Being out of political power for a while seems to give politicians a fresh new perspective. Last weekend, a group of 100 prominent Canadians gathered to discuss the continuing problem of national unity.
One of the biggest threats to national unity, they said, is public distrust of political leaders. That’s quite an admission for a group that included leading roles by such former premiers as Bob Rae of Ontario and Peter Lougheed of Alberta.
It’s also probably entirely true. People are naturally fed up with politicians who lie to them, who shrug off election promises, and who frequently get caught in petty scandals.
Read Also
Late season rainfall creates concern about Prairie crop quality
Praying for rain is being replaced with the hope that rain can stop for harvest. Rainfall in July and early August has been much greater than normal.
But there may be a lot more to public frustration than this. There seems to be a growing feeling that the national decision-makers have utterly no comprehension of the hopes and situations of people in Western Canada.
A young Alberta farmer who called recently said he simply can’t understand what governments are doing – deer are eating his crops but he can’t shoot them; he’s considered a risk to society and subject to new gun-control arms because he has firearms, but people on nearby reserves are exempt; those who believe in traditional family values seem to be considered second-class citizens; and some prison security is so lax that inmates just hop over four-foot walls to escape.
All these programs, of course, have been developed by experts who can put forward lengthy justifications for them.
That’s the problem, the farmer said: “Everybody’s educated to the point where they don’t have any common sense.” Understandably, he and others just want government to stay as much as possible out of their lives.
And that’s where the Canadian Wheat Board comes in. This farmer sees it as just one more example of alien bureaucrats telling him how to run his life.
If the board is to survive, it and its defenders need to work hard to correct this misperception. The board is indeed a government agency, but it owes its legitimacy to farmer support and to its goal of serving farmers’ interests – not government interests.
If changes can be identified to help the board better meet its goal, or even just to improve understanding of board operations, then change should be made. But the board should not be tarred, feathered and crippled as part of some struggle against big-brother government.
Some board powers do indeed date from wartime regulations, but generations of farmers worked to preserve and extend those powers after the war.
Board powers exist because of farmer pressure. The board is to serve farmers’ interests and be responsive to their desires. That’s the way it should stay.
