Tom,

If corporations are "entitled" to vote and if the principals of corporations are likewise "entitled" to vote what steps is the election co-ordinator taking to prevent individuals from voting twice as individuals may be principals in many corporations and they may also be the holders of multiple permit books?

If producers have more than one permit book regardless of whether that book is listed in the name of an individual or a corporation and there were deliveries of wheat or barley in either the 05/06 or 06/07 crop years they will automatically be issued multiple ballots.

[Vader]

If I am following your line of argument Tom then I see that producers are allowed to vote only once.

(2) No producer may vote more than once in an election.

Individuals who are over the age of 18 are not constrained by this piece of the legislation. Unless they are constrained by a different part of the Act, they may vote as many times as they like whether it be by statutory declaration or by being automatically issued multiple ballots through their participation in permit books.