CWB Election... should people be allowed to vote twice or more?

[TOM4CWB]

Melvill,

What is your thought on people who have access to a CWB ballot because they are an "Actual Producer" ...

But then sign a Statutory Declaration to get another second ballot personally...

(from a secondary permit book suffix # personally)

Allowing themselves and their interests to vote twice in this CWB election?

[TOM4CWB]

Lee, Here are the Regs;

CWB Act "VOTERS


5. (1) A producer who is an individual may vote if they have attained the age of 18 years by the last day of the election period or, if under 18 years of age the producer has designated a cosignatory of a permit book who is at least 18 years old on that day and who has consented to vote on behalf of the producer.


(2) No producer may vote more than once in an election.

VOTERS LIST


6. (1) Subject to subsection (2), every producer is entitled to be included in the voters list in respect of the electoral district in which they produce grain.


(2) A producer who produces grain in more than one electoral district may only be included in one voters list, which is chosen by the producer.


7. (1) Not later than 60 days before the last day of the election period, the Corporation shall provide the election coordinator with a list of producers who are named in a permit book on the day the list is sent or who were named in a permit book during the previous crop year.


(2) The election coordinator shall, not less than 30 days before the last day of the election period,

(a) make publicly available a list of the names of the voters in each electoral district; and

(b) send to each candidate a list of the names and addresses of the voters in the candidate's electoral district. SOR/2000-302, s. 1.


8. Any producer whose name is not included on the voters list may, at least fourteen days before the last day of the election period, request the election coordinator to add the name of the producer to the voters list, if the producer provides proof of their identity and eligibility."

Our farm @ Sherwood Park has a permit book. We have been prevented from voting in the District 1 election in 2002... and are not on the voter's list in 2006.

There are 7 of us, actively engaged in this farming operation... who work day to day... yet we were prevented from even one ballot reaching MNP in 2002... they sent the Ballot too late for the return to make the mail in cut off date.

The CWB keeps switching us to district 4... even though not one acre in this permit book is from district 4.

If the election co-ordinator won't stop multiple votes... and allows the CWB to kick producers out of the election process... with out statutory authority... should this election be shut down with an injunction... until the voter's list is corrected?

I have been told by NMP... it is the CWB that provides the information to MNP... on the voters list... and which producers are allowed a ballot... and who is not.

I had a call from a fellow who his father... who is retired for 6 years... got a statutory Declaration... before he even got his ballot.

This person said his father has NOT been listed even as a suffix in the farm permit book for years... and the CWB must have dug his name up our of the ancient archives. He insisted this is a banana republic election!

What do we do folks?

[TOM4CWB]

CWB Act
2 (1) in this Act

"Actual Producer" means a producer actually engaged in the production of grain;

"Producer" includes, as well as an actual producer, any person entitled, as landlord, vendor or mortgagee, to the grain grown by an actual producer or to any share therein;

[Vader]

Tom,

Do corporations get to vote?

[AdamSmith]

Tom, I suspect there is nothing to be done for the cwb election, but we need to make certain that the Barley (and wheat) plebicites don't use cwb permit book data for the voters list.

Ag Canada has all the info neccessary cross refernced with provincial data.
I would argue for either a weighted vote (based on tonnes of barley sales board and non board)or a high bar threshold like 67% (just like the 1974 Canola vote) for the single desk option to clear in order for the the cwb to keep exclusive jurisdiction.

Or considering the cwb considers themselves to be a commercial body one day and a democratic body the next, Maybe 50% of the weight of the vote comes from one man one vote, the other 50% of the weight should be a weighted vote (bassed on tonnes delivered)

[JD4ME]

Be careful what you wish for Tom I farm near a great number of Colony's should everyone on the colony's vote?
Have you ever asked the boss's which way they'd vote? And they'd vote as a block.

[WRAPper]

Interesting comment JD but I suspect getting them to vote is the hard part in my part of the country it's rare to see them at polling staions . That said they don't have to go to polling stations for this I suppose.

[liberty]

If there is going to be a plebiscite, it should be based on the principal of one bushel, one vote. That way, the producers who put the most capital at stake growing wheat should get a proportionately larger say in this matter that someone who grows only a small amount. There's nothing unfair at all about this. It's how every other corporate entity functions in this world. If you put more effort into an enterprise, it's only fair that you should have more control.

[TOM4CWB]

Vader;

http://www.cyberclass.net/decision.htm

"[16] Black's Law Dictionary (7th Ed.) (1999) gives as the primary meaning of the word "person", "a human being" and, as a secondary meaning, "an entity (such as a corporation) that is recognized by law as having the rights and duties of a human being".

Osborn's Concise Law Dictionary (7th Ed.), (1983) defines a "person" as:

The object of rights and duties, that is, capable of having rights and of being liable to duties. Persons are of two kinds, natural and artificial. A natural person is a human being; an artificial person is a collection or succession of natural persons forming a corporation.

In the Dictionary of Canadian law (2nd Ed.) (1995), a "person" is a "natural person"' and "includes a body corporate or politic" Blackstone himself made the same distinction between natural and artificial persons and treated them all as persons in the eyes of the law (see para. [11] above).

[17] These definitions taken from dictionaries including dictionaries of legal terms are uniform and clear. A "person" in its ordinary meaning includes a human being or a natural person as well as an artificial person such as a corporation. The primary sense of the word is a natural person; the secondary sense, an artificial person such as a corporation.

[18] The Interpretation Act (Canada) is consistent with this ordinary meaning. Section 35 of that Act defines a "person" as follows:

"person" or any word or expression, descriptive of a person includes a corporation.

The use of the verb "includes" extends the definition to include a corporation. The definition does not exclude a human being. In the French text of the Act, the meaning is even clearer:

"personne" Personne physique ou morale; l'une ou l'autre notions sont visées dans des formulations générales, impersonnelles ou comportant des pronoms ou adjectifs indéfinis.

A "personne physique" is a natural person; a "personne morale" is a corporation"

JUSTICE SEDGEWICK FROM THE ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE REFUTES THE "NATURAL PERSON" ARGUMENT IN HIS JUDGEMENT DECISION RE: THE PRESENTATION BY DAVE LINDSAY, AGENT FOR THOMAS KENNEDY ON JULY 20, 2000

COURT FILE NO.: 00-CV-14232
DATE.- 20000831

ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE


Vader; IMHO a "person" includes anyone, including any: partnership, co-op, corporation, or combination involving a "natural person" in one of these entities... including an "actual producer" as defined in the CWB Act.

[TOM4CWB]

JD4ME,

If I am part of a Corporation, partnership, co-op, or any other assembly of "person" or incorporation of people together;

I believe the CWB has been saying the person in the natural physical sense can only vote 1 ONE time... through the incorporated "Person"

THis is why the "Statutory Declarations"... as well as the interested parties need to be checked to see that they are being sent only ONE ballot.

THe Election Co-ordinator has the numbered ballots... and can take out duplicate ballots at any time in the election process.

It is a real shame the CWB itself did not fix the voter's list before the ballots and Statutory Declarations went out!

[Ron]

CWB Act
2 (1) in this Act

"Actual Producer" means a producer actually engaged in the production of grain;

"Producer" includes, as well as an actual producer, any person entitled, as landlord, vendor or mortgagee, to the grain grown by an actual producer or to any share therein;


Does this make my banker a "Producer"? He has to sign a declaration whether or not he has an interest in my advance?

This is crap. If you grow wheat you should have a vote in how you market it. Your vote should be proportional to how much your vote counts.
But then what about the guys who dont bother growing wheat because they are stiffled by the CWB? They dont get to vote at all?
Its a crappy system. Throw it all out. End of story

[TOM4CWB]

Ron;

Note that involvement in growing is the first condition... and having a SHARE in that grain that is grown... is the second condition.

"any person entitled, as landlord, vendor or mortgagee, to the grain grown by an actual producer or to any share therein"

Nothing about selling grain, delivering grain to the CWB, or even having a permit book.

Is this the first election where the majority of eligible voters must swear Statutory Declarations to vote in a Canadian election?

Further.. this is the most important election in the history of the CWB... because the biggest losses will be incurred...

IF we can't get market choice to raise our grain prices to premium world values!

THe adjustment values on FPC should worry anyone...

that the CWB were still subtracting $2/t for the pool subsidy money...

when the prices are $8/t BELOW the pool value... is astonishing!

They must have given our grain away!

I note now the FPC are finished transparency in FPC's are gone... no net daily price is quoted any more by the CWB... only the DPC.... the majority of which has been priced out already!

[Vader]

Tom,

Are you saying that producers are persons, persons are corporations and therefore corporations should be eligible to vote?

[rbrunel]

just a note... I received our ballot today. My family owns a corporation started in 1970. we only get one ballot, it has been that way since the start. the ballot is for our company. and that is who votes. not the shareholders.

[Vader]

Is there anything preventing the shareholders of the company from voting as well?