What should our groups have done?

[rkaiser]

There was a resolution passed at the Rimbey ABP town hall meeting last spring calling for exactly that emerald. Passed with flying colors at the producer meeting and dumped by the directors even before it could be put in front of the semi annual.

I presented the resolution.

Good Luck

[sagewood]

Some of you people seem to have more knowledge of the inner workings of the ABP convention/delegates than I have, but I have to ask the question...why are ABP or their counterparts in other provinces against building one decent-sized cow slaughter facility somewhere in one of the prairie provinces? Previously, I understood that bulls/cows from the southern part of Ab. (and presumably Sask./Man) went to the slaughter plant in N. Dakota. I have heard that one of the N. Dakota plants was bought, dismantled and moved to Man. Is this plant up and running yet, and when it is, will it slaughter the OTM animals or will it be a steer/heifer UTM plant? I understand that at this time, the plants still have to pick which group they will slaughter in order to avoid 'contamination' from one age group to the other. I agree with all of you who say that we MUST end our focus and reliance both on the American slaughter capacity and their market for our beef. They will never let the border get back to normal from our side--their animals are going to come north for sure, and they will kill their animals first, as was seen in the past with Cargill. Also, the R-CALF boys will take advantage of this and start buying calves at fire sale prices up here, fattening them in their own feedlots and then filling up all the slaughter capacity on this side of the border with their own cattle. Once again, somehow, we need to get more slaughter capacity for the Canadian-owned cattle. I know it is not cheap to get into being a partner in a slaughter plant, but why oh why cannot the very wealthy Ab. government build the plant and then let us pay for it over time on a per animal basis. At least that way the Ab. taxpayer will get their money back, unlike the most recent big payments to Tyson and Cargill that took over $40M of our hard-earned dollars and gave it to their American shareholders. There are lots of us in the business who would support such a plant, but given the economics of this time, just cannot come up with $100,000 to put into a share of a plant. Just to have $100,000 in the bank is no small feat in this time in ag. with the drought just one year behind us and the double whammy of BSE issues for over 2 years. Well that was a long disertation, just to ask one question..

[grassfarmer]

Emrald1, things should happen the way you lay them out in your last scenario but the problem is lack of producer interest. Having a good turnout and passing a sensible resolution at one meeting in a zone is worthless if it is not repeated across the zone and across the province. This has been our downfall and is why the ABP is not seen as democratic. It is up to every producer to get out and demand change.

[kpb]

grassfarmer, The fact that the various producer organizations have done nothing to improve the lot of the average cow-calf producer should not, as you have suggested several times, be laid at the foot of the producer. It is easy to claim, as both you and emerald have, that the impetus for change has to come from the grassroots producers but, in a democracy, this idea is fundamentally flawed.

Consider this, we elect various members of government and various producer group reps to represent us and forward what we all feel, as voters, are in our best interests. These reps, whether they be politicians or producer reps, then are charged with the resonsibility of instituting policies that will be of best advantage to us.

We do not expect our federal or provincial politicians to come back to us with a poll or referendum every time they put forward a policy. We expect them to act in a way that best reflects our interests. That is a valid and correct assumption--otherwise why bother electing anybody--we might just as well have a poll on every issue that comes forward.

Similarly, we also elect various producer reps to forward our interests. In addition we pay a type of tax (check-off) to these groups. So we have a right to expect these reps to act in our best interest. We should not have to "hold their feet to the fire" or call for a poll or attend meetings en masse to make proposals to them. These are our reps, they should be advocates for us, they should be putting forward policies that further our cause without us nagging them constantly.

Emerald you have repeatedly said on this forum that these producer groups need to hear from the grassroots producers and have proposals put forward to them. This, to me, is a complete misunderstanding of how the deomocratic process works. Do we need to continually put forward resolutions to our politicians in Ottawa or Edmonton about specific issues? Or do we expect, as our representatives, that they will do what is in our best interest? If the citizens cannot rely on their reps to act, and will only be content when every issue is taken to a referendum, very, very, few actions will ever be taken.

Our industry reps ran for office, presumably, because they wanted to be leaders, not followers. It is not too much to ask that they assume a leadership role, not one of following. They ran for office of their own free will but with the assumption of power comes also responsibility. I submit to you, grassfarmer, that these reps have not acted as leaders in our current crisis and have not submitted any constructive proposal to add to the domestic slaughter capacity in this country which is widely regarded by observers both in the industry and ourside, as our main problem.

Adding slaughter plants is not an obscure concept--it's one that is generally accepted as a way out of our mess by most observers. So why is it that these producer reps are not only strangely silent on this issue but, as rkaiser has pointed out, actively oppose even the consideration of such a plan. Does this indicate leadership to anyone?

Emerald, you have challenged the grassroots producers to come up with proposals that will work their way through the bureaucracy of the producer groups. rkaiser has repreatedly told you of his frustrated efforts to do just that and the opposition of the status quo to any new ideas. But shouldn't the producer groups themselves be the ones who lead, who come up with the new ideas, who take the proposals back to the members?

grassfarmer, do you think as individual citizens we should be drawing up health care policy, or trading practices or international affairs? No, we elect people that we think will devote their efforts to furthering our best interest in these areas. The same should be the case with our producer group reps who were also elected to further our best interests.

I think that blaming the grassroots producer for the fact that our producer groups have done zip to help us control our future plays right into the hands of these groups. They were elected by us, they have a responsibility to represent us and our interests. Their lack of leadership and initiative is the real problem here, not inaction on the part of the grassroots producers.


kpb

[grassfarmer]

I stand by what I said kbp. You said "Consider this, we elect various members of government and various producer group reps to represent us and forward what we all feel, as voters, are in our best interests."
Problem is the majority of producers DO NOT elect anyone to ABP because they can't be bothered to attend the meetings. If the 5% that show up are either dyed in the wool ABP supporters or clowns bitching about the lack of a free meal producers are the ones to blame when the organisation doesn't represent the producers views. I don't like the current ABP leadership any more than you do kbp but lazy producers are to blame for it being a lame duck organisation.

[grassfarmer]

if producer groups take the lead and push their own agenda they will be accused of not listening to producers !
Who is the ultimate winner or loser when industry groups lobby government ? I view it as the producer, and if the producer wants things done a specific way then they need to get up off their collective butts and ensure that the group that represents their interests is doing their bidding.
As far as formulating resolutions goes, for the one that passed in Rimbey regarding Big C to get anywhere up the line it needed support of every zone in the province. That is where in my opinion producers aren't showing support for each other's initiatives. I have presented resolutions at zone meetings, done my homework well ahead of time and ensured I had producer support prior to presenting the resolution. I then went to my ABP delegate and made damn sure they knew that the producers of this zone EXECTED them to support the resolution at the AGM. I contacted several of the ABP executive to discuss the intent of the resolution and then indicated that I wanted a minute on the AGM agenda to speak to the resolution when it was to be voted upon. The ABP resolutions committee decided to break the resultion into two parts, one of which I spoke to, the other was spoken to by our Agricultural Fieldman. We had no problem with the entire process, but then we took the initiative, and didn't wait for someone else to do so.
kgb, your comment about the public having to assist government in forumlating resolutions, is interesting. Government polls the public on numerous issues prior to implementing legislation and base much of what the legislation contains on the feedback they receive.When 10% of the public take time to respond then the views of that 10% will likely be considered public opinion.
Municipal councils go to public hearing on any issue that requires a by-law, so there is continual opportunity for public input. As grassfarmer says, the number of people that really take an interest in what is going on within organizations and governments whose decisions affect their livelihood is dissappointing.
I have served in public office for many years and unfortunately most of the public have the same opinion you seen to have, they feel that they elected their representative to make decisions, however, when the decision isn't what THEY expect they sure know how to B---!

I was brought up with the mindset that 'you' are the community, IF the community needs to get something done, then get off your rear and help get it done. If somebody needs to speak out on an issue, find out what the issue is, what the ramifications of it are, and get your facts straight and then speak out, but make sure you are representing the wishes of the majority before you do. In other words stand for something and don't always 'let george do it'.

[rkaiser]

Oh my Goodness emerald, don't say "George". Look at what that did to the good old USA.

I agree that resolutions need to be passed at numerous meetings to get the attention of the board of directors of ABP.

Guess it's time for BIG C to formulate a well thought out resolution and start recruting folks like yourself, that seem to like the idea, but have not brought it up in their own zone.

Ther was a group of us last fall who pushed like hell, and had a number of resolutions passed in different zones concerning research into alternative theories concerning BSE. One was passed in three zones, defeated. However one of the others was only passed in one zone and was carried at the annual meeting.

"Be it resolved ABP request the U of A center for Prion and Protein Disease Research include and determine the validity of Mark Purdey's theory on BSE and CWD."

Is it truely up to producers to organise to bring forward positive direction emerald? Thought that was the reason for ABP in the first place.

I'm siding with kpb on this one guys.

[kpb]

emerald, your comments about the municipal governments really only serve to make my point. When we elect people to represent us, whether in government or in industry groups, those people are supposed to represent us and make decisions on our behalf.

You know this is not a difficult concept to grasp. Our government is based upon direct representation, not polling on every issue. This is Political Science 101 and I'm amazed that you say you have served in municipal office and did not know this. If we are to go to a system that requires the common citizens of this country to initiate and push every issue, as you seem to favor, then why have representatives at all?

Both you and grassfarmer have made the point that a very low percentage of people attend producer group meetings, vote, etc. This may be disappointing but it is irrelevant in this discussion. The fact is that the ABP reps were voted in by a majority of those who voted and so have the responsibility to represent the best interests and put forward the best policies for all producers.

The lack of voter interest also occurs at municipal elections. In the last Calgary election, only about a quarter of the people voted. And Calgary badly needs a new traffic plan. Do you expect every Calgary citizen to sit down and draw a new traffic control system for the city or do you expect these aldermen, albeit with in some cases less than 25% of the voters voting for them, to carry out their responsibilities and fix the roads? No reasonable person expects the citizens to solve problems that they elected politicians to address.

Finally, your comments about people complaining about the producer groups if they actually did something they didn't like or complaining that if the groups actually led the way instead of following they were not listening to producers are typical. They are typical of an apologist for a bunch of producer groups who have taken our money, been duly elected and done nothing to help resolve the biggest crisis we have ever faced.

To blame the average producer when the producer groups that were elected by those producers did absolutely nothing, in fact got in the way of positive discussion, is reprehensible. These groups are charged with the duty of representing our best interests---that is not happening.

kpb

[farmers_son]

Nominations are open for ABP delegate. Why not consider running as delegate this fall. See: http://www.albertabeef.org/news.asp?newsindex=286

Nominations are open for Alberta Beef Producers (ABP) delegate and cattle feeder council delegate positions. Elections will be held at over 35 fall producer meetings hosted throughout the province in late October and early November.

"We’d like to encourage producers to put their names forward and help provide leadership to the industry during this difficult time," says Millie Boake, a pure bred and commercial cow/calf producer from Rocky Mountain House and chair of the ABP producer liaison committee.

"I think it’s very important that producers actively work to address the challenges before the industry," adds Boake. "We need new people with new ideas so we can meet these challenges and help lead the industry to better days."

Nominations are open to any producer who has during the current, or immediately preceding year, sold cattle in his or her name and has paid a check-off fee to ABP, or to another person on behalf of ABP.

All nominations must be received, faxed or post marked before 12 midnight, August 31st. Nomination forms are available from the ABP office (403) 275-4400, or from the ABP website www.albertabeef.org.

[farmers_son]

good post farmers_son. kgb, I would suggest that you serve as a municipal politician or an ABP delegate or both, and then a year later see if your outlook has changed.
As far as the city of Calgary needing to spend dollars on infrastructure goes, that is something that anyone with half a brain could see is a priority, however, aldermen will no doubt either consult their constituents or bring the infrastructure requirements of their ward to the table when deciding how the next five year plan is developed. That is my point about polling the public. As far as ABP goes, I am not going to suggest that they have represented every issue that producers brought forward well, but I do think it is a bit of a stretch to say that they have done nothing. I hear that about municipal politicians when I know the individuals and how hard they work on behalf of their county. Any succcessful municipal politican will consult with the people they represent and do their utmost to represent the wishes of their constituents. One such elected official is cowman's municipal councillor. She has been there for many years and the reason is that she goes to the people to see what they want done and how they feel about issues facing the county. That is true representation regardless of what Political Science 101 happens to teach. I would doubt that .01% of elected officials or ABP delegates have studied the course. Municipal politicians are for the most part volunteers who are paid a stipend for their time, which in many cases is time away from their farm, family or business.
Its easy to point fingers and criticize, but are those who do so willing to put their name on a ballot or offer their services as an ABP delegate ?
I know that Randy did last year and it is unfortunate that the folks in his zone didn't recognize his willingness and ability to make a difference.
I would like to see my ABP delegate more often than at the fall zone meeting, and I would like to have the opportunity to discuss issues that I am concerned about with him, and it would be interesting to see what his involvements have been on my behalf since he was elected. I am not overly satisfied with the communication to producers done by ABP, I realize that they send out publications on a regular basis but they don't really tell me what my delegate is doing.

Randy, I was asked by ABP to run as a delegate several years ago, and declined. I have always felt it my responsibility to work tirelessly for any organization that I belonged to as a volunteer or otherwise, and I really felt that being an ABP delegate was a thankless job, and chose not to pursue it.
I certainly encourage you to lay the groundwork now for any resolution you want to bring forward this fall,and wish you well in the process.

[cowman]

kpb: Using your own logic perhaps the ABP was doing the right thing and the will of the people? Maybe the majority of producers wanted to just keep the status quo? Maybe the majority of producers don't see the value of a producer owned cow plant? Obviously if they did the uproar for one would be overwhelming? How many producers attend the ABP zone meetings? How many vote? Doesn't that imply that the majority of producers are content with the leadership?
I suspect your average producer is a wee bit leery of these type of "co-op" ventures? They always seem to go broke or become an "old boys club" where the benifits seem to flow to a few? I mean in reality does UFA really do a good job and give you a big advantage in prices?
The meat business is down and dirty! These packers could teach the Mafia a thing or two!
A producer owned packer could only compete with some government rules that kept the sharks at bay? Otherwise Cargill/IBP would eat them for breakfast!