• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Canadian Farm Enterprise Network (CFEN)

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Canadian Farm Enterprise Network (CFEN)

    Good Morning;
    The following press release was sent out by CFEN. Every farmer should ask their CWB Director 1.Did he attend? and 2. who paid for his $400.00 supper?

    Parsley


    Immediate Press Release May 4, 2002
    CANADIAN FARM ENTERPRISE NETWORK (CFEN)

    CWB GIVES FARMERS’ WHEAT MONEY TO LIBERAL PARTY

    Six Canadian Wheat Board Directors and four CWB staff attended the Liberal Fundraiser in Winnipeg on Friday, May 31 at a cost of $400.00 per plate and farmer’s picked up the tab. CWB Director Bill Nicholson defended it by claiming that allcorporations attend fundraisers.

    Portage la Prairie farmer Jim Pallister states, “Because it is compulsory, the CWB is not a normal corporation nor is it supposed to be a political instrument. The Liberal Government has given the Wheat Board regulatory powers that forces the money belonging to farmers, many of them unwilling, through Board hands. This is why it is unethical for this money to be kicked back to the Liberal Party or any other party. “

    Nicholson and other Directors, both appointed and elected, completely ignored their own Code of Conduct rules titled Political Activities which were publically available before the CWB pulled them off their website. The CWB's Code of Ethics is quite clear:

    QUOTE

    “H. Political Activities

    Every director is free to participate in partisan political activities. A director’s political activities, however, must be clearly separated from activities related to his or her appointment.”
    “If engaging in political activities, directors must remain impartial and retain the perception of impartiality in relation to their duties and responsibilities. .........” “Partisan politics must not be introduced into the workplace in any way ..........” “In order to ensure its’ independence and objectivity, the CWB will not use corporate funds, goods or services
    as a contribution topolitical parties, candidates or campaigns.” UNQUOTE


    When contacted, the Alberta CWB Director James Chatenay said he refused to attend because he knew his District #2 wouldn’t approve of taking money from wheat sales to give to a political party’s fund raising event.

    "The CWB Board of Directors has ignored its’ own Code of Ethics in order to contribute to the Liberal Party which currently owes $3 Million ", farmer Carol Husband of Wawota says, “This lack of ethics is offensive. Every Canadian has the right to beinvolved politically but it must be at their own expense and therefore CFEN is requesting that the ten Directors and Staff who attended the Liberal fundraiser pay back the $4000.00 into the pooling accounts, and not submit any per diems for attending.”

    For more information contact:

    Jim Pallister (204) 274-2323 Carol Husband (306) 739-2900
    Portage la Prairie, Manitoba Wawota, Saskatchewan

    #2
    How do you measure Canadian Wheat Board Ethics?

    The CWB's Board of Directors had a clause in their April 2001 version of their Code of Ethics under the section Political Activites and posted it on their web page as follows:

    "In order to ensure its independence and objectivity, the CWB will not use corporate funds, goods or services as a contribution to political parties, candidates, or campaigns". Good stuff!

    This prevention clause prevented the CWB Board of Directors from dipping into farmers' pooling accounts, which were called "corporate funds" in the clause.

    In supposedly May 2001, the CWB quietly revised the April version and renamed the section Political Activities(link to Political Donations Policy)

    Then, the CWB Board of Directors removed the prevention clause and substituted it with the following clause:

    "The Board and individual directors will comply with the Political Donations Policy
    adopted by the Board."

    The CWB's $2.3Million Communications Department did not notify farmers of the
    change, nor was the change posted on the web.

    Who approves?

    Parsley

    Comment


      #3
      Parsley,

      "In order to ensure its independence and objectivity, the CWB will not use corporate funds, goods or services as a contribution to political parties, candidates, or campaigns".

      These were the terms which were agreed upon at the last election, and should have been maintained.

      The CWB's job is to market grain and serve western Canadian Grain Farmers, not contribute to political campaigns!

      I am sure proud that Jim Chatenay knows the difference between right and wrong, and refused to condone or attend this function, and wasteful spending of our money!

      Do the other directors, elected and appointed, understand why they are directors at the CWB? Does accountability even enter their minds?

      What else do they do with our hard earned, with blood sweat and tears, livelyhood?

      Comment


        #4
        Tom4, >>What else do they do with our hard earned, with blood sweat and tears, livelyhood?<<

        They waste $thousands, maybe $millions on advertising. Why in the world does a monopoly need to buy advertising? Why do they need to be GOLD sponsers for SARM conventions? Do they do the same for Alta. & Man. Rural municipal conventions? Why do they need to contribute to CJGX (Yorkton radio station) "supper in the field promotion"? The only answer I have is I guess it's real easy to spend someone elses money.

        Comment


          #5
          I'm posting a news release that's a bit old but it's not every day that a staff member speaks quite so clearly!
          __________________________________________________ _______


          NEWS RELEASE NEWS RELEASE NEWS RELEASE
          NEWS RELEASE NEWS RELEASE

          JUNE 6, 2001
          Canadian Farm Enterprise Network (CFEN)

          CWB Minister Goodale in Conflict of Interest Over Liberal Fundraising

          Not only have the courts ruled, but the Canadian Wheat Board Act itself states that the CWB has no "duty of care" to Western farmers and answers only to the Minister responsible:

          Section 18.1 The Minister may by order direct the Board.

          Staffer Jim Pietryk, speaking on behalf of the CWB, stated that political donations made to the Liberal Party of Canada was "an entry fee for doing business". But why would both elected and appointed Directors need to pay an entry fee to the Liberal Party of Canada when they already have a direct line to the Government of Canada?

          Parliament has always provided the Wheat Board with a specially appointed CWB Minister who directly reports to the Government of Canada, so what was the reason for attending a Liberal Party function? Or any political function? The Wheat Board has the ear of Government. Mr.Goodale's own appointed CWB representatives at the Winnipeg
          Liberal Fundraiser financially contributed to the Liberal Party, using money from farmers' pooling accounts.

          This is a breach of the Code of Conduct and presents a conflict of interest for the Minister. Would Minister Goodale direct the Board and Staff to attend?

          The Canadian Farm Enterprise Network is publically asking the Minister two questions:

          Minister Goodale:
          1. Will you issue an order to the CWB to recover farmers' money from the individuals who attended the Liberal fundraiser last week?

          2. The CWB is unrepentent in making these contributions and their response is that they have been attending these fundraisers for years and the CWB is immune to Access to Information This being the case, is there any other money that has been diverted to the Liberal party or any other political party since you became Minister in control of the
          CWB in 1993?

          "If the CWB has used its' control over Western grain farmers to raise money for the Liberal party, Ralph Goodale is complicit," says Jim Pallister, Portage la Prairie farmer. "Even if he has not encouraged it, he has allowed it to happen.
          __________________________________________________ _______

          parsley

          Comment


            #6
            Wedino,

            The CWB wants to be treated like a responsible member of our community...

            Then if they want this respect then their actions should earn our trust, rather than them saying trust us without the actions that earn this trust...

            Somehow they still don't understand that respect is earned, not bought...

            Comment


              #7
              Good point wedino. If you have a CWB election in your district, ask the new faces running what their position is. We know what the encumbent's is. Farmers can make policy an election isssue. Let's get quotes from the candidates and post what they say so that farmers online have a measuring stick for marking those x's.

              Parsley

              Comment


                #8
                Sack the whole lot and start with a whole new slate of directors.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Here's another question to ask the CWB Directors:

                  HERE IS WHAT THE CWB IS OUT THERE CLAIMING:

                  "once wheat and barley marketing in Western Canada is opened up, there is no going back under provisions of the North American Free Trade Agreement."

                  Here is what the NAFTA Regulations actually state:

                  Article 1502 states: Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to prevent a Party from designating a monopoly. (designate means to establish, designate or authorize, or to expand the scope of a monopoly to cover an additional good or service, after the date of entry into force of this Agreement)

                  Article 1503 states: Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to prevent a Party from maintaining or establishing a state enterprise.

                  It is becoming more and more difficult to believe what the CWB says.

                  Parsley

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Parsley,

                    It is getting to the point that a person should automatically assume the opposite of what the CWB says, is more likely the truth!

                    I do not understand how they really think in 423 Main, do they really think none of us can read and are really stupid on top?

                    I really think they should hire some new consulants, ones who have integrety, and who know the difference between right and wrong! It is obvious almost all the directors have been blinded by the big power and sweet rewards of being Chretiens buddys!

                    Comment


                      #11
                      wilagro,

                      I really think we have to carefully analyze what the candidates are saying. For example in the June 13 Western Producer on page 27 ,WP reporter Barry Wilson has some telling comment s about CWB Director and encumbent, John Clair This is how he describes John Clair:

                      "........if it was not for his son-in-law's off-farm income and his own income from CWB work, his children would have to leave the operation"

                      Now that's telling.

                      1. If John Clair cannot make money on his own farm, is he in any position to make sound decisions about making money for anyone else's farm? Is that helpful in his advisory-role? As a Director model? These are important questions farmers must ask.

                      2. John Clair states, " Off-income keeps the farm running. Last year, my farm produced zero net income, so we lived on off-farm" .

                      Wow!

                      It must be difficult to act as a Director if your PRIME concern MUST be, if there is no other source of income, to remain employed. Would farmers' interests be better served if they strive to elect directors who have serving a corporation as the prime motive instead of needing employment?

                      Dollars are hard to come by for all farmers and we have to be clear- thinking in what we need and expect from those we elect.

                      Parsley

                      Comment

                      • Reply to this Thread
                      • Return to Topic List
                      Working...