CWB, Election Results

[TOM4CWB]

Hi Guys;

Ritter, McCreary, Flaman, and Toews

These are the CWB selected winners, the CWB wanted directors who have the best knowledge and experience. They bought and paid for them at the expense of a massive amount of good will. ENJOY the "single desk" CWB.

AS my nominator Wes (who was cheated out of his ballot) said;

BOY TOM When it faaalls... it suuuure is gooooing to bee aaaaa biiiigggg ffaaaallll.



I hope no person is surprised... I certainly am not.

[RocksinAlta]

Hooray for MacTavish.

[TOM4CWB]

News releases
2004 CWB news releases
Farmers’ support for CWB evident in election results


Winnipeg – Farmers in four districts across Western Canada have elected their representatives to the CWB’s farmer-controlled board of directors for the next four years. The elections results, as announced yesterday by the election coordinator, Meyers Norris Penny (MNP), are as follows:

District 4 – Ken Ritter (incumbent)
District 6 – Ian McCreary (incumbent)
District 8 – Rod Flaman (incumbent)
District 10 – Bill Toews (new director)
James Chatenay, the incumbent director in District 2, was acclaimed.

All of the elected directors expressed strong support for the CWB’s single-desk system of marketing grain during the election campaign.

“The CWB is one of the few farmer-controlled institutions left on the Prairies and the majority of farmers want to ensure it remains,” said Ken Ritter, who is chair of the CWB’s board of directors. “These results demonstrate that western Canadian farmers continue to support the single-desk system of marketing, recognizing the clout this gives them in a global marketplace increasingly dominated by large multinationals.”


Ritter congratulated all his fellow candidates for the time and effort they devoted to the director-election campaigns. “With voting districts that span several federal ridings, campaigning means a lot of hours on the road,” he said, adding candidates all relied on support from their families and friends.

The elected and acclaimed directors will take office December 31, 2004. A regularly scheduled board meeting and a long-term strategic planning session will take place January 18-20, 2005.


Complete election results can be found on MNP’s CWB director elections Web site, www.cwbelection.com.
Controlled by western Canadian farmers, the CWB is the largest wheat and barley marketer in the world. As one of Canada’s biggest exporters, the Winnipeg-based organization sells grain to more than 70 countries and returns all sales revenue, less marketing costs, to Prairie farmers.



For more information, please contact:
Louise Waldman
Manager, Media Relations
Tel: (204) 983-3101

[AdamSmith]

The real story of this election outcome is the pathetic 32% voter turnout. I even think one district had 29%.

One word comes to mind.

Irrelevant.

Clearly more than 2/3's of the, so called, eligable voters couldn't care less.

So, don't sweat the results, Tom.

Being on the Board of Directors of the Etch-a-sketch company during the computer chip era is, well, irrelevant.

AdamSmith

[JD4ME]

If its irrelevant why do you care so much??

[JD4ME]

Why do I get the feeling that if 3 percent had voted and the anti single desk candidates had won suddenly it would be a lot more "relevant"?
If you believe in a cause and you suffer a setback you quietly get up brush yourself off and continue on if the cause is a sound one it will eventually gain enough support to prevail. Whining and blaming is neither noble or progressive it is the sign of someone who isn't strong enough either in themselves or what they are striving to accomplish. It reflects poorly on yourself and your cause.

[TOM4CWB]

JD4ME;

Take a look at this one, quoted from above:

"All of the elected directors expressed strong support for the CWB’s single-desk system of marketing grain during the election campaign."

Excuse me.

Jim Chatenay, please forgive them...

Jim Chatenay, and District 2, please forgive the rest of us for being so blind, so uncaring, so greedy...

We will all pay, maybe not today or tomorrow, but JD4ME greed and stealing from our neighbour did not build western Canada... and the "Single Desk" continues to decrease the value of all of my assets every day.

This fact will not change... until we will colectively all pull our heads out of the sand.

Federated Cooperatives Ltd. operated a mulit billion dollar enterprise... no person goes to jail... and FCL gets stronger without a "Single Desk".

Enough said?

JD4ME, please take your hand out of my wallet. I do not appreciate it, at aLL.

[les]

Its a sad day in this country when again this mafia type crap can continue to rule as to how we can sell our own grain.

[IAmCanola]

We grow oilseeds, wheat, coarse grains and pulses. We believe in common sense and being pragmatic. We make a good living, support our community and endever to be a burden to no one (for any reason).

Spirited debate is a welcome force in bringing change to our agricultural industry; finger-pointing and self-serving pontification is not.

TAKE THE HINT !!!

[les]

excuse me for a sec while I go get my dictionary

[les]

IAmCanola...So you are saying we should just shut up and do as we are told to do??

[TOM4CWB]

IamCanola;

Question;

Would you say charging $30-45/t buyback on feed wheat and barley, for a license any one else outside the "designated area" in Canada gets free...

when the CWB Act does not differentiate between we farmers inside the "designated area" and those Canadians outside...

That your enforcment and approval of CWB action... isn't it inherent in your statement?

Are you telling me this CWB buyback policy that stops trade, stops value adding, stops the creation of prosperity... and that when you personally have a share in these CWB proceeds... yourself... or worse yet just stop those who need an opportunity to work hard...

Dead in their tracks...


Dead and prevented the opportunity to create prosperity for their own community and family...

Isn't your own statement rather pompus in the first place... when the truth and obvious effect of CWB "Single Desk" policies are studied?

[charliep]

Just a couple of my thoughts.

1) The optics of the controller of the election lists putting out a press release celebrating the election of CWB candidates. See http://www.cwb.ca/en/news/releases/2004/123004.jsp. This would be like elections Canada celebrating a Liberal victory in a federal election. Major change is needed here. This is not criticizing Meyers Norris Penny as they are simply (from what I understand) administrators of the process and have nothing to do with the election list.

2) Perhaps some of this comes to a continuous mudding of the waters between board of director opinion/policy and operations responsibility/accountability to pool participants as well as impartiality in providing services. Major reform of CWB governance is needed.

3) For both sides of this issue, where is the 60 what ever percent not voters thinking at. Do they not care? Are they happy with the status quo? Are they so fed up and disenfranchised with the current system they think the election is a waste of time? If they are forced to come off the fence, which side will they go to?

4) Putting this into the context of change being caused by outside forces and impact on CWB three pillars. Government guarantees will be gone shortly. With producer pricing options, the whole concepts around price pooling have changed. The only pillar that remain almost untouched is single desk selling. With this election, this last pillar will be the lifeboat the current board of directors will hang onto.

[IAmCanola]

Question: Does spirited debate mean shutup and do what you are told?

Charlie, would you please explain moderator's role, as you see it in your position. Thank you.

[charliep]

As a moderator, I have the role of ensuring keeping this thread going. I also have a role of trying to include marketing topics other than straight CWB policy.

I also have a role within AAFRD as well as personal opinion. I feel free both in the organization and myself to express my opinion.

I realize things get heated in here on occasion but I have to ask what aspects of these threads prevents free speech. My goal is just the opposite. That does not prevent asking tough questions or guaranteeing people won't get mad at what has been said.