Review of the Electoral System for Directors of the CWB - Answers

  1. Should the current one-permit book-one-vote system be maintained or should some form of a weighted or partially weighted ballot system based on crop area, wheat and barley or some other measure be considered?

A seeded acre weighted ballot would be the fairest system.

  1. Should absentee, non-farming interested parties be eligible to vote?

Non-farming landlords should not be allowed to vote. Crop Share landlords should have the vote weighted to their percentage of the acres on their own land, EG 160 ac. owned @ 1/3 share is weighted ballot @ 53.3ac worth of votes.

  1. Should the minimum voting age of be lowered or remain at 18?

Younger than 18 years should be allowed. Actual youth farmers should have a vote if they truly are responsible for growing grain.

  1. Should the current composition of the ten electoral districts be maintained or changed? Should the number of eligible voters in each electoral district be re-balanced? Should the boundaries of the electoral districts be changed? Should each electoral district be wholly within only one province? If boundaries of electoral districts are to be changed, how should the transition be managed?

The current districts should be changed to provincial based districts, with smaller more local districts. This would negate much of the productivity issue, as production in the same region is similar in capability. The transition should be immediate. The CEO/President needs to be elected by the electorate.

  1. Have you been content with the manner in which the CWB elections have been managed? How should CWB Director elections be managed? Who should be accountable for the process? Should elections be conducted by an independent electoral commission rather than an Election Coordinator as has been the case? Should the Regulations provide authority to audit the financial statements of both candidates and third-party interveners? How should election rules be enforced?

The CWB elections have been managed badly, as the CWB manages the voters lists, pays election coordinator, who then has a financial & managerial conflict of interest when CWB communicates its biases and demands inappropriate activities. A third party arbitrator other than the Federal Court of Canada that would be more accessible/less costly to candidates and the electorate. Elections Canada would be an appropriate 3rd party administrator, with elections Canada rules in all forms in force in CWB elections.

  1. If you have been a candidate in the past, what are your thoughts on the rules pertaining to candidate and third-party spending?

Third Party spending is great. The more people think and express themselves, the better the election process. The more the better.

  1. How should voter eligible voters be identified for information of candidates?

Candidates need phone numbers, e-mail addresses, and mail addresses.

  1. The current criteria for being an eligible candidate are as follows: a Canadian citizen, has attained the age of 18 years by the day his/her nomination papers are filed, is named in a permit book as an actual producer, or is a shareholder in a corporation, a member of a co-operative, or partner in a partnership that is named as an actual producer for either year, an actual producer in the electoral district or an adjacent electoral district in which he or she will seek nomination, neither a Member of Parliament, nor a Member of a Provincial Legislature, not employed in any way in the conduct of the 2004 CWB Directors election. Are the criteria appropriate? Are the criteria for being an eligible candidate correct?

 An actual grain grower must only vote in the district that they live.

  1. Do you approve of the current form of preferential voting system or would you support a change to majority voting (most votes regardless if the number is over 50% wins)?

Majority vote, one count. Like all other elections in Canada.

  1. Do you have any comments/concerns about the CWB Director Elections?

CWB elections are biased, badly administrated, financial interference, advertising for incumbents, special election pay-outs and bribes, stopping those who should have had ballots from getting on the voters list. The CWB monopoly is in charge, we are treated with distain. We need freedom to choose who we sell grain to. The CWB MUST Earn my respect and grain, not steal it and my families money/wheat and barley. The CWB owes us IP contracted money and refuses to pay or even respond to the billing invoice.

  1. How should the voters list be validated?

CWB Permit Book Number. If valid CWB #, then ballot, when no land conflicts with producer, any year in the CWB system with valid address.

  1. Are there other factors that should be considered in determining eligible voters?

Statutory Declarations that prove a valid actual producer.

  1. Should candidates be provided financial support for election campaigns?

Candidates should not have CWB help or funding.

  1. What should the Code of Conduct be during an election period for candidates, existing members of the Board and the Canadian Wheat Board?

Incumbent Directors MUST be bound by the existing CWB code of conduct just as they are during the rest of their term. Candidates otherwise are not to be bound by CWB codes of conduct. Let the electorate decide if election activity is appropriate.

In Conclusion, if the CWB had integrity and followed it's own by-laws there would be no need for you and the CWB Minister Alcock to review this CWB election process. The present CWB Board of directors has no moral authority, and we need a new election .
 

Designed & Maintained by www.familyfarmers.com