Two bills that could have a profound impact on the future of the Canadian Wheat Board were caught up this week in political manoeuvring on Parliament Hill.
When all was said and done, opposition members agreed there was no way the bills can be passed for the next crop year.
“They’re simply out of time, said NDP member Pat Martin.
“Getting it done for Aug. 1, 2008, is impossible.”
One bill gives federal cabinet authority to change the board’s marketing powers, the other changes CWB director election rules.
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…
The federal government said last week it wanted to send the two bills directly to the standing committee on agriculture, without going through second reading. The opposition had no objection.
Normally, that requires a five hour debate in the House of Commons.
However, on June 9 the Conservatives asked the House for unanimous consent to send the bills to committee following a limited debate in which each party could speak for 10 minutes.
Unanimous consent was denied, prompting CWB minister Gerry Ritz to accuse the opposition parties of obstructing Parliament and proving they are “out of touch” with western Canadian farmers.
The government says it wants to speed up passage of the bills.
“We’re just trying to expedite them,” MP David Anderson, parliamentary secretary to the minister of agriculture, said in an interview June 6.
“We want to get the committee’s input on them as quickly as possible and then get them back to the House and deal with them as soon we can.”
Wayne Easter, a Liberal member of the House standing committee on agriculture committee, said the government’s proposal was an attempt to stifle debate.
“It’s clear the minister of agriculture wants to ram this to committee without having to outline the broad issues and without having to answer any questions in the House,” he said in an interview before the government motion was introduced.
Easter said the opposition has no problem with the bills going directly to committee before second reading, but added there is a proper process to follow, which would involve at least five hours of open debate in the House.
Opposition MPs say the move indicates the government has given up gaining approval on the bills in the current session of Parliament.
“I think it’s an admission of defeat to submit them to committee at this stage,” said Martin, a member of the agriculture committee.
If the bill receives second reading before going to committee, any amendments must respect the intent and principles outlined in the legislation.
If it doesn’t go through second reading, that’s not the case.
Martin said it opens the door for the bills to be “gutted” by the opposition. He thinks the government wants the opposition parties, which hold a majority on the committee, to do just that.
“If that happens, they’ll blame the committee and the opposition for the bill’s failure,” he said. “They’re looking for a scapegoat as to why they haven’t moved on this long before now.”
Anderson said the government hopes the opposition members on the committee don’t “engage in mischief” on the CWB bills.
“Western Canadian farmers want these passed as quickly as possible,” he said. “I hope the opposition has the wisdom to pass these bills basically as they are.”
