Government proposals to reform the Canadian Wheat Board have split the farmer-elected wheat board advisory committee almost down the middle.
And a spokesperson for the slim majority that wants the government to scrap its legislation is accusing the wheat board of siding with the minority that wants reforms to proceed.
The spectacle was played out last week before the House of Commons agriculture committee as the advisory committee chair and vice-chair appeared to demand the bill be withdrawn because it would be the beginning of the end for the wheat board.
Read Also
Going beyond “Resistant” on crop seed labels
Variety resistance is getting more specific on crop disease pathogens, but that information must be conveyed in a way that actually helps producers make rotation decisions.
The offer of 10 farmer-elected seats on the 15-seat board is an “illusion” of farmer power, said advisory committee chair Art Macklin. The federal cabinet would retain control over the wheat board and by losing its crown agency status and beginning cash buying, the board would be diminished.
“It is totally unacceptable and should be withdrawn,” said the advocate of the wheat board’s marketing monopoly. But he conceded that he spoke on behalf of a divided 11-member CWB advisory committee.
Five of the members refused to endorse the presentation and instead, for the first time ever, published a minority report which criticized the legislation and said it should be improved and then approved, rather than scrapped.
“I have some problems with the legislation but producers have been telling us that the train is on the tracks, we aren’t going to stop it so try to get the best deal you can,” said advisory committee dissident member Terry Hanson, of Fillmore, Sask.
He said the minority objected to the aggressive tone of the majority report, and also the tactic of calling for withdrawal of the bill rather than its improvement.
Macklin said the bill is too flawed to save. The government should withdraw it and allow producer groups to develop a consensus on how to reform, strengthen and save the wheat board.
The Alberta Peace River district farmer and former National Farmers Union president said that while some Liberal MPs support the wheat board, the actions of the Liberal government have weakened it.
Macklin disputed government claims that one of the results of the legislation will be to democratize the wheat board and turn power over to farmers through the two-thirds of board members they can elect.
“We think this new structure will be more subject to political manipulation than the old structure,” he said.
Later, in an interview, Macklin accused the board of intervening in the advisory committee dispute to side with the minority.
Wanted other side heard
When it became clear the committee would follow normal practice by sending the chair and vice-chair to Ottawa to speak for the committee, who are both members of the anti-bill majority, the wheat board offered to fly a representative of the minority east to present its views.
However, the Commons agriculture committee refused to hear more than the official delegation. The CWB offer to send the dissidents to Ottawa was not accepted.
“We were shocked and disappointed,” said Macklin. “We felt the wheat board was taking sides and we did not feel that was appropriate. It was startling for us.”
Hanson said he thought it was appropriate for the board to want the other side in the dispute aired. “The advisory committee has never had a problem with the board getting our views out.”
However, he said last week’s public split into two camps was unprecedented in his experience on the committee.
