CWB ship buying

[gustgd]

part of my reply to John on his survey about the lakers.

So how ever you want to count put us down for this is a bad idea.
Although not for financial reasons ( heck it might even make the CWB money)
Its for all the "intangible detriments/drawbacks"
Bad precedent of allowing them to expropriate money with no defined ownership.

a)It's $1/tonne this project would the next be $2-3-4-10
b)They never consulted ever...... I go to more meetings than most and this is the first I've heard of it. Maybe I should have said something when they got into their own quality assurance lab, but they said they had a good business plan.
c) The portion of the BOD who voted for this have a bad history of business management. There is a long line of poorly managed organic farms and need we mention the Sask wheat pool?
d) The ability for them too cook the books so to speak.
e) All the thoughts of owning depreciating assets.
f)The tie in with mission terminal, and the overcapacity out there.
g)Did I mention that we will be charged approximately $8000.00 a year and never get a payback. kind of like a co-op with no dividends.
h) This is more than we as farmers spend on research for new varieties which btw has a 14:1 return on barley and 5:1 on wheat.

This is just off the top you had good ones as well.
all the best

Gerrid Gust

[checking]

I'm no more in favor of the CWB owning a laker fleet than I was in having railway overcharges of an equivalent amount sent to the WGRF.

After awhile these $65 million farmer cookie jar extractions tend to add up, but certain people only complain about specific missing cookies. I guess it might have to do with what Board chair you occupy, right gustgd?

[gustgd]

@checking

January 19, 2009: Wheat Growers Support Return of Excess Freight Charges to Farmers


The website won't let me bring it up but I'll dig through my saved folders.

Can you show me where you protested back in the 90's when the legislation was drafted putting the freight overages to the WGRF.

[gustgd]

Found it!

Media Release
For Immediate Release: January 19, 2009

Wheat Growers Support Return of
Excess Freight Charges to Farmers

The Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association has written to the federal government asking that the excess rail freight charged in the 2007/08 crop year be returned to farmers.

"This is money that belongs to farmers who delivered grain in the 2007/08 crop year," says Mike Bast, Chair of the Wheat Growers. "The amount, plus interest, should be refunded to farmers."

In the 2007/08 crop year, the Canadian Transportation Agency determined that CN and CP overcharged grain shippers by $59.8 million due to the failure of the railways to properly adjust their freight rates to reflect the decreased car maintenance allowance embedded in the revenue cap calculation.

The Wheat Growers have asked the federal Ministers of Transport and Agriculture to ensure the $59.8 million plus interest is returned to farmers and to review options with farmers and shippers as to how this might best be achieved.

The Wheat Growers also ask that the 15 percent penalty amount of $9.0 million assessed against the railways be allocated to the Western Grains Research Foundation (WGRF) and added to its endowment fund. The Wheat Growers note that this amount is approximately twice the amount the WGRF receives in check-off payments in a typical year.

The Wheat Growers also ask the federal government to consider increasing the 15 percent penalty, given that the existing level does not appear to be a deterrent to excess freight charges. CP has exceeded its revenue cap in four of the past five years and CN has exceeded its cap in three of the past five years.

The Wheat Growers also support a railway costing review, so that the revenue cap is set in such a manner that the railways are appropriately compensated for the service they provide and have sufficient incentive to invest in the rail system to meet future needs.

For further comment, please contact:

Mike Bast
Chair
Mobile (204) 330-0053

[checking]

So you agree with me that to make me whole, two cookies must be returned to my cookie jar, and it is wrong for Boards to either accept, or take money that belongs to farmers to spend on Board pet projects.

It's too bad that rural party lines was the tech of 1990's. Perhaps many things adopted in that age should be reviewed in the light of the internet world.