The Federal Court of Appeal has reserved judgment in an appeal against an earlier ruling that federal legislation to end the Canadian Wheat Board monopoly disregards “the rule of law.”
However, whatever the court’s ultimate judgment, both sides agreed it will not affect the legality of the legislation approved by Parliament last December and that will end the CWB single desk Aug. 1.
At issue is the performance of agriculture minister Gerry Ritz and whether he followed the rules when creating the legislation to fulfill a Conservative commitment to “marketing freedom” for prairie grain farmers.
Read Also
U.S. livestock: Cattle climb on low herd numbers, hogs mostly up
Chicago cattle futures continued to climb on Monday after reports on Friday showed a smaller herd than expected. Hogs settled mostly higher.
Last December, Manitoba Federal Court judge Douglas Campbell ruled that by writing a bill to end the CWB single desk without farmer approval in a vote, Ritz should be “held accountable for his disregard of the rule of law.”
A 1998 amendment to the CWB Act required that before grains are added to or subtracted from the monopoly, farmer approval in a plebiscite was required.
Ritz argued that the 2011 Conservative majority government with strong support from prairie farmers was all the approval he needed.
And he was not adding or subtracting affected grains but abolishing the monopoly.
During more than four hours of argument in an Ottawa courtroom May 23, lawyers for the Canadian government squared off against lawyers for eight fired CWB directors, Friends of the Canadian Wheat Board and the Council of Canadians, arguing that point of legal interpretation.
Although the court has been asked to move quickly on a ruling, court rulings often can be months in gestation.
In the original proceedings, judge Campbell, on the other hand, issued a 21-page ruling just a day after arguments ended, a point noted by federal lawyer Robert McKinnon.
The ruling that Ritz had an obligation to hold a farmer vote according to 1998 amendments to the Canadian Wheat Board Act did not slow the government down.
The House of Commons already had approved the bill and the next week it was approved by the Senate and given royal assent.
After the Ottawa hearing, both sides said they were pleased.
“I think it went well,” said former CWB chair Allen Oberg, one of the litigants. “I think the government tried to bring other side issues in but what is at stake here is the government following the rules, which it didn’t.”
Oberg was joined in the courtroom by six of the seven other former directors fired when the bill took effect and government appointees replaced the majority farmer-elected board.
Ritz issued a statement arguing that the policy is moving forward.
“We are confident that the court will see the merits of our case.”
The day began with the Federal Court of Appeal judges rejecting an application that argued Ritz and the government should not be allowed to appeal the earlier court judgment because they had ignored it.
