Haney and the Wheat Board sitting in a tree...

[Fransisco]

http://realagriculture.com/2011/02/11/the-cwb-gets-into-a-boatload-of-ships/

<b>The CWB Gets Into a Boatload of Ships</b>

Is there anything that the Canadian Wheat Board does or says that does not come with controversy? This week the Canadian Wheat Board announced that they are purchasing two lake freight ships at the cost of $65 Million dollars. Much of the criticism came immediately from the Western Barley Growers and the Grain Growers but the CFA supported the concept.

There are several points and questions being discussed in many different coffee shops this morning.

Is the purchase of assets outside the mandate of the Canadian Wheat Board?
Why were farmers not aware of this shift in strategy, especially with the recent elections?
Based on estimates, the cost to farmers is $1 MT over the next four years. Some are arguing that this is in poor consideration of soon to be retiring farmers who will see limited benefits from the ships. Others are saying that this money would be better put to use in farmers own pockets so that they could reinvest in their own farming operations.
According to the CWB’s calculations, the ships will be paid for in 6-7 years and have an expected use of 25 years. The estimated net benefit over the life of the ships is $250 million which is returned to the CWB bottom line.
As you have heard me say before when the CWB is in the headlines, farmer’s brain’s leak out of their heads. Whether you are pro or anti CWB, it is hard to argue with the raw business numbers of this purchase. What is being played out in the media is the politics of the CWB which I am not all interested in. I think this is an interesting play for the CWB in the sense that if it works out it may lead to more transactions like this which will have a benefit to farmers. When you leave the politics out you can think more rationally and clearly. To me this is not a pro-choice or pro-single desk debate. What should be discussed is the business justification of the purchase and evaluate it properly.

If the profits are returned to general revenue, then the benefits are to all farmers in Western Canada. If the CWB’s is responsible for the marketing of farmer’s grain and if the savings are passed onto farmers then farmers are getting the benefit. If the CWB is utilizing lake frieght already and now can utilize it’s own asset this is good business. In my mind this is no different than a farmer buying a semi grain trailer because he is getting tired of paying custom haulers to deliver grain to the elevator for him. It is also the same as packing plants owning trucking companies to better vertically integrate and achieve logistic cost efficiency.

Everyone is talking about the mandate of the CWB and that this is a breech of it. It would appear after some research that owning ships is no different than rail cars. They are movable assets and not real estate. If the CWB purchased a grain terminal then that would classify as a breach of the mandate.

What’s your thoughts? Leave your thoughts or questions in the comment box below and remember no politics

http://realagriculture.com/2011/02/11/the-cwb-gets-into-a-boatload-of-ships/

[Fransisco]

Yes, there is always a strong 'business' case to be made in favour of THEFT.

[wd9]

It's not politics, its raw frustration and emotion. Many people want the board to end so this isn't about good business cuz buying the ships is good business, its about with a purchase like this it is obvious the CWB will be taking our grain for a long long time to come. And that adds fuel to the already huge fire.

[Fransisco]

Business is a voluntary endeavour. There is nothing voluntary about this.

[BTOfarmall]

K-I-S-S-I-N-G........

[northfarmer]

Haney muat be working on a deal with the CWb himself, maybe he fashions his new wave ag media to get financed by the CWB like the rest of the MSM in ag they seem to to not want to piss off their big advertiser ......the Govt of Canada paid for the hopper cars and gave them to the CWB, I will help pay for the lakers, but all my grain goes by car to the West coast..... will we now push grain from more points in the west against the freight to pay for our laker JV with the ex ceo of the CWB !!!!!

forget lakers, forget weather forcasting, stick to your mandate, sell my grain for top net return to the producers, or get the &^%$ out of my way so i can do it for myself, and Haney same for you, insulting pissed off farmers by questioning the intelligence and passion of those opposed to the collectivist hoard!!!!

I have no legal mandate to watch your vids to pay for your advertising, you are done with me.

[TOM4CWB]

Ouch...

Good Rant... Good points... sure you won't change your mind tomorrow North?!!!

<(>:{) GRIN!!!!

[TOM4CWB]

I wonder if Shaun will let this stay up? Is it too political???

"1. Dear Shaun,
This is all about the confiscation of ‘designated area’ grain growers money. Something the CWB has become VERY skilled at; with it’s ‘slight of hand’ PPO contracts and Contingency fund pool account taxes ($40/t Jan 31/11).
This is a very simple problem… we are not supposed to be voting on each others property rights.
Just as in Federal elections… all folks vote… not just business or unions… 1st nations or immigrants. Everyone gets an equal say… if over the age of 18… if they are a citizen or landed immigrant in Canada.
The CWB allows just one vote per farm unit. This is not a democracy.
Gross Farm income Canada;
Income less than 50,000 – 52% of farms – 5% of income,
50,000 – 99,999 – 14% of farms – 5% of income,
100,000 – 249,999 – 17% of farms – 15% of income,
250,000 – 499,999 – 10% of farms – 19% of income,
500,000 – 999,999 – 4% of farms – 16% of income,
1,000,000 and over – 3% of farms – 40% of income.
$250,000 and more = 17% of farms – 75% of farm income.
Source 2006 Statistics Canada – Census of Agriculture.
One would expect in 2011… this will be even more concentrated to fewer farms for more income.
How can those who sell 40t of wheat… over 2-3 years… make a decision for a grower that sells 5,000t a year?
On the ships alone over 4 years:
$20,000 for one farm/grower; $80 for the other grower!
For any sane person to understand how we actually got to this point of insanity…
THIS does explain the problem and issue!
Some farm with $80 in the pot… has the same say as another farm with $20,000 in that same pot for paying for these ships!

Both own exactly the same amount of the Ships… and likely the grower delivering 12,000t to the CWB over 4 years is despised and hated by the CWB!

“It’s not politics, its raw frustration and emotion. Many people want the board to end so this isn’t about good business cuz buying the ships is good business, its about with a purchase like this it is obvious the CWB will be taking our grain for a long long time to come. And that adds fuel to the already huge fire.” Words of another farmer who thinks this ship purchase is inappropriate.

If you want a raw emotional response from grain growers… rub salt in this wound!!!"

[TOM4CWB]

WD9,

Well spoken!

Shaun... you should not play with fire!

""As you have heard me say before when the CWB is in the headlines, farmer’s brain’s leak out of their heads. Whether you are pro or anti CWB, it is hard to argue with the raw business numbers of this purchase."

If Shaun had to pay over 5 figures into buying these two ships... over the next 4 ears... perhaps he would be having a 'brain leak' as well.

If this was not an insult... what was it meant to be... a complement???

Lifer... I saw no redeeming respect for any of my property rights in that article... by Shaun... only disrespect for my family and community.

Shoot Judgement & undeserved insults at us... expect something in return."

[shaney]

Thanks for being such a fan North and others. By the way I am not bought or
paid by CWB to have an opinion that all all resembles theirs. Every time that
someone might say something positively about the CWB you should not assume
they are bought or in a tree together as insinuated. I have spoken against the
CWB on different matters such as bill 474, the last election, the need for election
reform, the need for biotech wheat and most NFU like positions that they take.

Don't be so quick to assume, its to bad that people cannot provide a differing
opinion on this site without accusation or direct conflict. Your anonymous rant is
unjustified but you are entitled to your opinion just as I am.

In my position as a commentator or media person I receive an equal amount of
hate mail accusing me of being a CWB lover and hater. Which probably means I
am doing my job.

Tom I'm sorry if you think I insulted your family and community. Since I live in a
community that is probably similar to yours I wasn't intending to insult them
either.

I'm sure there will be another issue to come in the future with the CWB and I
might oppose it and we will all be friends again. Talk to you later and I hope I
have't ruined your weekend.

[TOM4CWB]

Shaney,

No Problem... thanks for letting my post stand... and certainly no hard feelings... the beauty of the Internet is we CAN communicate freely and express our true feelings... which is a great asset for humanity and building a stronger community!

Thanks for your candor and opening up this topic for more to understand how their neighbour is feeling about how our money gets spent!

Cheers!!!

[HFL]

I guess as a designated area farmer I am to dumb to sell my own grain. Now it seems that I am to dumb to spend my own money. They have to do that for me as well.

[rockpile]

All of this discussion got me a little curious so I did
a little research. In 1981, the Federal Gov't got into
an arrangement with the CWB to purchase 2000
hopper cars. The Feds facilitated an agreement with
several North American financial institutions to
purchase the cars and then lease them to the CWB
for 25 years which would defray the upfront costs
to the Board yet yield a profit to the investors.
Considered a win win at the time. So yes, in fact the
CWB (meaning you and I and shippers of all types of
grain) paid for the cars. When the smoke cleared,
CPR was given outright ownership of the cars in
return for assuming 100% of maintenance costs.
Once those costs got too high, CPR bailed out of
the agreement. This was all happening during the
same time while the Feds were pouring hundreds of
millions of dollars into branch line rehabilitation.
(That's another story)
Now wake up time. In 2005 the CWB purchased an
additional 1660 cars outright. Both Measner and
Ritter are quoted in the press release. I have no
recollection of any squealing or whining about that
at the time. Also note, that in 2005 there were,
shall we say skeptics, elected sitting on the Board. I
don't recall any issue being raised by anyone at the
time.
So - today, the CWB owns about 3510 hopper cars.
I don't have the numbers for Sask and Alberta, but I
do know the Feds own 12,400. I believe (last
number I saw) that the total fleet is around 22,000,
some leased from the US I believe. If you love
reading, you can find most of this stuff on the
Transport Canada website.
Lakers; someone erroneously suggested that there
was excess capacity of bulk haulers on the Great
Lakes. Not the case. On both sides of the border
there is growing concern that the Lakes and the
seaway is losing much needed capacity and traffic.
Governments on both sides of the border are
starting to throw coin at this problem.
Last one: Tom and others west of Indian Head, Sask.
Are they no longer doing cross hauls? I do not
know, though I do know that Manitoba stuff comes
West.
No opinion on the ship purchase - I need more
information, not sermons, before I make my own
personal decision.
Rockpile

[Fransisco]

Rockpile, right or wrong the decision is not yours to make. That's the main point.

[rockpile]

Fran: Nor should it be. Welcome to the real world!
Rockpile