Many thanks to Princess for taking the CWB Town Hall tele-conference call this evening while I was out.
Here are Her Quick Notes:
August 3, 2011 Called@7:19 pm (meeting started at 7 pm)
Jim Ray, officiator of meeting.
Chairman Oberg: As far as the CWB developing a plan, we have looked at numerous structures and none is as good as the current system.
Any assistance as far as regulation, access to facilities, that would have to be through legislation.
As a board we have a fiduciary responsibility to this organization, to the current structure as it exists.
We are willing to offer advice to the gov.
Brian, Peace River: Has the fed gov given indication what might take place of CWB advance? And In our area we do not have a fair opportunity to market grain.
Chairman Oberg: Little analysis has been done by fed gov on changes they are contemplating. No consultation with farmers. Branding and development, someone will have to fulfill those responsibilities. This timeline is unreasonably short.
Larry, Lofarm. We have grain cars. What will happen with those? Sell & disperse the funds?
Chairman Oberg: If fed gov proceeds, that would be one of the issues to be decided. We recently did upgrades to those cars. They could be rolled into new organization.
Poll: 77% said they had voted or would vote.
Trevor, Advance Colony, Sask.: Why the gov is intent on dismantling the CWB? Result of WTO? Or why? What will happen with the Lakers for St Lawrence?
Chairman Oberg: Reason behind gov. wanting changes. I can only speculate. Part of their policy for a number of years. Philosophical. Organizations within industry pushing for change. Are those objectives the same as farmers? I would not like to see CWB offered at WTO as concession without a corresponding benefit.
Rick Stanke (CWB VP of Logistics): Lakers: In process – 1/5 built. Sailing in 2013. Outcome will depend on discussion with fed.gov. Directors will move forward when we have more info from fed gov.
Richard, Ecksicome, AB: Boxcars. Non-board grain can get cars when they want them. Board grain they never get cars. Peas, I can hedge, and move when I want.
– They cut him off.
Rick: As to why your spring wheat has not been called. We will have to look at that - there are large space levels for wheat, we are looking for wheat. It must have something to do with the arrangement you have at a local level. We will follow up with you tomorrow.
Press 9 to get in cue to ask question.
Kelly, Macklin, Sask: CWB assets – what will happen to it? Money back to farmers where it came from?
Chairman Oberg: I missed your question. I missed the word assets. Assets are limited. Office building, software, railcars, lakers. If wound down, significant ongoing liabilities that would need to be dealt with. Hundreds of millions of dollars – pensions, severance penalties on contracts. Board agreed wind-up costs should be federal gov. responsibility.
John: Re vote. Why based on permit book holders who marketed to CWB for last 5 years. Why not on tonnage? Allen mentioned fiduciary responsibility. Some families have multiple ballots for multiple permit books. Not democratic.
Chairman Oberg: I’ve heard this numerous times. When I look at other elections, everyone gets one vote. Barley growers suggest it, but don’t follow that at their annual meetings. One farmer, one vote.
Lynn, Enchant: If fed gov. insists on taking CWB down, there is a value associated with it. I’m thinking the CWB is worth $6 to 8 million. So should the fed gov. give the farmers that value?
Chairman Oberg: there is value to this CWB of $500 to 600 million a year. With dismantling that will be lost. There is a strong case for compensation. I would like to see the minister look at the results of the plebiscite. When the crow was dismantled, farmers were compensated, so they should now.
Poll: If fed gov. removes single desk, should farmers be compensated by fed gov. 1 yes, 2 no, 3 unsure.
Kim, Choiceland, Sask: Shortline rails, producer car allocation. With no CWB, are we going to get no producer cars?
Rick: Today 99% of producer cars are producer grain. We support it and work with railway to get the cars to market. Other commodities don’t have it. Savings of $14 million each year to farmers from producer cars. That will be gone if single desk eliminated.
John: Geography. East of Manitoba – not part of CWB. Why were western farmers put in and not rest of Canada. Its called CANADIAN wheat board.
Chairman Oberg: History. 1935, strong lobby from prairie farm groups to establish. Ontario group provincially in 1950s. Ontario different, different types of wheat, delivered directly to mills in Ontario & USA. Ont. Farmers wanted changes – not thrust on them by federal gov. Quebec has single desk and democratically made that decision. The purpose of the plebiscite is to give farmers the say.
Darlene, Saskatoon: In 2012, how does it affect port at Churchill?
Rick (logistics): Today, port of Churchill only western port that touches tidewater. CWB uses it as much as possible to save money for prairie farmers. Today CWB directs it. In future, parties in grain will direct grain where it is in their interest. Port of Churchill owned by US company. We won’t likely see it being used in future. Wheat board sends 96% of the grain there.
Poll: 78% said yes, 9% no, rest unsure.
Gerald, Kamsat, Sask: What will happen to our overseas markets without quality and volume guarantees of the CWB?
Rick: Every week we tender grain to Japan, there is a premium for Canadian wheat. Once CWB is gone, those premiums will go. Today we are the only seller on your behalf of Canadian wheat. In the future you’ll go to a transactional system. The premiums you receive from the way things done today will disappear.
Maple Creek, Sask: why are you so sure CWB will cease to desist on open market? Small companies like Parrish & Heimbecker should be consulted.
Chairman Oberg: 2 major impediments to any new entity. Capital: CWB has not retained any earnings. They would need access to facilities at port. Without that, the new company would rely on the grain companies, who would be their competitors. That would not be an enviable position. We are looking to fed gov. for assistance to create new entity. CWB will be wound down. New entity would not resemble CWB in any way.
Chairman Oberg: Re: smaller companies. More consolidation of independent companies – smaller ones together or join larger one. Can we keep the expertise going forward in open market.
Brent: Why the 11/12 pool for the durum isn’t higher than spring wheat with the American market for durum being so strong?
Rick: Current pro 10/11 is 12 month average from August to July, next years will capture Aug-July of next year. Change in marketing dynamics – a year ago there was lots of durum. Today it is at a premium to spring, which is more traditional.
Wendy, Outlook, Sk: Producer cars: post board, we would be competing with grain terminals to get a car, but they are the people we are forced to sell our grain too. What does the board do, and how will it work post board.
Rick: Today, 2 aspects. 1. Access to terminal, arranged by CWB. 2. CWB markets grain and secures a sale. Post CWB, you would need access to terminal, which is competing with producer cars, and you would need someone to arrange sale. 96% of producer cars today move with CWB products.
Chairman Oberg: You will have right to load producer car – guaranteed right. Will there be savings? I load producer cars. No savings to load canola car. Will the savings be there without CWB?
Elsie, Gimley: Smaller farmers need those grain cars, especially if you are far away from elevators.
Chairman Oberg: Concern – equitable access to system. CWB provides that with contract calls, everyone gets equal shot at space. Basis levels will control it in future. Talk to your mp and neighbours, make them aware of the situation. Ask that the fed gov. to respect farmers wishes through this plebiscite.
Francis, Elm Creek Mb: Tired of being pushed around by gov. Jerry Ritz pushing. Ask for his resignation.
Chairman Oberg: Jerry Ritz does not share my point of view. Ask the gov. to respect democracy. Farmers right to decide. Farmers pay for entire cost of CWB operation, so they should decide its future.
Rick: Rhetoric includes “it’s a popular demand by farmers” WCWGA quotes this. Only 25% of WCWG belong to it. I don’t get this.
Chairman Oberg: I don’t have those numbers. But that is why this needs to be decided by plebiscite. That was one of the safeguards put in in 1998. The gov. wants to circumvent that by changing the act.
Announcer: What is your impression of this town hall?
Chairman Oberg: lots of good questions. Once CWB is gone, it will be gone forever. I see the books, I know how it works to benefit in market place. Our competitors, USA, Europe want it gone.
If you didn’t have a chance to ask a question, you can leave a comment at the end of this message.
This plebiscite will be your only chance to have your say. I’m glad we’ve been able to include thousands of farmers in this town hall. Lots of meetings coming up. They are posted on CWB web site.
8:08 pm
Here are Her Quick Notes:
August 3, 2011 Called@7:19 pm (meeting started at 7 pm)
Jim Ray, officiator of meeting.
Chairman Oberg: As far as the CWB developing a plan, we have looked at numerous structures and none is as good as the current system.
Any assistance as far as regulation, access to facilities, that would have to be through legislation.
As a board we have a fiduciary responsibility to this organization, to the current structure as it exists.
We are willing to offer advice to the gov.
Brian, Peace River: Has the fed gov given indication what might take place of CWB advance? And In our area we do not have a fair opportunity to market grain.
Chairman Oberg: Little analysis has been done by fed gov on changes they are contemplating. No consultation with farmers. Branding and development, someone will have to fulfill those responsibilities. This timeline is unreasonably short.
Larry, Lofarm. We have grain cars. What will happen with those? Sell & disperse the funds?
Chairman Oberg: If fed gov proceeds, that would be one of the issues to be decided. We recently did upgrades to those cars. They could be rolled into new organization.
Poll: 77% said they had voted or would vote.
Trevor, Advance Colony, Sask.: Why the gov is intent on dismantling the CWB? Result of WTO? Or why? What will happen with the Lakers for St Lawrence?
Chairman Oberg: Reason behind gov. wanting changes. I can only speculate. Part of their policy for a number of years. Philosophical. Organizations within industry pushing for change. Are those objectives the same as farmers? I would not like to see CWB offered at WTO as concession without a corresponding benefit.
Rick Stanke (CWB VP of Logistics): Lakers: In process – 1/5 built. Sailing in 2013. Outcome will depend on discussion with fed.gov. Directors will move forward when we have more info from fed gov.
Richard, Ecksicome, AB: Boxcars. Non-board grain can get cars when they want them. Board grain they never get cars. Peas, I can hedge, and move when I want.
– They cut him off.
Rick: As to why your spring wheat has not been called. We will have to look at that - there are large space levels for wheat, we are looking for wheat. It must have something to do with the arrangement you have at a local level. We will follow up with you tomorrow.
Press 9 to get in cue to ask question.
Kelly, Macklin, Sask: CWB assets – what will happen to it? Money back to farmers where it came from?
Chairman Oberg: I missed your question. I missed the word assets. Assets are limited. Office building, software, railcars, lakers. If wound down, significant ongoing liabilities that would need to be dealt with. Hundreds of millions of dollars – pensions, severance penalties on contracts. Board agreed wind-up costs should be federal gov. responsibility.
John: Re vote. Why based on permit book holders who marketed to CWB for last 5 years. Why not on tonnage? Allen mentioned fiduciary responsibility. Some families have multiple ballots for multiple permit books. Not democratic.
Chairman Oberg: I’ve heard this numerous times. When I look at other elections, everyone gets one vote. Barley growers suggest it, but don’t follow that at their annual meetings. One farmer, one vote.
Lynn, Enchant: If fed gov. insists on taking CWB down, there is a value associated with it. I’m thinking the CWB is worth $6 to 8 million. So should the fed gov. give the farmers that value?
Chairman Oberg: there is value to this CWB of $500 to 600 million a year. With dismantling that will be lost. There is a strong case for compensation. I would like to see the minister look at the results of the plebiscite. When the crow was dismantled, farmers were compensated, so they should now.
Poll: If fed gov. removes single desk, should farmers be compensated by fed gov. 1 yes, 2 no, 3 unsure.
Kim, Choiceland, Sask: Shortline rails, producer car allocation. With no CWB, are we going to get no producer cars?
Rick: Today 99% of producer cars are producer grain. We support it and work with railway to get the cars to market. Other commodities don’t have it. Savings of $14 million each year to farmers from producer cars. That will be gone if single desk eliminated.
John: Geography. East of Manitoba – not part of CWB. Why were western farmers put in and not rest of Canada. Its called CANADIAN wheat board.
Chairman Oberg: History. 1935, strong lobby from prairie farm groups to establish. Ontario group provincially in 1950s. Ontario different, different types of wheat, delivered directly to mills in Ontario & USA. Ont. Farmers wanted changes – not thrust on them by federal gov. Quebec has single desk and democratically made that decision. The purpose of the plebiscite is to give farmers the say.
Darlene, Saskatoon: In 2012, how does it affect port at Churchill?
Rick (logistics): Today, port of Churchill only western port that touches tidewater. CWB uses it as much as possible to save money for prairie farmers. Today CWB directs it. In future, parties in grain will direct grain where it is in their interest. Port of Churchill owned by US company. We won’t likely see it being used in future. Wheat board sends 96% of the grain there.
Poll: 78% said yes, 9% no, rest unsure.
Gerald, Kamsat, Sask: What will happen to our overseas markets without quality and volume guarantees of the CWB?
Rick: Every week we tender grain to Japan, there is a premium for Canadian wheat. Once CWB is gone, those premiums will go. Today we are the only seller on your behalf of Canadian wheat. In the future you’ll go to a transactional system. The premiums you receive from the way things done today will disappear.
Maple Creek, Sask: why are you so sure CWB will cease to desist on open market? Small companies like Parrish & Heimbecker should be consulted.
Chairman Oberg: 2 major impediments to any new entity. Capital: CWB has not retained any earnings. They would need access to facilities at port. Without that, the new company would rely on the grain companies, who would be their competitors. That would not be an enviable position. We are looking to fed gov. for assistance to create new entity. CWB will be wound down. New entity would not resemble CWB in any way.
Chairman Oberg: Re: smaller companies. More consolidation of independent companies – smaller ones together or join larger one. Can we keep the expertise going forward in open market.
Brent: Why the 11/12 pool for the durum isn’t higher than spring wheat with the American market for durum being so strong?
Rick: Current pro 10/11 is 12 month average from August to July, next years will capture Aug-July of next year. Change in marketing dynamics – a year ago there was lots of durum. Today it is at a premium to spring, which is more traditional.
Wendy, Outlook, Sk: Producer cars: post board, we would be competing with grain terminals to get a car, but they are the people we are forced to sell our grain too. What does the board do, and how will it work post board.
Rick: Today, 2 aspects. 1. Access to terminal, arranged by CWB. 2. CWB markets grain and secures a sale. Post CWB, you would need access to terminal, which is competing with producer cars, and you would need someone to arrange sale. 96% of producer cars today move with CWB products.
Chairman Oberg: You will have right to load producer car – guaranteed right. Will there be savings? I load producer cars. No savings to load canola car. Will the savings be there without CWB?
Elsie, Gimley: Smaller farmers need those grain cars, especially if you are far away from elevators.
Chairman Oberg: Concern – equitable access to system. CWB provides that with contract calls, everyone gets equal shot at space. Basis levels will control it in future. Talk to your mp and neighbours, make them aware of the situation. Ask that the fed gov. to respect farmers wishes through this plebiscite.
Francis, Elm Creek Mb: Tired of being pushed around by gov. Jerry Ritz pushing. Ask for his resignation.
Chairman Oberg: Jerry Ritz does not share my point of view. Ask the gov. to respect democracy. Farmers right to decide. Farmers pay for entire cost of CWB operation, so they should decide its future.
Rick: Rhetoric includes “it’s a popular demand by farmers” WCWGA quotes this. Only 25% of WCWG belong to it. I don’t get this.
Chairman Oberg: I don’t have those numbers. But that is why this needs to be decided by plebiscite. That was one of the safeguards put in in 1998. The gov. wants to circumvent that by changing the act.
Announcer: What is your impression of this town hall?
Chairman Oberg: lots of good questions. Once CWB is gone, it will be gone forever. I see the books, I know how it works to benefit in market place. Our competitors, USA, Europe want it gone.
If you didn’t have a chance to ask a question, you can leave a comment at the end of this message.
This plebiscite will be your only chance to have your say. I’m glad we’ve been able to include thousands of farmers in this town hall. Lots of meetings coming up. They are posted on CWB web site.
8:08 pm
Comment