• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CWB Elections: Those That Can Vote, Should Vote

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    CWB Elections: Those That Can Vote, Should Vote

    CWB Elections: Those That Can Vote, Should Vote


    There are farmers saying they won’t vote in the CWB elections because they don’t grow CWB crops. They say that they really don’t care what the CWB does or doesn’t do because it doesn’t have anything to do with them.


    Well, it does.


    Delivery of CWB grains is restricted by the CWB “calling” grain into the system – you’d like to deliver more but you can’t. As most farm bills come due in the fall, farmers need to sell grain to pay the bills. Since they can’t deliver enough CWB grains to pay the bills, they sell something else.


    A friend once joked that he grew peas so that he could pay his durum production bills in the fall. It’d be funny if it wasn’t true. Between the low Initial Payment and 50% contract calls, there just isn’t the cash flow needed to cover the input costs. So peas or canola or some other crop carries the burden.


    Canola is the big one – the big non-CWB crop that gets sold at harvest or shortly after to pay the bills. The problem is that too much canola gets pushed into the system in the fall. As canola stocks build in the primary elevator system to more than a million tonnes in most years, the basis can weaken by as much as $30/tonne (or more) – we’ve all seen it. This is not elevator companies taking advantage of you because they know you need to sell - grain handlers use price to get farmers to slow down on deliveries and – at the same time – to get buyers to buy more (or attract price sensitive buyers, like Mexico). Once the stocks in the elevators begin to get cleared up, the basis works its way back up to as much as even money to futures, as buyers look for prices that will now attract new deliveries into the system.


    Feed barley is another big one. I’ve already talked a few times about the current export feed barley program that is costing all feed barley producers – even those that don’t sell to the CWB – millions.


    The CWB’s passive system of “inventory management” makes the whole system – for all crops – dysfunctional. Whether they are manipulated, managed or free, markets provide signals and incentives to both buyers and sellers. In western Canada, since they get the same price regardless of when they deliver, farmers have the incentive to deliver wheat early in the crop year (instead of holding it for later delivery); yet they can’t deliver any more than the CWB allows. On the other hand, the canola market gives incentives (signals) to sell for delivery later in the year; yet many can’t as they need the cash now, not later.


    When the CWB states it doesn’t distort markets, it’s wrong. Among others, it distorts the markets for all the non-CWB crops grown in western Canada. And it’s not to the benefit of the farmer.


    Don’t think for a minute that because you don’t sell to the CWB that it doesn’t concern you. It does. If you’re a grain farmer, and even if you don’t sell grain to the CWB, your vote in the director’s election is important.




    Starting today all my commentaries are available at www.cwbmonitor.blogspot.com


    John De Pape
    John De Pape Ltd.
    Winnipeg, MB

    #2
    Are there any non-board candidates?

    Comment


      #3
      I think you have to be a board supporter to run, what a crock. I read the oath under the cwb election and it pretty much means you either have to lie or be a board loving buffoon to become a director. How can this be any kind of measurment on how much support there is for the monopoly. In our disrict 7 both candidates are pro CWB so if I vote I will be endorsing the monopoly. I choose to save my gas and throw the ballot in the trash. If they really want to find out answers they should have asked you to put an X in a box for an open and free market. Instead I get to choose between two monkeys.

      Comment


        #4
        Looking over the candidate information, it looks to me like those who would choose a voluntary CWB have checked out of the director election process. I see no candidates who are in support of the CWB becoming a voluntary organization, completely controlled by farmers. Which is sad, because the only way the CWB will survive is to become voluntary, commercial, and divorced from government. If directors and director candidates would face the truth, and act in "good faith in the best interest of the corporation", this is the position they should be taking. Anything else will lead to the further demise of the organization.

        Being dogmatic about ideology rather than accountable and pragmatic about the business you are running is not an attribute of a good director. A valuable contribution to the board table means questioning the direction the organization is going and advocating change when necessary. It is not resisting those changes and repeating ideological slogans to the public and to farmers when challenged with facts and figures.

        When the organization ultimately fails, will directors be held liable if they have not acted in the interest of the organization and prepared it for the future?

        Comment

        • Reply to this Thread
        • Return to Topic List
        Working...