Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutThe Brussels Post, 1974-06-19, Page 7Family property laws affect every one of us. These are the proposals Ontario is considering to improve them. Have you ever thought about how much your life is affected by family property law? Probably not. Yet, hardly anything you have goes un- touched by these laws—the property you owned before you were married, the property you've acquired since, your home, your joint bank account, your credit, even survivor's rights when your husband'or wife dies. Because family law is so fundamental, several years ago the Ontario Government asked the Ontario Law Reform Commission (OLRC) to consider the relevance of the existing laws to today's needs and to recommend appropriate changes. The Commission has reported and now the government is interested in learning your reaction to these recommendations. Should ownership of family property including the family home depend on who actually paid for it?...or should a system of co-ownership of assets be developed on the basis of marriage as a social and economic partnership? Should a spouse be entitled to an interest in the property of the marriage even when he or she has been unfair or unfaithful? How should the wife's non-monetary contribution to the development of the husband's business be recognized? if a system of co-ownership of property were introduced, should a couple have the option to draw up their own contract or make other arrangements to govern the property of their marriage? Should the proposed changes apply to existing marriages or only to future. marriages? The Commission did consider other kinds of community property systems including those in which sharing would take place from the time of marriage. As the OLRC proposals now stand, assets acquired during the marriage would be shared only when the marriage ends. The Commission also recommends that both husband and wife have a duty to support their children, and to support each other, when the other is in need and is unable to work. Do you agree with these proposals? We want to know what you think. To enable you to learn more about the OLRC proposals. your Ontario Government now offers a concise, easy-to-understand booklet, as well .as a film on the subject for group discussions. We invite you to send for the booklet or borrow the film for your group. And, we'd like to know what you think of the OLRC's proposals, as well as other changes you'd like to see in family property law. After all, the laws are designed to serve you. Write to: Ministry of the Attorney General Queen's Park Toronto, Ontario M7A 1T5 The Ministry of the Attorney General Robert Welch, Minister Government of Ontario William Davis;Premier TUE BRUSSELS POST, MUNE 19, 1974-1 og stabilization plan causes concern to farmers 314,411i 1 A'141,L ie. Agricultural Stabilization and recently responded to newts being expressed about e federal government's new g stabilization plan which was owed May 22, The plan covers all hogs exing 88 or above marketed weep. April 1., 1974 and March 1975, up to 1,500 hogs per m, It guarantees producers a iimum margin of $22.41 per idredwcight between the olesale cost of feed grain and g prices on a national basis, following are the six most mmonly heard concerns; I_ Hog Stabilization Plan will guarantee producers a profit. was never intended to! The a is intended to a stop-foss' gram. This is in line with the ition of the Canadian Pork The Council also gcsted that the program "not at an incentive level", because would not be reasonable to 'ourage production at a time en marketings are outrunning nand. A guaranteed profit plan uld do just that. The plan gives ucers. the confidence to' stay business but the guaranteed rgin is not at a level which will OW producers to ignore market ph' and demand conditions. ,:flie.support program should calculated on a quarterly basis toad of over one year. The gram is not intended to cover 1 term market losses which and do occur in any business, ticaltural or otherwise. The gram is intended as a stop-loss rogram to prevent. long term 'es caused by factors beyond hog industry's control and t Johns stalls ew officers t the regular meeting .of St. n's Lodge, A.F. & A.M.. No., Brussels, a new slate of eel's were installed for the citing year. 1974-1975. her are: W.M.-Wilfred Short- d, PRM.-Robert Grasby. . -Max Watts, J.W.-Barry ers, SeCy.-Edwin Martin, 'as..-Gerald Gibson, Chaplin- , Muir, S.D.-Albert Whiting, .-Murray Hoover. 1.G.-Bruce 'iron, M.-Donald McDonald, -Wm. King, Tyler-Geo. therington, D.C.-Ross McCall, !Auditors-Clark Matheson and Oldfield. astalling Master, Norman over, was assisted by other ithers of the Lodge •and tors from London, Goderieh. nun, and Scaforth. Members and visitors attended 'me Worship in • -Brussels Hod Church Sunday morning le 16: tmplicigty ..$11SherSatdrYtteS—' PROS HARDWARE- 881,41M1 itittiAAEIA detrimental to the long term interests of the producer. Normally, livestock producers plan their operations on a yearly basis and it is therefore logical to calculate the hog stabilization payment on a yearly basis, In addition, quarterly averages could lead to serious disruption in marketing patterns as producers attempted to change their marketing plans in • order to ensure eligibility for quarterly payments. Thus on a rising market, producers could tend to lump their marketings at the end of a quarter while on a falling market the opposite might happen. 3. Regional disparities in production cost and market returns are not recognized. This is a national plan but a plan which recognizes regional differences' in production costs and returns by weighting these costs and returns across the country according to each region's proportion of the total Canadian hog slaughter. Any payments made to producers under the plan will be identical across Canada. In this way the plan wil not alter any natural advantages or disadvantages that a region may have and will not encourage production in one region as opposed to another. 4. The plan does not include the cost of producing weanling pigs and other costs, This is not correct. All costs are included in the guaranteed margin. 5. The support plan bases feed efficiency on that obtained under the ROP program; the ordinary producer cannot achieve this kind of feed efficiency. The ROP feed and management, program is not out of the reach of good farmers. The program is based on common sense practices that can be and are adopted by serious hog producers in Canada. In any event differences between actual feed conversion figures of any producer and the ROP figures are no doubt about the same as they were in the base period and thus are recognized in the guaranteed margin. 6. Feed calculations are based on wholesale prices and not on retail prepared feed prices. This discriminates against the small producer who cannot buy in wholesale lots. Calculations are based on wholesale prices of feed grains because they are more reliable indicators of feed costs than are retail prices which vary a great deal within regions as well as from one region to another. If retail prices were used as a base, the guaranteed margin would be reduced correspondingly, because the margin is the difference between the average of the actual prices received by producers in the base years and the Wholesale cost of feed during the same period. The A.S.B. reminds producers that grading slips or other proof of sale and slaughter should be retained by farmers to be used at the end of the support period if a payment is declared. Complete details on claiming procedures along with claim forms will be made available at that time. WEEKLY SALE BRUSSELS STOCKYARDS LTD. EVERY FRIDAY AT 12 NOON PHONE 887-6461 — BRUSSELS, ONT.