ROSETOWN, Sask. – They came, they saw, they concurred.
Some of the 75 or so farmers who showed up at the local Elks Hall on a mild autumn evening last week were hoping the all-candidates’ meeting would help them decide how to vote in the Canadian Wheat Board directors election.
For at least three, that’s just what happened.
“It was useful,” said Rosetown area farmer Garry Lawrence as he rehashed the evening’s events. “I learned who I’m going to vote for.”
His friend and fellow farmer Louis Sparks agreed.
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.
“I came because I wanted to hear all the views,” he said over the din of chairs being stacked and tables put away. “Now I’ve pretty much made up my mind who I’m going to vote for.”
On the other side of the room, farmer Phil Brown, of Fiske, said the speeches and question period made for an informative evening and helped him decide who to vote for.
“I took notes and put stars and checkmarks beside guys who made good points.”
As it happens, all three decided they were going to vote for the same candidate.
Saying they wanted to give dual marketing a try, they said they would be voting for Ken Ritter, the only one of five candidates who supports that idea.
“I believe in democracy and I’d like to give a dual market a try,” said Brown.
But this unscientific sampling of opinion doesn’t mean Ritter was everybody’s choice.
Judging by the applause during the two-hour session, there was plenty of support for candidates Jim Robbins, Bill Rosher, Ray Ryland and Alan Fischer, all supporters of single-desk selling through the wheat board.
But the pro-board candidates were also subjected to some unfriendly heckling from three or four vocal dual market supporters in the crowd, and the written questions put to the candidates were generally hostile to the board and single-desk selling.
Ryland said it would be a mistake to try to interpret what most farmers are thinking based on the views expressed at public forums like this.
“I observed one individual who was part of the heckling group walk to the front of the meeting with a handful of questions before the meeting even started,” he said, adding he suspects most of the questions came from a couple of individuals.
He said many people who attend such meetings are committed supporters of either a candidate or a particular view of the board.
“The opportunity to change people’s minds at these meetings is minimal,” he said. “Some folks will be there to try to make an impression, but they’re trying to make an impression on people who often already have their minds made up.”
The pitch
During the speeches and question period, candidates had a chance to make their pitch:
- Ritter said farmers should have the right to choose how they market grain and the board must be more open and accountable to farmers. Dual marketers are “on the right side of history,” he said.
- Fischer suggested he wants the board to halt rail line and elevator abandonment. He said individual farmers can’t fill a boat or go overseas to make a sale, and so must work together through the board.
- Robbins said the board only has value if it’s a single-desk seller. A voluntary board would just be a grain company without any assets. But he also said the directors can’t change the board’s marketing authority anyway, so voters should look at other issues.
- Rosher said the board should use its negotiating power to force the railways and grain companies to stop abandoning lines and elevators. Voters should elect people who want to maintain the farm community and a strong wheat board.
- Ryland said the biggest job for a director will be ensuring there is two-way communication between the board and farmers. Voters should choose competent people who can manage and run a big business, not ideologues.
