The Senate has thrown back into the government’s lap an amended Canadian Wheat Board bill that must once again face a House of Commons debate and vote, probably in early June.
It gives the government at least three weeks to find time to pass the bill again before the House of Commons adjourns for the summer.
The bill will then have to go through the Senate once more.
If approved before summer adjournment, it would clear the way for autumn elections to the board and a Jan. 1, 1999 start of the new CWB era.
Read Also
Final crop reports show strong yields, quality
Crops yielded above average across the Prairies this year, and quality is generally average to above-average.
The amendments, which senators insisted would make the reformed wheat board “work better for farmers,” may run into criticism from both sides.
Cautious proposals
They are cautious proposals, arguing that the inclusion clause be scrapped, the partially elected board of directors be consulted on who the minister appoints as president and the federal auditor general be allowed to audit the CWB books.
The committee also recommended that regulations cap the contingency fund at $30 million.
But the senators dodged the most contentious issue – whether prairie farmers should be given a chance to opt out of the wheat board export marketing monopoly as is planned for the Ontario wheat board.
Prairie groups supporting an end to the wheat board monopoly quickly condemned the Senate report as a “whitewash” because it made no recommendation on the marketing choice issue.
“By ignoring the Ontario situation, it appears that this report will further fuel western alienation and regional divisions,” said Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association president Larry Maguire.
Meanwhile, at least one of the proposed amendments could give Canadian Wheat Board minister Ralph Goodale some trouble.
The Senate is recommending the federal auditor general be able to delve into CWB books. Goodale in the past has been reluctant to endorse the idea, preferring the wheat board’s use of private auditors.
“That will have to be studied to make sure we understand the implications,” Goodale press secretary John Embury said May 15. “It is not clear yet on that one what the minister’s reaction will be.”
He said Goodale should have no problem with the proposal that the inclusion clause be dropped in favor of a requirement that any future government attempt to add or subtract grains must be endorsed by a producer vote. “That is pretty well what the minister proposed himself.”
Consulting on president
And he said the request that the board of directors be consulted by the minister before a president is appointed also should not face government opposition:
“That’s probably what would have happened anyway and I can’t see how it’s troublesome to write it in.”
Senate ag committee chair Len Gustafson, a Saskatchewan Conservative, said the government also should endorse the proposal that the auditor general be given access to the wheat board’s books.
“I’m hopeful that they see this could put some trust back in the system,” he said in a May 15 interview. “There is a lot of mistrust of the board out there.”
Gustafson said if the government rejects any of the three proposed amendments, he will vote against the bill when it returns to the Senate for final approval.
“But I guess then it will pass if the Liberals want it to,” he said. “They do have the majority.”
