Eight of the former farmer-elected directors of the Canadian Wheat Board were in court this week, seeking to stop any further implementation of Bill C-18.
In the face of protest from grain producers and a Federal Court decision criticizing the way the government had ignored parts of the Canadian Wheat Board Act, Bill C-18 became law on Dec. 15, 2011. The bill effectively ended the CWB's "single-desk" system, meaning farmers can sell their own wheat without going through the Wheat Board. Bill C-18 also meant dismissal of the 10 producer-elected members of the CWB, leaving the five government-appointed members in charge of the organization.
It was a frigid January 17 when Allan Oberg, a former director of the Wheat Board along with seven other former directors, began efforts to obtain an injunction that would halt any further implementation of the Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act.
Media, farmers and interested parties crowded the small Winnipeg courtroom where the case was being heard. Many in attendance had to stand.
Colin MacArthur, council for the plaintiff, told the court that it should not be forced to rule on Justice Douglas Campbell's December ruling, which found that federal Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz ignored Section 47.1 of the Canadian Wheat Board Act when he introduced bill C-18 to Parliament. He then proceeded to argue that ending the single-desk system had done "irreparable harm" to Western Canadian wheat and barley growers, and that an injunction should be granted until the validity of Bill C-18 was tested by the court.
The federal lawyer representing the Attorney General of Canada, Robert MacKinnon, argued that it was impossible to tell if Bill C-18 will have a negative effect on farmers, and cited a 2008 study which suggested that the CWB had exaggerated its ability to demand premiums for Canadian wheat on the international market.
MacKinnon also told the court it should not regard the case as one representing the interests of all western grain farmers. He stated that it was instead about the eight former directors, and argued that it was impossible to know how many farmers support the efforts of the plaintiffs. Finally, he added that an appeal to Justice Campbell's Federal Court ruling was currently underway, making the injunction to stop Bill C-18 unnecessary.
MacArthur told the court that in the face of Minister Ritz's previous action in ignoring a Federal Court ruling, the court should not assume that he would heed the result of the appeal, and therefore the injunction is needed.
MacKinnon responded that the injunction would impede the ability of western grain farmers to sign forward contracts for their 2012 crops, and would only serve to add to the uncertainty being faced by producers and buyers alike.
After two full days of testimony, MacArthur concluded his response to MacKinnon's arguments by saying that the eight former board members represented eight districts that support the single-desk system, and the federal government should be held accountable for the damage they have done to western farmers through Bill C-18.
"The statement was made that there is no 'human cry'; you have eight former directors that are representative of a great number of producers, and they sure are trying to hue and cry through this court," he said.
Justice Perlmutter decided to reserve his decision, leaving the question of the CWB's fate open until he makes a ruling.
Original Article
Source: Rabble.ca
In the face of protest from grain producers and a Federal Court decision criticizing the way the government had ignored parts of the Canadian Wheat Board Act, Bill C-18 became law on Dec. 15, 2011. The bill effectively ended the CWB's "single-desk" system, meaning farmers can sell their own wheat without going through the Wheat Board. Bill C-18 also meant dismissal of the 10 producer-elected members of the CWB, leaving the five government-appointed members in charge of the organization.
It was a frigid January 17 when Allan Oberg, a former director of the Wheat Board along with seven other former directors, began efforts to obtain an injunction that would halt any further implementation of the Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act.
Media, farmers and interested parties crowded the small Winnipeg courtroom where the case was being heard. Many in attendance had to stand.
Colin MacArthur, council for the plaintiff, told the court that it should not be forced to rule on Justice Douglas Campbell's December ruling, which found that federal Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz ignored Section 47.1 of the Canadian Wheat Board Act when he introduced bill C-18 to Parliament. He then proceeded to argue that ending the single-desk system had done "irreparable harm" to Western Canadian wheat and barley growers, and that an injunction should be granted until the validity of Bill C-18 was tested by the court.
The federal lawyer representing the Attorney General of Canada, Robert MacKinnon, argued that it was impossible to tell if Bill C-18 will have a negative effect on farmers, and cited a 2008 study which suggested that the CWB had exaggerated its ability to demand premiums for Canadian wheat on the international market.
MacKinnon also told the court it should not regard the case as one representing the interests of all western grain farmers. He stated that it was instead about the eight former directors, and argued that it was impossible to know how many farmers support the efforts of the plaintiffs. Finally, he added that an appeal to Justice Campbell's Federal Court ruling was currently underway, making the injunction to stop Bill C-18 unnecessary.
MacArthur told the court that in the face of Minister Ritz's previous action in ignoring a Federal Court ruling, the court should not assume that he would heed the result of the appeal, and therefore the injunction is needed.
MacKinnon responded that the injunction would impede the ability of western grain farmers to sign forward contracts for their 2012 crops, and would only serve to add to the uncertainty being faced by producers and buyers alike.
After two full days of testimony, MacArthur concluded his response to MacKinnon's arguments by saying that the eight former board members represented eight districts that support the single-desk system, and the federal government should be held accountable for the damage they have done to western farmers through Bill C-18.
"The statement was made that there is no 'human cry'; you have eight former directors that are representative of a great number of producers, and they sure are trying to hue and cry through this court," he said.
Justice Perlmutter decided to reserve his decision, leaving the question of the CWB's fate open until he makes a ruling.
Original Article
Source: Rabble.ca
No comments:
Post a Comment