Opposition critics planning to fight government plans to legislate an end to the Canadian Wheat Board monopoly are united in arguing that the main battle will be outside Parliament.
“At the end of the day, only strongly motivated producer opinion will be able to turn the government onto a different course,” said deputy Liberal leader and former agriculture minister Ralph Goodale.
“A vocal, articulate groundswell of producer opinion saying there would be a political cost to the government if they continue to run roughshod over producer opinion is required.”
Read Also
Alberta researcher helps unlock the economics of farming
Lethbridge Polytechnic researcher helping agriculture producers with decision-making tools in economic feasibility
Added NDP CWB critic and Winnipeg MP Pat Martin: “We need producers and the general public, frankly, to mobilize on this issue to insist that farmers have the democratic right to have a say on this fundamental issue.”
However, they are divided on the question of whether the courts and lawyers could play a role by legally challenging the government legislation next fall.
Goodale, a Regina lawyer, insisted that even if the government plans to introduce new legislation that rescinds the CWB Act, it does not free the Conservatives from the legislative requirement that a farmer vote be held before the board’s mandate is changed.
He was the minister responsible for shepherding CWB Act changes through Parliament in 1998, including the farmer vote requirement.
“In my view, any such move by the government to get rid of the act would not free the government from the obligations of that act that no change can be made without farmer consent through a vote,” he said.
“I do think it would be subject to challenge in court and having heard from farmers across the Prairies, I believe there could be several legal proceedings.”
Supporters of the government plan for fall legislation to rescind the CWB Act and create new rules through new legislation argue that a legal challenge is unlikely to succeed and be counter-productive.
“If they repeal the act, then its rules no longer apply and no government can bind the hands of a future government,” Richard Phillips of Grain Growers of Canada said.
“The downside of people thinking about court challenges is that the horse is out of the barn. Fighting it and wasting money in court rather than working to design rules that allow a voluntary wheat board to survive with the best model going forward does not help their cause.”
Martin, a vehement opponent of the government plan and an MP whose Winnipeg riding includes CWB head office, agrees with Phillips.
“I don’t see what court challenge could succeed in stopping the government of Canada from changing legislation,” he said.
“For those who say we will tie this up in court, I don’t see on what authority or what grounds. We in Parliament are the highest court in the land. We make the laws, courts interpret and enforce them.”
In Regina, former University of Regina professor Howard Leeson, a former constitutional adviser to the NDP government of Allan Blakeney, agreed with Martin.
“If the government wants to change the legislation and change the rules, it can,” he said.
And with a new majority in Parliament, the Conservative government can pass its legislation.
Still, Goodale insisted the Conservatives can be challenged for their lack of democracy.
“The position the government has taken is that if I’m your doctor and am going to do an appendectomy, I will ask your permission,” he said.
“But if it’s euthanasia I have in mind, I won’t even bother raising the question with you.”
———
access=subscriber section=news, none, none
