How could the launch of the decisive parliamentary debate on the future of the Canadian Wheat Board have been so tame?
True, there was some Conservative cheering and opposition jeering when agriculture minister Gerry Ritz stood, seconded by minister of state for finance Ted Menzies, to table Bill C-18 Oct. 18.
But the next afternoon when debate began as the first step in demolishing the monopoly, there was little emotion on the floor of the House of Commons.
For Ritz, who says ending the CWB monopoly led to his entry into federal Reform politics in Saskatchewan in 1993 and then election as an MP in 1997, it sounded like another day at the office.
Read Also
Worrisome drop in grain prices
Prices had been softening for most of the previous month, but heading into the Labour Day long weekend, the price drops were startling.
“There were two issues that got me into Parliament way back then,” he said last week. “One was the long gun registry and the other was the wheat board.”
But how was he feeling the moment he became the minister to do the deed after all these years?
“I’m not saying I’m euphoric or anything like that,” he said hours after debate began. “It is just a good solid business move for my bottom line and for the other farmers out there.”
Can’t you feel the passion? Perhaps it is a Conservative plan to not appear too triumphant, but Prince Albert, Sask., MP Randy Hoback fell off the wagon a bit by telling the Commons it was a great day for farmers.
“I am so excited.”
In response, opposition MPs were more energized, emotional and rhetorical, but still, the debate at times seemed a bit like listening to a discussion of amendments to clause one, sub-clause two of the Income Tax Act.
The debate has been filled with emotion, theatrics, toxic anger and venom since the Palliser Wheat Growers Association first began challenging CWB hegemony and Saskatchewan Wheat Pool’s support of it in the 1970s.
Demonstrations were held on the Prairies last week but none on Parliament Hill, unlike the days of the Crow rate grain subsidy debate in the early 1980s.
But in Parliament, despite allegations that Bill C-18 is illegal (from the Liberals) and earlier promises from the New Democratic Party to use “every trick in the book” to delay the bill, there seemed little occasion.
Perhaps it is that the arguments have been made, the debate is decades old and there is little new to say.
Perhaps it is that both main opposition parties are without permanent leaders and their focus is on leadership (the NDP) or rebuilding (Liberals).
Or maybe NDP critic Pat Martin explained it even as he ridiculed and challenged government defences.
“I must admit that there is a feeling of helplessness on this side because the Conservatives have chosen to use their majority to ram this change through to the prairie economic base without even consulting the farmers or allowing them the vote that they are guaranteed through legislation,” he said.
Indeed, the majority Conservatives have shown themselves prepared to use an iron parliamentary fist to force it through in almost record time.
So barring an unlikely court reversal, the debate is almost over and its end not in doubt.
Maybe that’s it.
