If Souris-Moose Mountain MP Ed Komarnicki has learned anything about the debate over the future of the Canadian Wheat Board, it's that there is no one way of thinking about the board, and certainly is no consensus over what its future should be.

Only one thing is for sure, and that is in today's changing agricultural industry, the CWB has to change in order to survive in today's world economy; the question that is so difficult for western Canadian farmers to agree on is how or what those changes should be.

The split in views is along ideological lines, and has thus led to the current position where a plebiscite will decide whether the CWB will continue to have a monopoly in selling barley, or if the CWB should be voluntary rather than mandatory for the sale of barley.

The two sides are intractable, and have always been: the monopoly has to be maintained or the CWB ceases to exist, say CWB supporters, while free enterprisers want farmers to have the freedom of choice of whether to market their grain through the CWB or on their own.

The latter position, usually known as "dual marketing", is called insupportable by those who want the CWB, but as the position has never existed in western Canada it's a difficult point to prove for CWB supporters.

The plebiscite on barley marketing will begin as soon as producers receive their ballots, which are to go out in the mail on Jan. 31, and are to be back with a postmark no later than March 6, 2007.

The curious thing is that the Conservative government has stated they are doing this because they promised to give producers marketing choice. If this is so, say CWB supporters, then have a vote on the CWB as a whole, on wheat and durum as well as on barley marketing. Just as the barley vote is approaching, word has come from the federal government that there will follow a vote on wheat, although no date has been set for this.

The CWB, which has been at odds with the Conservatives over this issue so far, responded positively, but added the caution, "Asking the question means living with the answer."

In other words, if the government is asking whether farmers support the CWB or not, they had better respect the vote results - and this applies to both sides. If farmers do indicate they want the choice on how to market their grain, then the CWB has to accept that and adapt, or else cease to exist. If farmers want to retain the CWB, then the Conservative government has no choice really but to accept that, even though it would mean the CWB would retain their monopoly.

Part of how the vote will come down will depend not only on the true preferences of grain farmers, but also on the wording of the question. Will it be straight-forward and to the point, asking if farmers support the CWB or not? This remains to be seen until the ballots come out - then, the future direction of grain marketing is truly in the hands of our producers. - Greg Nikkel