A visit to Canadian Wheat Board headquarters last week confirmed one thing for a group of farmers trying to end what they describe as the board’s excessive secrecy.
The solution to their concerns will be found some 1,700 kilometres farther east, in the nation’s parliament.
“There is nothing that can happen in Winnipeg,” said George Fletcher, chair of the Committee to End Secrecy at the CWB. “This has to happen in Ottawa and that’s where this case will continue on to.”
On that count at least, the committee and the board were in agreement when the half-day of what were described by both sides as amicable meetings ended March 10 at the board’s downtown offices.
Read Also
Agriculture ministers agree to AgriStability changes
federal government proposed several months ago to increase the compensation rate from 80 to 90 per cent and double the maximum payment from $3 million to $6 million
Board spokesperson Deanna Allen said it’s up to the federal government to determine the rules governing access to information about sales contracts, salaries and benefits at the CWB.
“We made it clear we are not able to bring about the changes they want,” she said.
She added that while the board supports the logic behind the rules, particularly the need to maintain customer confidentiality, the agency will not get involved in any political debate over changing them.
“We’re not going to help the committee, but I don’t think we’re going to try to thwart them either,” said Allen. “We’re neutral.”
The committee has been campaigning in recent months to make the board more open to public scrutiny. It wants the agency to be made subject to federal Access to Information laws and to have its books reviewed by the government’s auditor general.
Committee members say farmers should be able to find out more about specific grain sales, see how much money is paid to employees in salaries and benefits and review the board’s financial statements.
While it respects the integrity of the outside auditors who review the board’s finances for the agency’s annual report, the group says the auditor general should have the authority to review the board’s books and performance on behalf of farmers and taxpayers.
Fletcher said the committee is not campaigning to dismantle the board or to end its monopoly over wheat and barley exports.
“We don’t have a lot of complaints about the board,” he said from his farm at Eastend, Sask. “Mostly we just want more accountability.”
However Allen sees the committee as just another faction of the group of farmers trying to undermine the board, whether through border crossings, court challenges or political lobbying.
“It’s just the same individuals under a different name trying to find the board’s Achilles’ heel in some way,” she said, adding many committee member are prominent public advocates of dual marketing.
