Bill 43

[rkaiser]

Didn't know how to chip in on this one.... LOL Kinda funny to hear ABP talking about democracy and plebicites....

Also kinda funny to hear the fear about control by a small group..... ABP does some good things..... Some.... But someone tell me what they have done for the cow calf producer since BSE who they have all of a sudden decided that that is the group they truly represent... LOL It was not until last year that ABP even got to a point of accepting a cow calf council let alone a cow calf committee... There have been a few feedlot boys over in the ABP camp who have been pulling a lot of strings for the last few years as well. I won't name any names that start with S.

Why no talk of the New Beef Initiative Alliance or the Western Stock Growers when spewing fear about ten big feedlots now controling the industry,,,, LOL In fact I think that ABP would be welcome to join the new Beef Initiative Alliance if they were interested. Kinda like when they were first invited to the B5 group I guess..

But hey ----- what an opportunity for ABP right now. Save some face ---- put some cold hard cash in the pockets of feedlot and cow calf producers alike.... Get the word out to all of their current members while the checkoff money is still flowing there way and tell everyone to ask the feds to settle out of court in the BSE class action case....

[perfecho]

Perhaps keep the check off in place, however give options as to where it can be funnelled.......!
How about an option to send checkoff $ to purchase a processing plant?

[grassfarmer]

rkaiser asks "ABP does some good things..... Some.... But someone tell me what they have done for the cow calf producer since BSE" - Well in the last six months they have put up a few cowboy statues.....

Just thinking Farmers_son, this may not be the disaster you predict for cow/calf producers. You say the big feedlots will hold ABP to ransom unless you promote their causes (don't you already with lobbying to up the CAIS payment threshold to $3 million?, sorry I digress..)
Here is another scenario - the big feedlots walk with their levy money regardless, leaving ABP a smaller funding base but also an organisation that could reform and truly come to represent cow/calf producers.

[per]

A smaller leaner, meaner Cow Calf lobby group that joint ventures with the feedlot association when the issues are aligned. That would work for me.

There is a Cowboy poster south of Calgary that is so far in the field that it is hard to know what it is. I think it might be a campaign to build shelters for select ranchers. My Dad has asked some of his friends when they drive by what it means to them. Most don't have a clue. One the other day said the Rancher must be selling organic products or something like that.

If the ABP leadership are as smart as I think they have potential to be. The organization will come out of this strong and useful to the industry. If they decide to dig their heels in and fight at all cost it will likely destroy any shred of credibility they have. I have polled all my ranching friend over the last year and maybe it is just my area but support for refundable checkoff is about 8 out of 10. On this site the ABP boosters with the exception of f_s are for sure silent. None of the above is scientific and maybe just an anomaly but ABP support is not quite what I heard Rick Burton say it was on the radio yesterday.

[farmers_son]

A thousand times and a thousand times more…I am not Mr. ABP. My words here represent nothing more than the concerns and hopes of an ordinary cow calf operator, just me and my family. Whoever “you” is it is not me. In these pages and elsewhere I have always spoke against large CAIS payments to mega agriculture and have always spoke in favour of caps on large subsidy payments. I have consistently raised my concerns in these pages over big feedlots and it could not be more wrong to suggest I promote the big feedlots cause, just ask BFW. I have never spoke in favour of the big packers either preferring to call them pirates and privateers and have always (for much longer than it have been a popular issue) been a strong supporter of producer packing plants (still have not figured out all the details on just how to do that however). You would have to admit that is true.

I also happen to recognize the importance of organizations like ABP that create opportunities for producers to come together to gain much needed influence and power over their futures and livelihoods. Many small check offs all together created a very influential and respected organization and all for less than ½ of 1 cent per pound or three bucks a head.

How about this scenario... And remember it was not just ABP that the government squashed with Bill 43, it was hogs and sheep too. The entire livestock sector in this province were gutted by Bill 43. With the Alberta Beef Producers, Alberta Pork and Alberta Lamb out of the way and with no or drastically restricted ability to support research, marketing or policy development the government has achieved its vision of an ALMA board controlling all aspects of livestock production in this province.

With ABP no longer able to fund national initiates and support CCA who is left? Why ALMA is left and ALMA will fund CCA and will send directors to the CCA board. Within a few years the average producer like you and me is irrelevant to anything. ALMA will (in fact the plans were announced long ago) further its aims of making much more than age verification and premise ID mandatory. Where ALMA would eventually stop is anyone’s guess but plans are already in place for mandatory tracking of cattle movements, mandatory weaning, mandatory you name it. If you need proof here is proof:

http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$Department/deptdocs.nsf/all/com12203/$FILE/AB_Livestock_Strategy_Public_Doc_June_9_2008_FINAL .pdf

See page 27….

• Mandatory Vaccination and Medication Records, July 2010;
• Mandatory Weaning Date, to be determined;
• Mandatory Movement Records by 2010;
• Mandatory Source Verification 2010;
• Mandatory On Farm Food Safety Certified, July 2013

plus the possibility of needing to be Bio security verified, animal care verified, environmental stewardship verified, attribute certified at some yet undetermined date.

With Bill 43 the government has swept away the only effective opposition to its Machiavellian scheme to control all aspects of our life. How does that scenario grab you?

Now you hopefully understand why the government would not allow livestock producers be they cattle, hog or sheep producers to have a vote through a plebiscite on a refundable check off. It is not about ABP. That is clear to me.

It is about the Government sweeping aside any potential opposition to their grand scheme to take away our ability to decide our own future and to influence our own industry for ourselves. The government does not own my farm and I do not work for the government. There is one and only one organization that the government wants to see represent producers and that organization is ALMA, plain and simple.

Why does the government not allow me to have a vote through a plebiscite on the future of our livestock organizations?

Grassfarmer: I understand people have differing views and I recall your views on a farmers right to defend his property from theft. But not allowing producers to vote for themselves is like letting the thieving government just take our livestock organizations without producers being able to put up a fight. The same government that is putting that farmer who shot the thief who was stealing his quad through the court system is the one and same government that is stealing our ability to have and fund our own livestock organizations. All Alberta Beef Producers, Alberta Pork and Alberta Lamb are asking for is a plebiscite vote so these livestock organizations can put up a fight for the futures of their respective organization. Most of us would like the opportunity to vote through a plebiscite and however the vote would go would be fine. Just like we would like to shoot any other SOB who came around stealing what is ours.

[grassfarmer]

Come on farmers_son that's all rather melodramatic. "The entire livestock sector in this province were gutted by Bill 43" How can it be such a terrible thing when you allow producers to democratically choose which organisation they wish to have representing them?
"The same government that is putting that farmer who shot the thief who was stealing his quad through the court system is the one and same government that is stealing our ability to have and fund our own livestock organizations." Please explain how it is stealing our ability to have and fund our own livestock organisations?
We can have them tomorrow just the same as we had yesterday - nothing has changed there. If the ABP is doing everything right as you claim it is and all the producers support it what are you worrying about? If what you believe is actually true ABP won't lose a cent of it's funding. The Government won't be stealing anything from you. If producers are disgruntled with ABP's performance they might direct their dollars elsewhere. This change leaves all the onus on the producer - allows them a more democratic choice and the Government isn't taking away money or choice from anyone.
I suspect why you are really concerned is because you know the chickens have come home to roost and many producers will redirect their levy away from ABP.
If this were somehow to signal the end of ABP (which I really don't expect to happen) you have just provided the perfect epitaph:
"Most of us would like the opportunity to vote through a plebiscite and however the vote would go would be fine."
Oh, the irony.... when the very same request was made in recent years by producers of ABP regarding the levy only for it to fall on deaf ears. Poetic justice!

[farmers_son]

I think you are missing the point. It is not about ABP. Alberta Pork and Alberta Lamb were hit too. The three producer groups that represent livestock and fall within the greedy grasp of ALMA. Who is going to stand up to ALMA now? Who is going to tell the government that mandatory is not the way to go? The NFU? I think not.

[per]

Come on f_s, fear mongering at its best. I grow lots of barley, never once have I given a thought to having my checkoff refunded. They are doing a good job and are responsive to the needs of the barley growers. In fact only about 7% do ask for a refund and it has been steady for the last 10 or so years. That is how it will be for the pork, lamb, beef and potato guys. The core support will be steady and consistent. The only real difference will be the actual # of core supporters and that each organization will have to be responsive to all of the members on an ongoing basis. True grass roots bottom up democracy. Yearly referendum. Enduring accountability. I can't imagine how you can preach democracy and then reject moving the organization to true democracy.

[BFW]

Yes FS I will have to agree with you that you certainly have never been a proponent of the BIG feedlots and your comments on Rutherford the other day certainly spell that out very clearly. I find it interesting also that ABP has taken up with the provincial Liberal party to promote this fight of big vs small. This is about ensuring the viabiltiy of the cattle and beef industry in this province, not about ABP style democracy and ABP is not the industry. There is huge opportunity for us all here to do better here. I predict there will be less division amongst the various sectors going forward and more money available to advance our issues and a better return on that money invested. I don't understand the ABP campaign of fearmongering and think that they do it at their peril. This change to the legislation is long overdue, lets seize the opportunity.

[farmers_son]

I think the real point is the undemocratic and heavy handed approach by the government when they moved ahead with this legislation instead of allowing a plebiscite vote where the producers could decide for themselves.

I have a pretty good idea how, if the regular contributors to Agri-ville were the only ones to vote, which way the vote would go. However unless a Province wide vote was held the producers will never get to say.

I think there is a clear reason for that and that reason is the Province wants Alberta Beef Producers, Alberta Pork and Alberta Lamb out of the way so that there is no effective opposition to the mandatory aspects of ALMA that we are going to see next year.

Refundable check-off does not give you more choice – it allows money to vote instead of people.

There is a reason why the Government went with Legislation instead of allowing producers a plebiscite. When producers understand what is at stake and what the issues are they would vote in favour of the present checkoff structure and these three livestock organizations would be able to offer opposition to ALMA.

It is about producers being able to stand up to ALMA or being totally dominated by ALMA.

[BFW]

This isn't about democracy. This is purely about the business of raising, feeding,etc in Alberta. Why are we afraid of ALMA. Why then is their no worry about MAPA ( Marketing of Agricultural Products Act) which actually allows all these boards and commissions to exist. This is a refundable checkoff FS, the right to collect it has not been removed. I guess if it appears heavy handed ( and i disagree) its because we have as an industry been unable to solve this on our own.

[vagabonddreamer]

this is a very interesting socio/demographic discussion...much like the CWB debate on the commodity side of the board...

it has long been held that the propensity of those "against" a particular issue, to formulate into cohesive groups...is much larger than "supporters" to do the same...supporters of an issue dont really get their backs up until their position is threatened...

so although one reading this board for the first time might think all prairie farmers are against the CWB...or all beef producers are against ABP...that may not indeed be the case given a "forced turn out and vote" situation...this discussion board like many others has become a place to roil and vent over an issue...lots of good discussion as well...but i dont think agriville is necessarily a good example of the cross section of the population...vs

[per]

You are correct vg that Agriville is not a true cross section on any issue but I have over the last year been polling fellow ranchers and there is a decided advantage to choice where the check-off is concerned. Still not scientific but most folks I know wouldn't mind a discussion to change my mind if they could so I expect they were honest responses. This won't decimate the ABP, it will change it. Although I have fought to have choice, I most likely will leave my check-off with them as most others will too. It does however provide leverage for when they loose their way.

[farmers_son]

The ones who will have the leverage with a refundable check off are the big feedlots. All of whom have no problem with the mandatory aspects of ALMA because it is the cow calf producer who has to jump through those hoops. Bill 43 takes ABP away from the cow calf producer and hands it to the big feedlots... lock, stock and barrel.

Refundable check-off does not give you more choice – it allows money to vote instead of people. And the feedlots are the ones who would control the most check off. Lets not forget they would be voting with dollars they deducted from the value of your weaned calf. The big feedlots would be controlling your organization with your money and the cow calf producer could go jump in the lake.

However the real issue is the government, through Bill 43, is not allowing producers to decide this for themselves through a plebiscite vote. This debate, the pros and cons of a refundable check off is a debate that needed to happen in the context of a plebiscite vote. If there were to be a plebiscite vote and given there is more cow calf producers than feedlot operators there is a high probability this government and their the big feedlot friends may not get their way.

I think producers can connect the dots for themselves. And those dots show a government that is trying to ram ALMA down the throats of Alberta's livestock sector, not only the cow calf producers but pork and lambs too. Bill 43 is clearly an attempt to get rid of the main opposition to ALMA with its socialist mandatory undemocratic control of this provinces livestock industry and its primary producers.

[Sawbones]

FS..ABP is not democratic. If it were so then resolutions that were passed at the general meeting should be acted upon and not changed at the discretion of a few on the board. If they were acting for the industry and not merely puppets for the packers, they would not be lobbying the federal government to have the $50 million spent on SRM removal costs instead of supporting producer packing initiatives. I'm a cow/calf producer and I welcome the choice.