• 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.

Drifts on the Doorsteps

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

    #11
    jdepape says: We have effectively exported our malting industry to China.

    Yet he fails to mention China has an 10% import tariff on malt, compared to a 3% tariff on barley.

    jdepape says: "the malting industry would not invest any more capital in the malt industry in Canada as long as the CWB has single desk marketing authority."

    yet he fails to acknowledge that the domestic demand for malt in NA and the EU is falling, and currently malt plants are operating at less than 85% capacity. Furthermore he ignores the fact that areas where malt demand is growing (Eastern Europe, SA as well as China) have also see investment in malt plants further reducing the need for investment in Canada.

    Most troubling, jdepape asserts: "Democratically, the majority of farmers have told the CWB over and over they don’t want the single desk on barley"

    In fact "democratically, farmers have told the CWB and the government in every director election that they want the CWB and the single desk by voting in directors supportive of the single desk. Polls, surveys, and non binding plebicites do not form the basis of a democracy, elections do. Until farmers actually vote in a majority of directors who want change, "democratically" there can be no change to the single desk.

    But if jdepape is honest in his statement that "its all about listening and responding" then I am sure he will not have any problems responding to the following simple questions I have for him.

    1. In an earlier post on your blog you state: "Intuitively, the concept of the single desk makes sense. Farmers should benefit from collectively negotiating from a position of strength and the potential for better prices seems almost obvious."

    My question then is Why does the CWB not work? What changes would have to be made to or in the CWB so Canadian farmers would benefit from collectively negotiating?

    2. You state: "... the dual market, will not work. (I (jdepape) believe it can.)"

    Could you please tell me exactly how you see the dual market working in light of the AWB existing for less than 2 years after becoming a dual market entity in spite of the fact it had prepared for the dual market by raising a capital fund.

    Most open market supporters claim that a dual market will work but none I have talked to can tell me how it will work. hopefully you will support your claim that it will work with actual details and a plan.


    3. You state: "They need directors sitting at the CWB board table who won’t override farmers’ interests with their own ideology"

    So as a farmer voting in the upcoming election, how do I know a open market supporter also won't override farmer's interest simply because of ideology?

    Looking forward to your reply!

    Comment


      #12
      "Could you please tell me exactly how you see the dual market working "

      Open they eyes, and the revelation will come forth, glowing in its' manifestation of a gun-free wheat marketing zone where two tribes compete side by side for markets, and they shall be called Eastern Canada and Western Canada.

      Go forth and bear the news.

      Ps. The CWB has taught me obfuscation. Isn't it wonderful? Pars

      Comment


        #13
        I assume Parsley is referring to the now defunct Ontario Wheat Board which before 2000 was the sole marketer of wheat in Ontario. In 2009 the GFO, which was formed by amalgamating the OWB with the Corn and Soybean Grower organizations, marketed less that 170,000 tonnes of Ontario wheat. Not exactly a glowing endorcement of the viability of a dual market. Thanks for adding to the argument that the dual market is not feasable. And for evading my original question rather than answering it.

        Comment


          #14
          I assume Parsley is referring to the now defunct Ontario Wheat Board which before 2000 was the sole marketer of wheat in Ontario. In 2009 the GFO, which was formed by amalgamating the OWB with the Corn and Soybean Grower organizations, marketed less that 170,000 tonnes of Ontario wheat. Not exactly a glowing endorcement of the viability of a dual market. Thanks for adding to the argument that the dual market is not feasable. And for evading my original question rather than answering it.

          Comment


            #15
            I wonder who is paying depape for the blogs this close to an election.

            Comment


              #16
              The point is they co-exist with the CWB. They work separately from the CWB, but within Canada.

              2 marketing systems within one country.

              Two.

              2

              Creston Wyndell region of BC was taken out of the Designated Area. Now I'd agree you probably piddled your pants when it happened, but the value of the CWB pools did not deteriorate.

              The value is determined by how well the grain is marketed.And divided amongst the farmers, right?

              If 200 farmers from Saskatchewan withdrew from the CWB lassoo, there would be no consequence to the single desk. All the CWBvoting farmers you refer to, would remaion loyal to the single desk.

              Surely even someone cashing a per diem can understand the point.
              Pars

              Comment


                #17
                Pars:
                Sorry, not on the payroll, only trying to learn.
                And you are right about
                2
                two
                2
                markets coexisting already in Canada. BUT the 2-two-2 markets are not coexisting in the same geographical area of Canada.
                Farmers in Creston or Ontario cannot sell through the CWB even if they want to. There is NO DUAL MARKET in either of the places you refer to in your argument for a dual market
                If farmers vote to remove the single desk, I have no problem with that.
                I do have a problem with people telling me a dual market can work but then refusing or unable to explain to me how both will operate and exist over time; since when tried in Ontario, in Australia, etc. the boards have failed. Even you have not shown me a dual market, only an open market.

                Instead of trying to be funny and evading my question - show me a plan!

                Comment


                  #18
                  Farmers in the Creston area WERE part of the DA for years! You don't know what you are talking about. They bitched and the government caved, and they seceded by way of legislation

                  The Designated Area and the Rest of Canada both operate within Canada.

                  They operate side by side.
                  Quebec markets grain.
                  Ontario Board markets grain
                  Ontario farmers market grain.
                  Creston farmers market grain.
                  BWB markets grain

                  All function side by side.
                  Quasi wheat marketers within one country.

                  And, by the way, it's rumpured the CWB has courted , on occasion, to get the ROC to join the CWB. A trolling suggestion. NFU farmers in Ontario liked the idea; non NFU puked.

                  So, on a national scale, you are correct. it is not dual marketeting. It is a quasi-marketing. Pars

                  Comment


                    #19
                    In 1947, Canada had a sole marketer of wheat, and barley. The government's Canadian Wheat Board.

                    Then Canada legisalated a dual market.
                    The CWB from then on ONLY marketed Western Wheat and Barley.
                    Yes they did.

                    Today, we have MULT-MARKETERS

                    Do you suppose any one of those marketers sell feed barley into the USA?

                    Do you suppose any one of those marketers sell milling wheat to an Ontario flour mill?

                    Yes, well.

                    Pars

                    Comment


                      #20
                      Think all dml is saying is that "dual" is a soft way of saying open. It's a question of whether the CWB would survive as a voluntary organization with any sort of "power" in an open market. The OWB, with less than 10% of origination or the AWB would suggest that single desks by and large become minor players. Also - think that in Quebec it's mandatory to market Quebec grown wheat through a central agency.

                      Comment

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