results

[JohnKenneth]

What a disappointment to lose Dwayne Anderson - one of the smartest most experienced guys in there.

Anyone know the policies/background of Henry Vos?

[Jman]

Tom4CWB didnt do too well?

[Vader]

eight per cent

[Vader]

60 per cent of the popular vote went to the single desk side - pretty strong endorsement

[AdamSmith]

Ok we have 3 directors of a corporation/govenment agency that were there before and two new ones.

Big deal!

As if this changes my life any or changes what I believe and desire to achieve.

To those who support an open market don't be down because only one open market director was elected.

We believe that our neighbours should have zero say in how we conduct our business whether that is 1 neighbour or 9564 neighbours, and I will continue to believe that and strive to achieve my freedom from all 9564 of those busybody neighbours.

To those who oppose individual freedom, all I can say is this;

don't assume this means anything other than more turmoil and bitterness within this industry.

What did you prove today?

That your 9564 are the only ones who should be and spoken for and represented by the CWB?

The 6304 who voiced an opposing view deserve no consideration at all?

Isn't that what the CWB will infer from this result and tell the world?


I accept their dutiful right to oversee the agencies affairs, nothing more.

I reject your position that it gives you the right to force me to associate with the cwb.



Note (these numbers I am using may not be totally exact, so don't bash me because my numbers are wrong)

[Southpaw]

Well, if you like to play with numbers!
There were 31,081 ballots sent out and if you can believe the candidates bios that would translate into about 9944 votes in favor of continuing the single desk. That is only 32% in favor of retaining the single desk. That makes 68% in favor of marketing choice or don't care one way or the other.

[TOM4CWB]

Southpaw,

Add another 16,000 that were taken off the automatic Ballot distribution list... about 1000 of these "producers" got Statutory Declarations...

46000 known producers... 9944 in favour of the single desk... or less than 22%.

If we took all who could have voted with statutory declarations... we would probably be under 15% in favour of the "single desk" view of the world.

[wd9]

This might be a different Henry but....

Let me narrow down my focus on England for just a moment. Robert Barnes, who studied at Wittenberg and stayed at the Black Cloister with Luther was martyred by Henry VIII (Lindberg) (p. 313,315). Barnes had helped William Tyndale with his translation of the Bible into English. Tyndale also studied at Wittenberg and consulted with Luther before he started his translation (Bunkowske). In 1536 Henry VIII tried to kidnap him and when Tyndale was betrayed, had him burnt at the stake in Antwerp. Miles Coverdale, who also studied at Wittenberg, continued Tyndale’s work.

Earlier in 1523 John van den Esschen and Henry Vos had been burnt at the stake in Brussels under the auspices of scholastics at Louvain for spreading the Gospel in the Netherlands (Brecht)(p.102). Luther distraught that he could not be a martyr wrote them a beautiful hymn celebrating their martyrdom (Bornkamm and Ebeling)(p.259).

http://peterkrey.wordpress.com/tag/theological-lectures/

[TOM4CWB]

Vader,

Allen Oberg got 59% and we got 41% for market choice.

Wouldn't you agree this was a respectable showing considering all the P. R. "fear and intimidation" machines that cranked out negative messaging during the election campaign.

I was surprised by the bias towards the single desk in early November by many folks who were market choice supporters... but very recently have switched back to a market choice position just in the last two weeks.

Bring on the barley plebicite!

[wd9]

To me this is a surprise, would have thought the numbers would have been different. Elections are the ultimate popularity contest and this one is counted. Apparently single desk is the popular one, there I said it.

Can anyone interpret the data any other way? Sure, like above it can be used to justify many things, but does it support open market? Don't think so.

Had Dwayne won I wouldn't have picked where the popular vote is so quickly, but this is too obvious to think about for too long.

Barley plebiscite, well if one could extrapolate, and the data doesn't lie, any reason to believe it won't turn out the same way? Not that it matters though, the present day gov has a plan that is irrespective of votes and popularity. Interesting times for sure.

Vader, when you are right, well you know the rest. That beer is in the mail.

[chaffmeister]

Isn't it a pity that you guys (remember, I'm not a farmer) have to vote one way or another on the CWB - WITH NO REAL KNOWLEDGE OF WHETHER THE INSTITUTION WORKS OR NOT! IT COULD BE A TOTAL MESS BUT NO ONE OUT THERE KNOWS!

GUYS ARE OUT THERE VOTING ONE WAY OR THE OTHER ON GUT FEEL, PHILOSOPHY, EMOTION, PERSUASION, WHATEVER. BUT NOTHING AS CONCRETE AS FACTS.

IF THIS WAS A TRUE CORPORATION, AND YOU WERE TRUE SHAREHOLDERS THERE WOULD BE FULLER DICLOSURE (ENRON ET AL EXCEPTED). OR HEADS WOULD ROLL. OR YOU'D SELL YOUR STOCK IN FAVOUR OF ANOTHER ENTERPRISE - ONE YOU HAD FAITH IN. (sound like a choice? It should.)

I WONDER HOW MANY GUYS DIDN'T VOTE BECAUSE OF THE "I JUST DON'T KNOW" FACTOR. (Which is different than the "I just don't care" factor.)

HOW CAN YOU VOTE "FOR" OR "AGIN" SOMETHING IF YOU DON'T HAVE A FRIGGIN' CLUE WHETHER ITS OF ANY VALUE? WHO'S RIGHT: AGSTAR AND VADER OR TOM4CWB? WHO KNOWS.

The true irony here is that most farmers voting in support of the single desk are doing so because of the persuasive powers of a very few combined with a weak conviction of their own. Or a strong conviction of their own based on rhetoric and platitudes.

And that, my friends and neighbours, is the true injustice of the CWB.

Freedom of Information - bring it on.

[parsley]

Firstly, a sincere thank you to all those farmers who ran as candidates in this election. It is a lot of work and time away from your families and both your time and work is a committment to agriculture, and to all of us.

Secondly, congratulations to the all the farmers who won in their districts. Each of you were elected by fellow farmers. Now, your work really begins in a divided farm-community.

The farm commutity includes, and I'll use Vader's number, 40% of farmers supporting a minority marketing-choice position, (and that percentage of course, is debatable).

40% of the people who voted want to have the option to market their own grain.

This minority position is not negotiable, any more than the Bloc's view of Canadian Confederation is negotiable.

This Minority Marketing Choice
position continues to advance, while the monopoly marketing argument slowly continues to diminish in support.

As our Western culture continues to provide its' citizens with more and more choice, and freedom, I need to pick the business partners I want to represent me, and what I grow.

Nor do I want to have what I grow represented by, or associated with, farmers who refer to their fellow farmers, as "TIE EM BEHIND MY HORSE AND DRAG THE B--TARDS UP AN DOWN THE STREET AS LONG AS I LIKE" .(Refer to the thread "Harper's Surprise")

Regional CWB marketing remains viable for those who chose to participate, but some farmers do not want the Board as a marketing partner, just as Creston-Wyndell farmers didn't want to deal with the Board.

Creston-Wyndell farmers were advantaged by a minority position, and bypassed all Wheat Board marketing and pooling for years before that region was ever taken out of the Designated Area.

Minority positions are here to stay in our diverse country, our diverse cultures, and our diverse relationships, and we must work towards building a farm community that does not reject numerous factions working on different projects in various ways.

One size no longer fits all.

Parsley

[craig]

As a free market supporter I am disappointed with the election results. While we can put any slant you want on it, the reality is there are still a large number of producers who want to retain the CWB and that side of the argument has manged to convince them that their choice is all or nothing. Going forward I feel it is even more important to continue to point out those areas where the CWB fails. While many will continue to fight for that elusive open market, I would feel much more comfortable operating under a CWB that delivers what it claims or implies it does. The climate for implementing change is still before us. Let's not pass up the opportunity we currently have.

[JohnKenneth]

great perspective craig. i frequently find myself in the tough position of having to point out where the cwb fails, yet in a tone/using words that doesn't offend those who support continuation of the monopoly. i have a lot of direct experience using the ppo contracts, and trying to stickhandle around the sticky delivery policy, so i'm always getting asked what to do, and how. the why is so-right-there, but where people quit listening. it's really too bad farmers care so much about cwb policy, because it gets in the way of productive discussion about maximizing profitability, and causes many to make poor marketing decisions.

where do we go from here? i agree we're still on the path to better opportunities, but i'm so sick of all the rhetoric that this vote and any/all to come will generate. why debate? why not just move forward? why can't we all look to the pulse canadas and canola councils of our world to see just how much more can be done without a monopoly, the federal transfers and top-heavy administration? why not just work harder to get a better price using the tools we have - which are many, the majority of which are simply poorly utilized or not well understood.

elections and votes are not only useless in this environment, they are divisive, distracting and the fuel of the same emotions that continually cause us to make poor marketing decisions.

shame on the manitoba government for perpetuating this waste of time, money and energy.

[liberty]

I concur with Craig.

Like it or not, demographics have an influence in this debate. Many farmers today are of the older generation and they grew up in the era of big government socialism and the CWB. It's all they have ever known and they seem set to stymie change every step of the way.

I doubt that anyone is going to convince these closet socialists (and I know many of them) that substantive change is necessary and beneficial. The CWB voting system is set up to give these leftist, parochial interests a dominant position.

In the short term, all we can hope for is that Chuck Strahl keeps up the pressure on these regressive forces. If the CWB continues to insist on waging war on the man who is legally their boss, then this organization seems doomed to tear itself apart with infighting. At this juncture, I really couldn't care less if it does. This is the kind of thing that happens when the state takes control of the economy.