Farmers who have chosen to go to jail as part of their fight against
the Canadian Wheat Board are undermining the board’s democratic
structure, says CWB chair Ken Ritter.
“They are hijacking the election process,” Ritter told reporters Oct
31.
Earlier that day, 13 Alberta farmers went to jail in Lethbridge, Alta.,
rather than pay fines for violating the Customs Act during border
running incidents in the late 1990s.
Elections for directors are now under way in five of the board’s 10
Read Also
Interest in biological crop inputs continues to grow
It was only a few years ago that interest in alternative methods such as biologicals to boost a crop’s nutrient…
electoral districts.
Ritter said the timing of the legal proceedings was “fortuitous” for
those promoting the election of candidates who want to end the board’s
sales monopoly.
But he urged farmers to ignore the emotions and hoopla generated by the
events in Lethbridge.
“I’d simply ask all farmers to look at the candidates and look at their
views and platforms and make their decisions in a responsible, normal
way.”
Ritter said the 22 candidates offer a wide range of views on all issues.
Nine of them want to end the board’s single desk status and change the
board into what they call a “voluntary” marketing organization that
would sell Canadian grain in competition with private grain companies
and individual farmers.
Ritter said farmers who want to end single desk selling can pursue that
goal by voting for those candidates.
He said the marketing agency has no desire to see farmers go to jail,
but emphasized that the farmers involved chose to go to jail and create
a public spectacle, rather than pay their fines.
He also noted that the fines were imposed for violating the Customs
Act, and he said the wheat board had no role in determining their
conviction or sentence.
One of those going to jail is CWB District 2 director Jim Chatenay of
Red Deer, who declined to pay a fine of $2,500 levied for refusing to
turn over his van to Canada Customs officials after he delivered grain
into the U.S. without a wheat board permit in July 1996.
Ritter said the board’s governance and management committee is
examining whether Chatenay’s conduct violates the board’s code of
ethics, which requires directors to act “in the best interests” of the
board and not do anything to “undermine the reputation or integrity” of
the corporation.
That committee will report to the full board of directors on whether
Chatenay’s behaviour merits disciplinary measures.
“At this point no decision has been made,” said Ritter, who criticized
his fellow director for acting in an “alarmist, grandstanding manner.”
