The Canadian Wheat Board is beginning to change as it recognizes it needs a more “open market attitude,” said agriculture minister Gerry Ritz last week.
In an exchange with Liberal agriculture critic Wayne Easter during an appearance at the House of Commons agriculture committee Dec. 12, Ritz also predicted that if the farmer plebiscite on the future of the barley monopoly was restaged, more farmers would vote to end the monopoly.
“When you analyze it, the farmers in Western Canada, 62 percent of them, supported some sort of change, some sort of open market attitude at the wheat board,” Ritz said. “The wheat board themselves have come to that idea, too, that they’re going to have to change because they’re losing market share.”
Read Also
Ag in Motion speaker highlights need for biosecurity on cattle operations
Ag in Motion highlights need for biosecurity on cattle farms. Government of Saskatchewan provides checklist on what you can do to make your cattle operation more biosecure.
Easter reiterated the view of board monopoly supporters that only 13.8 percent voted to get the CWB out of barley marketing and therefore all the rest thought they were voting to keep the board involved.
Ritz reflected the marketing choice view that the largest bloc of farmers voted for marketing options that would include a voluntary wheat board as one option.
“If we had that same plebiscite today, I’m sure it would be in the 75 percent to 80 percent range judging by the calls I get from the affected farmers in my area,” said Ritz.
Later, the agriculture committee got tangled up in a raucous debate over motions from New Democrat Alex Atamanenko that the Conservative government compensate prairie farmers through the wheat board for costs imposed on the board by the government for firing former CWB president Adrian Measner and for changing election rules in the middle of the election.
He said part of the Measner-related costs that should not come out of wheat board funds is paying severance.
“There were costs incurred when Mr. Measner was fired,” said Atamanenko. “It would be logical for the government to assume those costs, as opposed to the wheat board and farmers.”
Conservatives on the committee, led by Saskatchewan MP David Anderson, parliamentary secretary for the wheat board file, vehemently opposed the proposal.
Anderson argued that the motion could not be passed unless details of Measner’s severance payment, as well as the full value of his salary, bonuses and memberships, were made public.
“I think it’s important for the record that we ask the question as to why the opposition does not want to reveal the information to farmers about the cost of Mr. Measner’s severance and retirement package,” said Anderson, a relentless CWB critic.
He suggested board management practices of giving bonuses, memberships and perks to executives also should be investigated.
“Through much of the time that Mr. Measner was the chairman (sic) of the Canadian Wheat Board, the volumes that the board was trading actually went down,” said the MP. He speculated that bonuses were based not on performance but used as hidden salary increases.
Over Anderson’s objections, Easter argued that it was illegal for the government to dismiss Measner for opposing an end to the monopoly because he was duty bound by law to uphold the board’s mandate and to follow the wishes of the majority of the board of directors.
“He could break the law and keep his job or he could obey the law and be fired by the government of Canada,” said Easter. “He chose to obey the law and live up to his responsibilities as CEO of the board.”
In the end, both Atamanenko motions passed with support of the opposition majority on the committee, but they do not bind the government.
