The CWB’s Real Problem With Marketing Choice

7 Replies to “The CWB’s Real Problem With Marketing Choice”

1. It would appear that the tactic of stating the the CWB cannot exist in a dual marketing environment is having some effect. Between 2005 and 2006, the dual-market option lost 8% support. With the 3 options, it will be hard to say that a large majority of farmers want 1,2,or 3.

2. It’s easy to say, however, that a majority don’t want the CWB to keep its monopoly.

3. I’m sure the numbers in favor of just the cwb will increase with the vote…but not enough to stop the Feds from making barley marketing open… My question is: how will the Liberals and Ndp spin this pole, by the Board?????

4. Wasn’t it Kevin Hursh who said that it was intellectually dishonest for the government to ask three questions? What is it then when the wheat board asks them and asks them first?

5. What utter BS. If its mine they have no say.
   …and I will fight to the death my and your rights to private property.

6. Who will be counting the ballots? I would distrust the CWB being in on the count except in a scrutineering role. Even in that role you can bet they will dispute every possible free choice ballot. Here’s hoping for freedom for the barley producers followed as soon as possible for the same freedom for wheat growers. When that is settled the next move should be for similar freedoms for dairy, egg and poultry producers by at the very least shaking up the quotas to more fairly distribute them across the country, or better still abolish the marketing boards altogether.

7. One of those choices is irrelevant in a free country.