Will the Senate upset government's CWB bill?

The Senate agriculture committee study of Canadian Wheat Board legislation is the last chance in this go-around for board critics to try to win their points. What are their chances? Poor to almost non-existent, but there are some intriguing possibilities.

The Senate will hold public hearings across the west. From far and wide, the pitch will be made that the bill needs fixing. There will be enormous pressure on the sometimes-independent Senators to do what the Liberal majority in the Commons refused to do – make substantial amendments.

Read Also

Producers face the reality of shifting grain price expectations

Significant price shifts have occurred in various grains as compared to what was expected at the beginning of the calendar year. Crop insurance prices can be used as a base for the changes.

The opening day of committee hearings in Ottawa showed the Senate itself divided.

The government position obviously will have its strong defenders, including Alberta’s Nick Taylor and Joyce Fairbairn.

But there also are critics – Liberal Senator Eugene Whelan taking the view that the bill could undermine the wheat board and Saskatchewan Senators Len Gustafson (Tory) and Herb Sparrow (Liberal) raising questions about whether it goes too far to retain control.

All sides concede there is a strong possibility they will propose amendments, which would have to go back to the Commons for a vote if passed by the Senate.

That in itself is not a threat for the government. Its Commons majority will vote down anything Goodale does not want to see in the final product.

But wheat board minister Ralph Goodale acknowledged last week that the Senators do have one other weapon, more powerful than their ability to propose amendments. It is the ability to delay.

Goodale told them he would like the legislation approved by April to give officials five or six months to organize late autumn elections for board of directors.

As usual, he is working with a tight deadline. That rankled some Senators who say they will not adhere to any political deadline set by the government to complete their work quickly.

But Goodale also handed them some leverage. If the Senators decide more study is needed or changes are required, they could drag out the committee study and the debate.

If the calendar crept along toward the end of April or into May without final Senate votes, the government could start to get a bit anxious and perhaps be open to some negotiation.

Of course, the Liberals hold a slim Senate majority and party pressure will be applied to make sure the debate on Bill C-4 is fast and efficient.

But Senators who have secure jobs have been known to defy their political bosses, particularly if they feel they are riding a public wave of anger that the elected politicians have ignored.

They also have been known to push back occasionally if the Commons tries to herd them. Recall that Sparrow, a Liberal, cast the vote which killed the Liberal government’s Pearson Airport legislation in the last Parliament.

The irony, of course, is that many of the Reformers and farmers who will be pleading with the Senators to show some independence are the same people who normally dismiss the Senate as an irrelevant political eyesore that should disappear.