I note with interest that after the results of the last Canadian Wheat Board election, several comments have referred to the words won and lost.
I am curious how there were wins and losses in an election that was about finding the best way to serve farmers’ interests. I thought that those who lost either were of an opinion opposite to the majority of their constituents or other candidates had a better qualification.
Those who won obviously spoke for the majority of their constituents but all they won was the right to be at the board and represent their constituents’ views.
Read Also
Europe holds promise for Canadian lentils
Pulse Canada is trying to help boost lentil consumption in Europe, which is already the fourth largest market.
The whole issue of the CWB should be a respectful dialogue regarding the best way of bringing maximum returns to farmers. No one wins or loses. It is just that the majority agrees with a certain procedure.
It is unfortunate that CWB elections have become an issue of winning or losing, forgetting that the main thrust should be a discussion.
One comment that “eventually we will win” is very interesting. The person making that statement must feel that his viewpoint will still be valid whenever that event arrives. Could it be that when this eventuality arrives, the situation will have changed to the point a whole new procedure will have to be developed? What of this person’s stance at that point? Would he be prepared to change?
There are few people who disagree with the statement that there is strength in numbers. That is the basis of the CWB. That the CWB has been known to make questionable decisions should be an expectation. No human organization is perfect so shouldn’t the focus be on a respectful dialogue that seeks to find the best alternatives for the benefit of most farmers?
One thing is certain, if we keep up the bickering and criticizing, we will all be losers.
Horst Schreiber,
Ohaton, Alta.
