CWB Ships are none of your buisness- Mb Cooperator

[Fransisco]

Laura Rance

EDITOR


The reaction to last week’s announcement that the Canadian Wheat Board is investing in lake freighters was for the most part predictable.

Some farm groups actually think it’s a wise investment and a practical thing for the board to do. It’s certainly not the first time the board has invested in transportation infrastructure. And in hindsight, its investment in hopper cars has paid off.

But those who want the board disenfranchised had a long list of reasons why investing $65 million in lake freighters that will hit the water in four years, be paid off in eight and contribute an estimated $10 million back into the pool accounts every year thereafter is a bad idea.

“The CWB board of directors should not be taking money from farmers to finance the purchase of ships or any other capital asset,” WCWGA president Kevin Bender said in a release calling on the federal minister to block the deal.

“Farmers on the verge of retirement, needing the money or wanting to invest elsewhere should not be compelled to buy ships.”

Although it’s not clear the federal minister would block the deal even if he could, he did wade in with the view that this is a reckless use of farmers’ money. Then there was the board-bashing blogger, who posted his latest conspiracy theory.

Perhaps the most practical critique came from the Grain Growers of Canada, which opposed the purchase but suggested now is a good time for a discussion on how to best position the board for the future.

“If the CWB is going to accumulate assets in preparation for a new business environment, then it is definitely time to sit down and also discuss the ownership structure of the organization,” it says.

“Let’s talk about who actually owns the CWB and its assets. Does the government own it? Do Canadian farmers own it?”

“It’s time for the government, CWB and progressive farm groups to sit down and map out the future where the CWB will be an effective and active grain marketer for the farmers who wish to use it.”

They are all, of course, entitled to their opinions. And you’ll hear no argument from us about the need for a rational, forward-looking discussion on the future of grain marketing in Western Canada, especially in light of evolving global markets and climate change.

<b?What we take issue with is the suggestion that the board of directors had an obligation to consult with Prairie farmers before making this decision.</b>

Boards of directors exist to guide the strategic interests of an organization. Just as they should not be engaged in its day-to-day operations, <b>they should not be expected to seek the approval of their shareholders or check with the politicians before making decisions</b>, even ones requiring major investments.

Prairie farmers elect 10 directors who can collectively outvote the government appointees at the 15-member board table. If farmers don’t like the decisions their directors make, they can elect new ones the next time those elections come around.

In the meantime, they should trust the CWB’s board of directors make decisions that are in their best interests. We see nothing about this deal to suggest they are not.

The fleet is aging. Farmers (especially in Manitoba) will need new ones to get their grain to market. If the board has to pay the freight, why not own the vessels?

[Fransisco]

Talk about an elitist attitude!

[Fransisco]

How gracious of Ms Rance to allow us to have our own opinions. Our grain and our money, no, we can't be trusted with that, but we'll let you have your opinions... for now.

[Burbert]

Is it practical to hold a vote, each and
every time the CWB is going to make a
money related decision? If so, then I
think that should be translated to
governments as well, Feds, Provs, and
Municipals. I kin see that the future
will involve, lots and lots a votin.
Sounds a bit stupid though. No more
farmin, just constant voting. Oh well the
times are a changing!!!!

[FarmRanger]

Not every time, only when you want to exceed
your mandate.

[TOM4CWB]

Burbert,

It is VERY practical to hold a vote... on every single delivery of wheat.

We do this with Canola, Flax, Peas, Lentils, Cannary, Rye, Corn, Soybeans, every grain except wheat and barley.

Is my farm and family too stupid to decide where our Capital ought to be spent; and what our priorities are?

If the CWB wants to charge those who will use these ships; take their money alone... that is for those folks to decide if they should be in or out.

As for me and our farm... there is absolutely no benefit to us or our wheat and barley shipments to the west coast Pacific ports.

WHY on earth should we have our Capital stolen from us to pay for someone else's ships we will never see a return or benefit from?

Or are you Berbert... telling my family and farm... we are responsible to pay for Great lakes Freight and cross subsidise Manitoba grain growers... that are already voting against the CWB by growing CORN???

Manitoba has 40% more heat units... and I must pay them to grow fusarium wheat and blend this wheat pay for it to come west... or perhaps we are being forced to cross haul our western fusarium free wheat... clear across the continent... to blend up Manitoba fusarium wheat... to go on the lakers??? EAST... into a lower price end use market???

Is there any wonder western 'designated area' growers are short $2/bu?

I know this is all TaklingEskimo to you... perhaps I can deliver you a hearing aid by hand???

[liberty]

While it's true that, theoretically, producers have the opportunity to vote out directors they don't like, the timing of the CWB boat purchase gives them no opportunity to do that for two whole years. By that time, any attempt to cancel the building contract will carry significant financial penalties.

An op-ed in today's Winnipeg Free Press speculates that the current directors had to have known about the boat purchase before the recent CWB elections, and yet not one raised a peep about it during the campaign. It's hard to believe otherwise.

Either they, the board bureaucrats or both kept the deal under wraps until now because they knew it would be a hard sell to a lot of farmers during a campaign.

As an organization, the CWB is about as transparent as mud. This episode proves it once again.

As for having some sort of producer referendum on this issue, that would be entirely appropriate considering that the boat purchase is a major capital investment that is unprecedented in the history of the CWB. It also carries significant financial risk that farmers should be given every opportunity to be made aware of and to ask questions about.

The current crop of directors obviously don't have a clue as to what constitutes a strategic decision and how to handle it properly.

[BTOfarmall]

Tom yer Opinion is Like yer A$$hole, Who Give A Shit!!!!!!!!!!!

[BreadWinner]

My money----My choice, I cant think of a better reason to allow people out of this stranglehold. I want out and they can do what they want with their supporters money. Time to wake up Ritz, this is why I ellected you. Maybe the Liberals could follow through and let us out of this crap. Cant wait to hear this election's load of crap.

[TOM4CWB]

BTO,

Bless you... will your CWB handlers congratulate you for showing us where they are vulnerable?



God Bless Canada!

[cityguy]

Leaving aside the issue of whether it's a good investment or not (don't know - not enough information for me) or whether it should have been an "election" issue (why not - it seems military planes/helicoptors always are), rather than simply charge $1/mt across the board, why don't they raise the FAF by about $4/mt which means that those in the eastern catchements have to essentially pay the bill? after all, isn't the FAF supposed to recoup some of the additional costs of moving grain east?

[BTOfarmall]

Tom you kin't be goin around Quotin Scripture & Half Truths like dis all da time if'n you want us to take you Seriously....

DJpaper said...... (C&P)

" I see a number of guys complaining that their grain moves to the west coast andso won't even benefit from the laker purchase.

I am defending the purchase in every possible way, the financial return from the lakers - the $10 million a year they talk about - will go into "revenue from other sources" which is distributed to the pool accounts. So it doesn't matter which direction your grain goes."


Sooo Now What Tom, Now What?????

[BreadWinner]

Do you honestly think the revenue from these lakers will go into the pooling accounts??? It will go into the laker contingency fund in case they have a bad year or unforseen repairs or expenses. When the wheat board shackles are lifted it will be used to pay severence $$$$$ to all those poor employees.

[TOM4CWB]

BTO,

You can own whatever percent of the CWB lakers you like... Count my farm out.

Since we do not use the pool accounts ( sell with PPO's)except when forced against our will ... and we are obviously having our PPO volume of sales included in the $1/t tax...

This is just another insane way to pay for a CWB Capital asset... that we will not use.

If there is a $10m dollar 'profit' then it must be shared over all of the approx 25mmt of grain shipped each year... figure it out for your self BTO... how much savings will the 3.2mmt get?

A whopping $.40/t income for shippers going through the Great Lakes... to go against an estimated cost of $23/t?

You have been duped BTO.

This is totally different than hopper rail cars.

SO my farm must risk thousands of dollars in income... for a possible forty cents per year per tonne income?

If the CWB could ever match the tonnes that paid in... to the profit to be returned...I see absolutely no evidence this is planned or going to happen.

BTO... what rabbit hole are you going down... by claiming I am irreverent and using my personal faith to somehow shackle you...?

Do you make the claim none of us have property rights... and that your theft is a proper acceptable common law principal!

We are supposed to be happy about you taking and 'coveting' our Capital assets for at least the next 8-20 years... without permission?

Who says it will not be over $10m or that the tonnes produced will not be substantially under 25mmt?

Why should grain going to domestic value added processors in western Canada be levied this tax at all?

And why should the domestic feed market benefit from a wider basis... causing a natural decrease in feed grain prices... meaning that far more than 25mmt will actually lose value?

If our family plans to produce less wheat as the years go by... we will NEVER get our Capital funding back... especially IF we opt out of the CWB!

Which this is TRULY all about in the first place.

A very cheap disguise to force the Canadian government and western 'designated area' grain growers into believing the CWB 'single desk' is somehow of value and must be maintained!

BTO you are a very cheap imitation of an insulting thieving bully.

Go steal someone else's property!

I for one... am not buying any of your arguments... so take my farm's name off the list of those who must pay for your boats!

[jdepape]

BTOFarmall:
If you're going to quote me, the least you can do is get it right.

This is what I wrote:

I see a number of guys complaining that their grain moves to the west coast andso won't even benefit from the laker purchase.

<b>Not defending the purchase in anyway</b>, but the financial return from the lakers - the $10 million a year they talk about - will go into "revenue from other sources" which is distributed to the pool accounts. So it doesn't matter which direction your grain goes.

BTO:
I suggest you get a new computer - the one you have does a lousy cut and paste (C&P).