Question to thalpenny

[parsley]

thalpenny,

Would you please answer this question or if you don't know the answer, would you please refer it to someone in the CWB who can:

Does the 14(b)requirement, which is the pecuniary benefit phrase, lie in the Licensing Part IV or in the Marketing Part III?

Parsley

[parsley]

thalpenny,

We seem to be getting nowhere!

I'll rephrase the question and maybe it will be a little easier to understand :

Does the 14(b) requirement, which, ACCORDING TO WHAT THE CWB TELLS FARMERS, is supposedly the buyback, actually lie in the Licensing Part IV or in the Marketing Part III?

Parsley

[parsley]

thalpenny,

Right down to the bare bones:


Is 14(b) in the Licensing or in the Marketing part of the Act?

Parsley

[parsley]

Yoohoo, thalpenny?

[parsley]

Vader,

You seem to have a lot of Wheat Board information at your fingertips. Can you answer this question for thalpenny?

Parlsy

[TOM4CWB]

Parsley;

This situation reminds me of the Customs Minister of the Canadian Government.

Many of us appealed the seizures of our vehicles, to the Minister of CCRA, and the Minister had a decision to make about whether the seizures were legal or not.

The CCRA Minister refuses to decide whether these seizures were legal, and yet the Minister is proceeding to jail farmers who don't even know if what customs did in seizing these vehicles was legal or not.

And if the CCRA Minister decided today, this decision would not be a legally binding decision for years, cause the farmers have instant appeal rights to the courts, and we know how long this process can drag out!

INJUSTICE swirls around the CWB like flies around a dead rotting...