Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 1-15 of 18
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Agriculture committee  That's what we've balanced, that for the period of the transition we would continue to provide a guarantee of borrowing, which really means that the Wheat Board would be getting great interest rates on their borrowings, as they do now, for a period of years, up to $200 million, w

November 2nd, 2006Committee meeting

Howard Migie

Agriculture committee  The Government of Canada would take over the liabilities. The assets that farmers, in effect, have paid for over the years would be transferred. Then we'd put two items in the window--one is up to $75 million, if needed, that would be transferred to give it a boost, plus there'd

November 2nd, 2006Committee meeting

Howard Migie

Agriculture committee  Maybe I can start, just to say it's proposed to start as a 100% prairie-farmer-owned entity. That's the start, and it's that way for at least the first couple of years. Then the board of directors of the day would have some flexibility to move partway down the path of being less

November 2nd, 2006Committee meeting

Howard Migie

Agriculture committee  Just in terms of assets, if you look at the numbers, you'll see there's a proposal that roughly a little over $100 million, which could be supplemented up to $200 million, be transferred to this entity.

November 2nd, 2006Committee meeting

Howard Migie

Agriculture committee  If you look carefully at the numbers, that's not the case. We would have a lot of assets in liabilities. The ones we're proposing to be transferred, whether it's the hopper cars or the building...these over time have been paid for by prairie farmers as a group. They've contribute

November 2nd, 2006Committee meeting

Howard Migie

Agriculture committee  I'll take the first question. This is one part of a process. Our task force was given one task, and it's only part of a much broader approach to making a decision. A meeting in Saskatoon was also one step in the process. The government has taken a clear policy direction. It took

November 2nd, 2006Committee meeting

Howard Migie

Agriculture committee  In the current Canadian Wheat Board Act, there are a large number of government responsibilities and roles and regulations. At the end of the transition, CWB II would not have any regulatory powers at all, and there would be no governmental role. The legislative changes would be

November 2nd, 2006Committee meeting

Howard Migie

Agriculture committee  No, there will be a need for legislation, in the same way that there's an act of Parliament for the United Grain Growers set-up and there's an act of Parliament for CN Rail. Certain things would be in there with respect to governance at the end of the day, and there may be cert

November 2nd, 2006Committee meeting

Howard Migie

Agriculture committee  The approach we took was that when the Wheat Board is contributing to research, which they are for some market development activities.... CWB II would probably not play the same role, because some of these benefit the entire industry; they don't just benefit one player. Even if

November 2nd, 2006Committee meeting

Howard Migie

Agriculture committee  What we're proposing is a transition period that allows enough time for the market to adjust. Frankly, it reminds me very much of when I was working on the free trade agreement with the United States. Before it happened, there was a lot of worry and concern about which companie

November 2nd, 2006Committee meeting

Howard Migie

Agriculture committee  I'd like to add one comment. It's not a zero-sum game, that there are an equal number of winners and losers. Currently, flour millers and grain companies are allowed to operate as a group when dealing with the Wheat Board on a number of things. They can work together, they can ne

November 2nd, 2006Committee meeting

Howard Migie

Agriculture committee  Paul is going to address the question of the adjustment side on winners and losers.

November 2nd, 2006Committee meeting

Howard Migie

Agriculture committee  Perhaps I'll try to answer your question. We spoke with a number of grain companies who came to see us--some small and some large ones. They have all operated with the Canadian Wheat Board system acting as a monopoly for as long as anyone can remember. The Canadian Wheat Board d

November 2nd, 2006Committee meeting

Howard Migie

Agriculture committee  That is a different question than what this group was asked to do. It's very appropriate in my capacity to be assisting the minister and the government to implement the policy--that is really my job. In terms of our particular task, we weren't asked to examine the various studies

November 2nd, 2006Committee meeting

Howard Migie

Agriculture committee  The task force didn't deal with that part of what the Wheat Board provided because that wasn't what we asked them to provide. We could have sought views of people--who supports which position and why--but that wasn't our task; it was to look at moving in this direction means...wh

November 2nd, 2006Committee meeting

Howard Migie