Federal government files lawsuit against Churchill railway owner

They do have a point about the Wheat Board, but doesn't having the preident of the company instrumental in that decison involve some dort of conflict of interest?

True. But is the government going to make the case that the dissolution of the wheat board was improper since it impacted the railroad contract?

Seems to me the government is just being silly here.

That's Omnitrax's defense; without the Wheat Board, the port is not profitable. The government is just saying a contract is a contract. They were given considerations in return to improvements to the port, and time to do those improvements. Time is up.

Not repairing the railroad is part of reneging on the contract to improve the Port.

I can understand the force majeure, as the government did their business model harm by dissolving the Wheat Board.

Why improve the port if there's no cargo to ship to or from it? That's not a port, it's just a town with an unused pier.

Suggestion: Open a joint naval and air force base there.

Churchill used to be where we launched our satellites from. The sounding rockets launched from there were done so with engines designed by Bristol Aerospace, and the design is still in use by NASA and Magellan Aerospace today.

But with no railroad it's just a town with a few polar bears, waiting to die.

Could bring back the Wheat Board but given the Liberal tendency to keep things the Tories did around (e.g. free trade, the GST), despite saying in public how much they oppose and hate them, the odds are the WB is just part of history now.

The Wheat Board can't be brought back. It was more than just the people, it was the legislation that gave it teeth as well. I doubt the Liberals would even try especially since it wouldn't include just Western farmers, in the sense of fairness.

The wheat board needed to go.

But maybe it would have a purpose again if NAFTA is ended.

The wheat board needed to go. No offence, but you're either misinformed or not informed at all.

The producers using the board didn't want it gone. The foreign customers buying our grain didn't want it gone.

The private agribusiness that replaced it, they wanted it gone.

Our customers now have product with reduced quality and unreliable shipping dates.

Farmers get less for their grain and pay more to ship it.

Big agri-business execs? They get a second cottage...

No offence, but you're either misinformed or not informed at all.

I'm informed enough. The CWB was a mandatory single desk and all wheat farmers in the affected areas were mandated to sell to the CWB whether or not they wanted to.

Had participation been voluntary I'd be okay with it. But I object to these monopsonies where producers are forced to sell their products at a price determined by the buyer or where collective marketing is forced upon people...a form of forced speech as opposed to free speech.

Even if a majority of farmers support the CWB it still violates the rights of those few who do not wish to participate.

The people who supported the CWB remain free to form a farmer-owned corporation to do much the same things as the CWB did. Have at it.

But the people who don't want to participate are now free to do as they wish.

Freedom won and for me that's the most important thing here.

1. The wheat board was controlled by farmer elected board members. There was always an option to vote for an open market candidate. Pro single desk members were elected again and again.

2. The wheat board controlled wheat and barley. That's it. Plenty of other crops to grow if you want to play the market all on your own. Nobody was forced to participate in anything.

3. Farmers HAD the freedom to determine the fate of THEIR wheat board through board member elections. The government of the day did everything they could to sway these elections, and when they still couldn't get farmers to vote against their own best interests, unilaterally decided to scrap the board.

Your freedom line is an empty platitude. The same BS the government used to convince the general public that all the noise coming from agri business condemning the board, was coming from farmers. Fuck the farmers, not exactly a large number of voters.

On this topic, you don't know shit. Canada can not subsidize it's agriculture to the extend America and European nations do. This board was the only clout land locked prairie farmers had.

The same subsidized US agribuisness that now controls Canadian grain and pulse markets. Freedom of choice is eliminated for those not willing to deal with the monopolies.

Look, like I said, I am FINE with anyone who wants to participate in such an arrangement. Cooperatives are a great way for farmers to market their goods.

But I object to anyone being into anything. That's where you lose me.

If you want to drive, you are forced to get a license.
If you want to travel outside the USA, you have to get a passport.

Paying taxes, following the laws of the land, marriage license, hunting license...

Need I continue? There are a lot of things you are forced to do.