New information revealed regarding OUI changes if not Disbandment

[oneoff]

I followed the Clearout 41 Plus story closely in the days when it was available through the PMRA OUI (Own Use Import) program. This extraordinarily successful program brought some competition to the glyphosate market and surely it can't be argued that prices declined substancially. In fact it was so successful that a whole lot of the industry; collaborators and the government decided to change the program.
All the reports I read indicated that the GROU program that was to replace the OUI for crop protection products; and was enacted to provide an improved selection of products; provide an empty container collection program; reduce government paperwork in administration and generally provide an even better program offering farmers more chemical purchase options. Of course it didn't work out that way; and all we did was lose OUI.
Today one of our self admitted Champions of the voice of farmers; a member of numerous groups speaking on behalf of farmers; none other than our own "wd9" posted these revealing statements
Begin quote
"wd9 posted Jul 16, 2010 12:45
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OUI was illegal and it allowed stealing of intellectual property. It had to change. The initial meetings had more lawyers than regulators. It was scary. Specific example was allowing clearout in by stealing all the reg data from monsanto to prove it was safe. This was not right." END QUOTE
Too bad he; or our other spokepersons or negotiators hadn't spread that far and wide at the time. No wonder farmers lose battles; with leadership like that; its collaboration and agreement without any trace of a strong fight.
OUI was a government approved program that FNA (also previous groups and ordinary farmers) spent years to get approval for a generic glyphosate). The Federal government; PMRA and Health Canada took years before they accepted the generic glyphosate under the OUI program. Years later (as in a few hours ago) we learn it was all based on stolen reg data from monsanto; and OUI had to change; this was not right etc. We were soldout. This isn't right; and that weak analysis explains whose hands we are in.

[oneoff]

Here's a June 2007 press release from FNA. It sort of proves they knew the wd9's of the world.
Begin quote

"Be clear that a great majority of farm organizations support OUI and the number of organizations that joined the PMRA-CropLife Alliance is very small. However many they are, they need to either deliver on the promises or be held accountable why not. It cannot be good enough to say they didn't get what they expected, or that they were misled, or that it's the government's fault for moving too slow, or that the chemical companies have decided to focus on seed so there is no room for improvement on chemicals. They may have these and a much bigger list of excuses ready for the eventuality that there is no competitive product once OUI has been suspended. But they cannot claim they didn't know better. They were warned, explained to, cajoled and even mildly harassed to try to see the issue through the eyes of an active farm family who could lose tens of thousands of dollars. They knew. FNA delivered two thick reports full of detail to almost every farm organization in Canada. They knew. End Quote
In my research so far; there has not been one slightest inkling of allegations of stolen data or something wrong.. My first guess is that once you submit data to the federal government; it automatically becomes public knowledge; but hardly stolen when you attempt to repeat it. Sounds like a traitor in someone else's camp.

[sawfly]

thanks for post.
what is going on?
what have i missed?
there is too much money to be made
by big chem co.s shutting out generics.
is there something in the works trying to destroy what little access we have.

[TOM4CWB]

One;

' My first guess is that once you submit data to the federal government; it automatically becomes public knowledge'.

That was the whole point of what WD9 was trying to tell you. YOU ARE WRONG.

If you spent $5M getting a product registered... and someone else used your work to import a simular product... not even exactly the same...

You would be getting lawyers and going after the gov. too... if this happened to you... wouldn't you?!

I can buy generic glyphos for under $3/L... from a Canadian retailer.

How can you claim our system rips you off?

More and different chems are being allowed in. NOT a failure by any stretch. We are getting chems that have approved registration data for both US and CAN. comming on stream that avoids this problem. That is the goal... lower the cost of regulation. Face it... FNA was/is not a farmer bringing in own use chem not for resale.

[oneoff]

Come on Tom: Just because Canadian cheapest glyphosate is now $3.00 doesn't mean $8.00 to $11.00 per US gallon isn't considerably cheaper if it were available. That doesn't necessarily make Canadian glyphosate a bargain.
As for your opinions about how FNA stole Monsanto's data; that just doesn't make sense. It was the PMRA; a government entity no less; that carefully scrutinized the application. If something was done illegally I'm sure that OUI for glyphosate would have been shut down in an instant. Monsanto and the PMRA would surely have seen to that.
No your comment doesn't yet convince me one bit; and I will surely attempt to find the truth of the matter. I also invite you to back up your opinion with some independent or PMRA documents that support your charges.
Similarly; wd9's comment about a room full of lawyers and it being "scary" at the meetings to decide OUI's fate wouldn't have struck fear in my heart.
I never felt I was stealing "intellectual property" when I used the OUI import program. Throngs of farmers imported millions of liters of glyphosate. And that option was taken away. Just how many farmers have found GROU to be a benefit.
As to insinuating that glyphosate is so cheap that it proves the system is working well; just remember back a year when everyone was being hosed because of the supposed shortage of glyphosate. Well we had GROU at that time and it sure didn't help glyphosate prices; and the other list of GROU chemicals simply didn't/doesn't help any of my application.
FNA members and supporters; as well as other OUI importers must surely have some ccomments on this matter.
The wd9 post is a classic just like vader's rant on selfish and greedy durum producers. On this sellout of OUI a person gets labelled a loser; ignorant etc. etc along with insinuations of association with a company involved in theft of intellectual property. The author even decides that we are guilty with the "This is wrong" statement.
Wrong interpretation for a product whose patent had expired. Lets see your proof because I no longer trust your opinions.

[oneoff]

Tom You spend saay $5 million to get a product registered. You also may get a patent and are entitled to a period of patent protection. After that patent expires; the rules change.
You say I'm wrong. Well I have yet to see else make that accusation that anyone stole Monsanto's data. Give me a lead on that story so I may begin to investigate that accusation.

[oneoff]

This from IDEA (independent Dealers; Saskatoon) is probably a good summary from the chemical industry standpoint

"The OUI Program was implemented in 1993 and was intended to help Canadian farmers gain
direct access to American products when special needs arise. Under the OUI Program, a registered
product in the United States can be imported for personal use and is exempt from registration in Canada
under the Pest Control Products Act (PCPA) if two conditions are met: (1) the product must be
chemically equivalent to a Canadian registered product and (2) the product must have an approved label
that is equivalent to a Canadian registered product."

In Feb 2005 FNA's application for Clearout 41 Plus into the OUI program was accepted.

Note that once "equivalency" was proven that the die was cast in the OUI program.

As such; I believe the accusations and crap that wd9 has posted regarding stealing intellectual property; and stealing Monsanto's reg data was acquiescing to another's opinion without a trace of a fight. And let them lead the fight if they so wish.

Further; the equivalecy certificate "accepted" by Health Canada for Clearout 41 Plus that I found on an internet search listed not a Monsanto product at all; but was a competitor's glyphosate. This was in 2007 and I have yet to find the "equivalency certificate" for the 2005 period. A Chinese glyphosate application was rejected about 2006.

[TOM4CWB]

Oneoff,

I never once said one word about Monsanto.

FNA is not an individual farmer using the chem on their own farm.

Take off the NFU/NDP glasses for a moment!

[wd9]

Chemistries need to be registered to be used in Canada. OUI was legislation for very special short term extremely small amounts. Not millions of litres.

Guess it was just too simple for some to understand.

Oneoff, you are exhausting.

[oneoff]

Thank you for the "exhausting" compliment. I know thats about the closest I'll ever come to not being a loser.
All I'm saying is that its not unlike the Crow Rate issue. You have a deal with someone; eg. the railways or the chemical industry like happened with OUI. For years they pillage you and finally some courageous people find a way (or circumstances change such that 1 cent a ton mile is a bargain). Then the buggers pretend that somehow it is farmers fault and they use their substancial power to take your infrequent moment of good fortune away. As farmers we are so brainwashed that they have way too easy a time convincing us it is in our best interest to let them have their way.
PS You guys are so far off base in your assumptions about me that even you would be suprised.

Bye forever. There is no more "oneoff"