Amother Tid-bit

[cakadu]

Well, rsomer, if that is the foreshadowing of things to come, then it is no wonder that the producer side of the equation is feeling so much animosity towards this apathetic viewpoint, particularly when it is their own checkoff dollars that are helping to fund this future.

Where is the ABP in all of this? Have they become so far removed from what is good for the cow/calf producer that this is all they can see? What about the cow/calf delegates that are a part of ABP? While I am not totally informed about what the ABP is all about, I have gathered some nuggets of information from these threads and I have to admit that I am quite frankly surprised that we are not seeing an implosion coming from within the ranks of the ABP.

It would seem to me that if you are representing the cow/calf interests on the ABP, then you should be working your hardest to ensure that the cow/calf producer is at least somewhat protected. Every year in the mail there is a booklet showing who is representing what on the ABP and it seems to me that there are an awful lot of people that are representing producers. What happens to them once they get into the inner circle? I'm very curious to know and I'm sure others are as well.

If this is indeed the future, then what are groups like the ABP and CCA doing to prevent it?

[rsomer]

I would suggest that anyone who wants to know the workings of the "inner circle" talk to those people directly or even sit in on their meetings. Their meetings are open to the public as far as I know. The ABP board of directors generally goes on a tour in August and often an opportunity for the directors to meet producers is part of the tour.

I am concerned that the "inner circle" as you describe it has shifted away from the ABP and CCA and is now the Beef Industry Value Chain Round Table which are not elected by producers and their meetings are not open to the public that I know of.

Producers need to become more interested and involved in their organizations if they want their organizations to reflect their interests. Producer apathy has been a problem up to now and has been exploited by those leaders and even government who wished to see their own agenda pursued.

[cakadu]

I am asking these questions as an outsider to the beef industry. Has it really been producer apathy or has it been a case of producers feeling that they have elected their delegates and directors to the ABP and that these elected people would represent their respective interests?

What is the difference between a delegate and a director? What are the duties that they are supposed to be carrying out?

What if, up until now, producers and those in the beef industry have not really understood just how badly they have been misrepresented in these organizations, if this is indeed the case?

How would you ensure that personal agendas do not get in the way of doing what it is you are supposed to do?

[rsomer]

I would have thought as a former member of Ag and Food Council you would have been familiar with how the various commissions operating under Marketing Council worked.

See http://www.albertabeef.org/03about.html for a description of delegates and directors and their responsibilities.

Judging by the comments posted in these threads there is unhappiness with the ABP, some of which is warranted and some of which is not. I would encourage all producers to take more interest in their organization, attend as many meetings as possible and ensure the policies that the ABP pursues are in their best interest. In this time of change no should take it for granted that their organizations are going to change in a manner that benefits their operation. Time will tell if producers still will not attend their fall ABP meetings this fall if the border remains closed as producer turnout traditionally tends to be very low. It will be interesting to see just how bad things have to get before producers give a second thought about their industry and organizations.

You have asked me some questions, may I inquire of you what your opinion of the Beef Industry Value Chain Round Table?. Is this an example of a value chain in action? Given that the packers are being investigated by the Competition Bureau and a Parliamentary Committee for questionable business practices, would the packers actions operating as a monopoly be consistent with a value chain approach. Would you say that the packers and Canadian Meat Council being part of the Beef Industry Value Chain Round Table will explain the Round Table’s view that packer expansion will come from within the CMC and that there has been no visible support from the Round Table for packer expansion coming from outside of the CMC such as producer owned packing plants. What is your view of the packers having one or two seats on the board of ABP, good thing or not so good thing?

[cakadu]

Sorry to disappoint but one organization has nothing to do with the other. Ag & Food Council is made up of 25 people from the various sectors of agriculture and agri-business i.e. primary production, processing, retailing, finance etc. Generally there is a rep from the 3 big meats i.e. beef, pork and chicken. Council is at arms length from government, whereas Marketing Council is part of the AAFRD structure. It is made up of some 16 producer groups in the province.

I'd have to hear more about what the intent of that value-chain group is. I've certainly heard about it in the news and in a couple of the threads a long time ago. Refresh my memory - who is sitting on it?

Basically the intent of any value-chain is the open and transparent exchange of information so that everyone involved in the chain benefits from the information. The exchange of information would include things that have traditionally been held under wraps. A value-chain is to help reduce the risk for all the players and thus becomes a risk management tool.

What is the intent of having the packer representation on the ABP and what is the significance of bringing them on at this point in time? Is it something that the packers have been trying to get for a while and just haven't been able to? What is the ABP's reasoning for letting them on? What does the ABP see as the positives for letting them have 2 seats on the board? Wouldn't one suffice, if there had to be any at all? Are these 2 seats being divided between a federal packer and a provincial packer, or will it just give the big boys seats?

Sorry for the more questions than answers at this point in time, but unfortunately I don't have enough information to make a comment at this time.

[blackjack]

rsomer... my first reaction to the packers would be take a hike especially if our checkoff dollars end up going to the packer...like you say it is time for members to stand up and tell the Sargents and the Laycrafts the status quo has to change... we need packer competition in Canada not more control by Lakeside and Cargill...maybe we need to change the structure of ABP in how the checkoff dollars will be spent...its all our money the ABP spend so lets find the way we all get the best bang for the buck...question rsomer ...who started the round table was it the cattle associations or the feds ... just curious...

[rsomer]

I need to make something clear. I do not think the problems in our industry lies with individual industry leaders, maybe partly with individual packers but not our industry leaders.

There are a lot of people working very hard to find solutions for our present crisis and it is important to take some time out to say thank you as it is often a thankless job especially in a time such as this when there are no easy answers. The BSE crisis is not the fault of the ABP or anyone else for that matter, including the packers although they are responsible for profiting from BSE. Still it falls to our organizations to find solutions and it is important that all producers participate in the process to ensure the solutions work for them. Now more than ever it is important that there is a dialogue between our industry leaders and producers so each understands where the other is coming from and that the industry is being shepherded in a direction that works for all. Change is going to happen, with the individuals input or without.

I did draw a caricature of a possible future for the Alberta beef industry if producers don’t start taking an interest in their own industry as others will direct their future for them if producers allow it to happen. My exaggerated vision of the future touched upon many issues such as packer ownership of cattle, health concerns, mega farms and foreign ownership. In Alberta the ABP is the producers voice on issues such as these. To recap my comments I said "...it is up to each and every producer to make the change happen. The days when we could sit back and just let things happen are long gone." If there was a criticism, it was directed at the individual who lets others decide their future, not the ABP or our industry leaders.

Sorry, I can’t help you with the origin of the Round Table or who makes the decisions. Apparently there are about 50 people involved including the packers.

[rsomer]

Cakadu: Since there are more questions than answers, I will ask another question. For the exchange of information to work do the packers need a vote on the Board of Directors?

[cakadu]

I would say that they wouldn't, but that is without knowing all the where's and why for's. If it is the Alberta Beef Producers, I'm not sure what the packing end of it has to do with production.

As far as the round table goes, it looks like those already involved in the various organizations like CCA, CBEF etc. are the ones that are coming to the table. It seems to me that if you keep going to the same well, you're going to get the same water. Yes, you need some of the seasoned people there, but you also need people that can see things with fresh eyes and not the same old same old.

Yes, the leadership role can be one that is thankless and sometimes we do need to take the time to stop and thank them. Having said that though, we do need to feel that they are hearing our concerns and doing something that will benefit us. If it is perceived that they are going ahead with whatever they had planned anyway, then it is fairly hard to be thankful for what they do.

My suggestion would be to take your delegates and your zone directors to task and get out to the meetings that they call so that your voices can be heard. Send a strong message to them about what your concerns are AND the solutions that you see to address those concerns. Try to remain calm as it is easier to be heard when you're calm - at least outwardly. Maybe this is the best time to take back your organizations and have them working to your best advantage.

[grassfarmer]

I feel the ABP should really be taken to task for their role in the beef fiasco of the last year. If I had my way there would be a huge turnout at every producer meeting this fall and the ABP would get a big shake up. The problem, as rsomer says, is producer motivation. Having been involved in the Ponoka BIG-C meeting it was dissapointing the low percentage of producers attending (the meeting had a large crowd but still not a high % of beef producers in Central Alberta). We should have had a couple of thousand at all these meetings. So how do we get a turnout at ABP meetings? I note that the delegate nominations close on Aug 31st which is our first "deadline" Given that no-one will have sold calves by then what hope is there that producers will be hurting enough to attend?
I am getting kind of disheartened at this lack of producer motivation and am starting to weigh how much time I should divert from my own business planning/ survival to try and motivate other producers to help themselves. Selfish maybe, but ultimately we each have to try and survive individually as well as an industry.
As Cam Ostercamp concludes his article
"...as it stands now we do nothing to resist" - how true.