Agricultural Policy Framework Site

[TOM4CWB]

I don't think anyone could say it better than Morris Dorrish just did on his most recent BACKGROUNDER!

"Blah blah blah. Blah blah, blah and blah blah.

Blah blah blah, but blah
blah and blah.

Moreover, blah blah blah. The government blah blah, blah and
blah. Blah, blah blah, although blah blah. Blah blah blah, while blah blah
blah and blah blah. Blah, blah and blah blah blah blah, but only if blah
blah blah and blah blah.

That pretty much summarizes the Chretien government's plans for a new farm
policy.

If you think that's bad, how about ``This vision is only attainable
if we have comprehensive, cost-effective and consistent implementation
across Canada.'' Or ``Governments and industry moving forward collectively
to integrate all elements of the proposed APF...''. Or ``a comprehensive
plan for accelerated environmental action'' or how about ``....a strategy
for the global marketplace, including improved linkages through the
production and processing chain'', or yet again ``levering science and
innovation into excellence.''

The best path to good risk management is to
force all farmers to take out government crop insurance and stop them from
accumulating funds in their NISA accounts if they expect other government
money. Above all, all farmers everywhere in Canada must be treated
identically, so that no one benefits from anything that is not available to
everyone.

All this is pathetically beside the point.

At least 99% of Canadian farmers want only three things from their
government. First, to enjoy something a little closer to subsidy parity
with farmers in the U.S., Europe and elsewhere; second, relief from
taxation and user fees that are higher in Canada than almost anywhere else
on the planet; and third, to be left alone.

Neither farmers nor agribusiness need the government to tell them what to
do to advance and protect their interests. Innovation and new ideas, of
which there is already no shortage, work their way from the bottom up. No
one in any government, and certainly not in any government of Chretienistes, is smart enough to be telling the people who make their
living in farming and agribusiness what they need to be doing to get ahead."

Too bad the $5 million Ag Canada just spent on this process had not been sent to farmers instead!

[cakadu]

Tom it sounds like you want hog option #3 put forth by Rod. If you want to be left alone, then don't you have to stand on your own too? It's not unlike teenagers who want to make all the adult decisions, but who want mum and dad to foot the bills and consequences for those decisions.

Can you have it both ways? You want the government to bring you up to a parity level with the subsidized countries, but then you also want to be left alone to do as you wish. Perhaps what needs to happen is that the "subsidies" continue in the way of safety nets, but they should be tied to environmental, food safety etc., so that the wolf doesn't come so quick and the piggy has a chance to survive.

We can't continue to farm in the same way we did 40 years ago. Things have changed and we have to change our practices too.

By the way, 97% of the "subsidies" paid in this country are paid to the supply managed sectors. How do we handle them?

[TOM4CWB]

cakadu,

I am sad that millions of dollars of our hard earned cash is being spent in vain, and appears to be wasted.

I am sure you agree this is a crime, and the fact that our governments regularily waste our money does not make it any less a crime!

There are very real regulatory problems in western Canadian agriculture, as there is for agriculture in general, ie. supply management as you indicated.

I can only be responsible for changeing what I personally can change, but the provincial and federal governments must own up to the regulatory problems they have created!

The federal government tells us they are responsible for international trade and commerce, therefore they have a moral obligation to pay up when they fail to perform, don't they?

We were sold a bill of goods that was faulty in the mid 90's when our subsidys were restuctured.

Now it is not fair that governments leave our farm communities stranded and recked, is it?

[rodbradshaw]

Supply Management

I have had the opportunity to work with supply management groups over the last 6 years. Is it that bad of an idea?Basically everything that we buy that holds it's price is supply managed. If John Deere is not selling enough tractors, their long term stategy is build fewer tractors and control the supply. Any advance they make in cost reduction goes to their bottom line not that of their customer.

Supply management would be hard to implement for grains and oiseeds in Canada as we export far more than we use ourselves.

The one problem with supply management in its structure is entrance into the system. Quota costs have sky rocketed and thus the entrance feee has become prohibitive in most of the sectors, let alone the capital cost of setting up the farming operation.

[parsley]

rodbradshaw,

John Deere does not have a government mandated monopoly. I I were to start building tractors in Canada or the US tommorow, I would incorporate and proceed. Equality of opportunity. Willing trade and commerce. I would not be jailed.

However, if I were to start milking cows tommorow, and shipping the milk. Targeted opportunity. Coercive trade and commerce. I would be jailed.

There is a very distinct difference between a monopoly business and and a free enterprise one. Considering that you worked in the supply management sector for 6 years ,it seems incredible that you cannot cannot differentiate between the two systems.

Parsley

[TOM4CWB]

rodbradshaw,

I was amazed when the supply managed dairy industry sold out of the value added side of their industry, why did they do this?

This move seemed to be completely against processes like the APF that tell us are a must in the future to survive!

Just where is agriculture headed when failure is nipping at our heals no matter where we go?

I see that the Dairy industry says only 33% is being produced above the cost of production, and that huge increases are slated over the next three years.

Now, where is this going to lead this industry but into disaster as substitutions devastate their demand side and restructuring must occur anyway?

[TOM4CWB]

Parsley: I like your online meeting idea. I stress that everyone be positive and move forward with some good old commonsense toward building a sustainable future in agriculture.

[parsley]

There is a new thread called "Food Safety and Food Quality". Make your comments. And say your piece Kernel!. Should we send them in when we're done? We can decide that later.

Anyone not participating can't bitch later on without getting a bad time. Fair?

Parsley

[rodbradshaw]

Parsley
Yes, you can start producing tractors if you want and not go to jail. The major concept that you missed is that they control the supply and they practice predatory pricing as well. They control the market place along with CNH and to some extent AGCO. I don't know how long you have been farming but tractor makes that I grew up with no longer exist, not because they were bad mechanically but they didn't market well.

Parsley you also can start milking cows tomorrow without quota and without going to jail. It will have to be for the export market and you may or may not make any money on it, but your costs will be lower as you don't have the high price of quota. If you want the high price it is like a high stakes game of poker, you have to buy a seat at the table.

The other point I was trying to make was that we can't keep producing more and more for less and less and expect to get ahead.

Tom

The Co-op not unlike alot of Western Canadian co-ops was poorly run due to meddling by the board of directors and it's lack of recognition that it needed to make money. It took on a lot of costs that the present day owners have shed and it is now a profitable business much to the chagrin of it's former owners. There is a lot of upset former co-op members out there.
Rod

[TOM4CWB]

rodbradshaw,

I have neighbours in the poultry business as well, they are having just as tuff a time as many grain producers, I am not sure the quota system has done anyone any favours, are you?

Integration into supply chains is just as nessasary in poultry as it is in the hog or cattle industry for stable pricing and stability, yet quota costs add a huge extra cost with a questionable benefit for many.

Exactly what benefit were you thinking of when you wrote above?

I see that no-one gets a free ride and license to print money, except for government, and it appears the feds in Ottawa are the worst offenders as they pass down costs while padding their pockets and get larger without being responsible or productive.

The further away a government is seated from the citizens, and especially when it removes are forms of threatning discipline, the more likely they will loose touch with reality, wouldn't you agree Rod?

[parsley]

rodbradshaw,


You say, " they control the supply" . No they don't. Last I heard there are other tractors out there manufactured and sold by Massey, Ford etc. Sold into every province and state, sold in all countries of the world, as many as the company wants to manufacture and market.

Then you say, " you also can start milking cows tomorrow without quota and without going to jail. " If I were to buy 200 dairy cows tommorow and milk them, what can I do with the milk and where can I market the milk?

parsley

[dalek]

Parsley you get a license and get on the export contract market where you sell your milk to processors to export on the world market. Then you can compete with the only other farmers in the world currently playing on the world market, mainly New Zealand and Australia at some times of the year, and I think maybe Poland. Other than those countries there IS no world market, everybody else has some form of supply management, tariff protection or subsidy. BTW export contract prices now are about half of the US milk price.

[parsley]

Just so we can put this together in simple terms, would you agree there are two operating systems for trade and commerce:

1. Would it be fair to say John Deere competes for business (they manufacture, they market). and they do it without coercion and jailing laws?

2. Would it be fair to say that the dairy industry uses coercion and jailing laws because as dalek states, "Other than those countries there IS no world market, everybody else has some form of supply management, tariff protection or subsidy ( those laws all have built in penalties)?

parsley

[rodbradshaw]

Tom4cwb

If they are late entrants into the business, quota costs are probably dragging them down. If they have been in the business along time they probably misjudged the vagaries of the market as production is adjusted to keep supply in check.
Supply chain integration is important for producers to try and get a larger chunk of the final selling price no matter whether it is supply managed or competing in the open market.

Governments are getting increasingly out of touch with the agriculture community. We don't have the bucks to buy support (other than Quebec) to get the time and consideration we are due.

Parsley
Last time I checked Massey was part of AGCO and Ford was part of CNH. If they don't control supply, why have they closed dealerships, shut factories and bought out competition. Yes you can start manufacturing tractors but you better have deep pockets as it is not an even playing field out there unless your going to make every part yourself. It will be interesting to see how long or for that matter how many tractors that Buhler or McCormick sell. It may not be legislated but if they don't practice supply management, how come prices for tractors have increased 4.5 times in the last 30 years and barley is floundering in the same range it did 30 years ago. I know that we can't blame it all on the CWB. We have increased production and reduced variable costs and we still are not making money. What we need to due is limit supply. Maybe Ken Goudy and his "Focus on Sabbatical" is on the right track. It will never work though as I will let my neighbour cut back and I'll plant wall to wall to capture the increase.

Finally you asked if there are two systems. One where John Deere manufactures and markets. The second where Dairy and the feather industry control supply and set price because of Cost of Production Formula's. I would say that the first one is the Canadian Grain Farmer who produces as much as physically possible and then says what will you give me for it. Remember it is the %of unsold that dictates the price of what gets sold, not what the value of the product is worth.
I am not a great supporter of the present Supply Management System but I think that there is a lesson that we can learn from them. If we continue to produce all that we can produce and there is surplus to what is needed we are goiung to be subjected to low prices. It's a no brainer. Quota systems will never work in grains and I wouldn't advocate that we try to make one. Ther is an old adage, The cure for low prices is low prices. How low do they have to go before people quit producing grains.