Letter-gate has made its way to the halls of Parliament.
The brouhaha over a proposed letter-writing campaign that some claim was designed to support the government’s plans to restructure the Canadian Wheat Board was debated in the House of Commons and will end up in front of a Commons committee later this month.
At the same time, the Canadian Wheat Board was dragged into the imbroglio, denying suggestions by Conservative MP David Anderson that it was orchestrating opposition to government plans to dismantle the board’s single desk marketing powers.
Read Also
Canola oil transloading facility opens
DP World just opened its new canola oil transload facility at the Port of Vancouver. It can ship one million tonnes of the commodity per year.
The letter-writing issue was raised during question period Sept. 25 when New Democrat agriculture critic Alex Atamanenko asked CWB minister Chuck Strahl what he knew about a proposal by a Regina communications company to write letters to newspapers on behalf of pro-open market organizations: “Is the minister aware of this? Is his department paying for it? What is he going to do to stop it?”
Strahl replied he had no idea what Atamanenko was talking about and later issued a statement denying any involvement.
“Any allegation that I or my office, in any way, is linked to a letter-writing campaign is nonsense,” he said.
Charlton Communications had proposed to three agriculture organizations that it write letters to the editor to be approved and signed by their members, to counter the “propaganda” being put out by “the other side.” The e-mail did not specifically mention the CWB issue.
The e-mail containing the proposal said it was a response to suggestions from “government, MPs and others.” That led to charges from some farm groups and politicians that the government had ordered the letter-writing campaign to lend support to its plans for the CWB.
Company president Mary-Lynn Charlton later issued a statement saying her company was not acting on behalf of Strahl’s office and that her firm neither has contracts with nor receives funding from Agriculture Canada or any government department.
She criticized the National Farmers Union for making unfounded allegations about links between her company and the government.
The company’s lawyers sent a note to the NFU ordering it to refrain from making any statements alleging that Charlton was acting at the request of the government.
Later in the week the standing committee on agriculture passed a motion calling Charlton to Ottawa to testify on the matter Oct. 19.
During an exchange on the subject at a Sept. 28 committee meeting, Anderson said that if the committee was going to investigate Charlton, it should also look at the CWB.
He said the committee should look at whether the board has been using its database to make contacts for the purposes of writing letters and whether the board was involved in the formation of a new grassroots pro-single desk group called Real Voice for Choice.
CWB spokesperson Maureen Fitzhenry said the board had nothing to do with the formation of the new farm group and that it would be illegal to use the wheat board’s database for anything other than business dealings with farmers.
