Canadian farmers give direction for next Federal Budget

[TOM4CWB]

Canadian farmers give direction for next Federal Budget

(Tues., August 23, 2011 Ottawa) –The Grain Growers of Canada (GGC) recently submitted a formal pre-budget consultation policy paper to the House of Commons’ Standing Committee on Finance as part of the Federal Government’s pre-budget process.

“The Government needs to hear what real farmers want to see in the next budget,” says Stephen Vandervalk, President of the GGC. “By being this proactive, we get our policy ideas moving in the right government circles.”

Within the document (available at www.ggc-pgc.ca ), the Grain Growers highlight many areas where minimum change to Federal Government policy would benefit Canadian farmers. It also demonstrates how the Federal Government could reward good environmental farm practices through tax credits, and how to stimulate research.

“This sort of positive reinforcement is a win/win for Canadian farmers and for the Government,” explains Vandervalk. “Tax incentives for practical items like lower emission engines and updated GPS systems to reduce inputs are not only good for farmers, they are also good for the general public that cares about the environment.”

“Growers are asking for more research dollars and our document contains a very innovative idea on how to improve research funding,” says Vandervalk. “We want to see successful programs retain the revenue generated to encourage even more success.”

Policy areas covered in the Grain Growers’ pre-budget submission include:
•Research
•Regulatory Costs
•Food Safety and Sustainability
•Young Farmers
•Innovation and Market Development
•Rail Service Review

The GGC policy document explains how more public-private research partnerships are needed and how the implementation of the Rail Service Review’s recommendations is the single most important policy action Canadian farmers need today. “With harvest around the corner, we need the Federal Government to make Rail Service Review one of its highest priorities,” says Vandervalk.



Representing over 80,000 successful wheat, barley, canola, oat, corn, pea, lentil, rye and triticale farmers across Canada, the Grain Growers of Canada is well known as the national voice of Canadian grain farmers.

For more information on the Grain Growers, or to see a full copy of the brief please visit www.ggc-pgc.ca .
-30-

For more information:

Stephen Vandervalk, President of the Grain Growers of Canada, 403-795-1171

Richard Phillips, Executive Director of the Grain Growers of Canada, 613-875-1795

[parsley]

Out of the mouths of the Grain Grower communists with their novel ideas:

"Strengthen the ability of farm groups to apply and collect check-offs so all farmers contribute equally to research"

Moving towards mandatory checkoffs is always too tempting for communist thinking.

You either eye up other people's money or you don't.

GGC obviously do.

And all for the sake of the starving masses, they claim, and also for the sake of equality.

Sounds like policy Reg Alcock would promote. Parsley

[TOM4CWB]

Parsley,

There are real and constructive changes in our organisational structures like CWB reform.

Our farm has always given WGRF levies to them. A new structure needs to allow these same democratic opportunites to growers for input and direction in R&D.

BE NICE PARSLEY. Give our future working together a chance! Be a part of the solution... not the problem!

[parsley]

CWB: Jail farmers for selling what they grow, as they bypass the CWB.

GGC: Jail farmers for depositing what they sell, as they bypass the checkoff agency?

Coercion and force by central planners is exactly what it is. Coercion and force. Don't try and bullshit me, AV'ers or yourself Tom.

[TOM4CWB]

Parsley,

In the finest western Canadian tradition... your concerns are duly noted. WGRF was/is democratic and respects our freedom to participate in funding them (or not as the case may be). You should expect no less in future organisations that we plan to replace this CWB voluntary funded WGRF system.

[parsley]

How would one go about:


"Strengthen the ability of farm groups to apply and collect check-offs so all farmers contribute equally to research"

Place a plea in the Western Producer "to apply and collect"?

You sound rather like you are pissing on my leg and telling me it's raining.

In Libya, we hear about the "democracy" that is about to arrive. Until, of course, you read the manifesto published by the rebels saying Sharia Law will go into effect.

Verbal comfort is effective if you don't read, isn't it.

So tell me, honeybunch, what does this mean in your language of choice?:::::::

"Strengthen the ability of farm groups to apply and collect check-offs so all farmers contribute equally to research"

I'm Farmer Ameliorate. I don't want to contribute.Equally or unequally. What are the consequences in the GGC's world? Pars

[TOM4CWB]

Parsley,

A "voluntary funded WGRF system."

Now be a pal... and if a voluntary funded WGRF system... meets your criteria, indicate it would!

Why shouldn't we be able to work together to do research, development and promotion that brings with it a strong and vibrant industry with reasonable resourses to meet the challenges ahead?

Others like US Wheat see the challenge!

"August 4, 2011 Western Producer

Other industry organizations will need to take over key functions now performed by the Canadian Wheat Board if the single desk is eliminated, says an American wheat industry leader.

Alan Tracy, president of U.S. Wheat Associates, said the elimination of the single desk could leave a void in farmer advocacy, market development, customer support, export promotion and quality assurance.

Investment in those areas will be needed to protect the reputation and sale of Canadian wheat in the global marketplace, he added.

“Even if (the CWB) doesn’t disappear, it would presumably become just one competitor in the marketplace and it would seem that some of that kind of work … would most likely be taken up elsewhere,” said Tracy.

“That’s something that the Canadian industry and Canadian farmers themselves really will have to decide.”

Agriculture Canada officials confirmed last week that an industry group has been formed to look at issues that could affect the Canadian grain industry after the single desk has been eliminated."....

[parsley]

American industry leaders and US governments have run their country and businesses and banks into the ground. Maybe they should solve their own debts and deficits, and practice minding their own business when it comes to giving advice based on their deficit stick.

Now, that's meant to be a deserved pissy retort, Tom.

[wilagro]

I agree with parsley. No more COMPULSORY check-offs for ANY purpose or cause.

[TOM4CWB]

Parsley;

I don't see anywhere in the this GGC news release anything about a mandatory check-off being planned.

As I said earlier... your objection was/is noted.

Thanks!

[TOM4CWB]

Parsley,

I see the problem here...

You took the quote out of context... you did not include the rest of the story!

"B) Strengthen the ability of farm groups to apply and collect check-offs so all farmers contribute equally to research – this is critical in cereal grains as changes come to the Canadian Wheat Board, but even today there are large gaps such as ethanol processing in wheat and the feed industry in barley."

"today there are large gaps such as ethanol processing in wheat and the feed industry"... this requires that a better system is created so all grain sectors are benefiting from grower funded initiatives.

If no funding comes from grain ethanol growers... are these grain ethanol growers expecting other growers to pay for R&D to increase produtivity in this ethanol sector???

I hope not. We need a fair and balanced system.

[parsley]

Intent.
What is GGC intent?

"Strengthen the ability of farm groups to apply and collect check-offs so all farmers contribute equally to research"

More $$ to restore funding to previous levels (Read the brief)

Going to get $$ from Rural Knitting Clubs or from farmers like you and I?

And what's this claptrap about all farmers contributing "equally"?

Doesn't the word "equally" sound like a socialist's equality defense-argument?

To me it sounds as if the intent of the GGGC is this: that ideally every producer organization should make damn sure checkoffs take place ("strengthen"), and burden every farmer.

How would anyone impose no-exceptions contributions without COMPULSORY legislation? Tasar guns? Or would GGC's Richard Phillips invite Ralph Goodale in to talk farmers into submission with a 48 hour speech marathon.

GGC continuously appear before politicos as professional agra lobbyists.

They're hunting for cash.
They want unfettered legislative access to your grain cheques. It's called automatic checkoff.

That's how I view it.

I don't want to go out to play. I don't want to pay for most of the research projects. You wanna be "it" again, Tom. I don't.

[TOM4CWB]

OK Parsley...

I will try to make sure no mandatory levies are deducted from any grain income you earn. You had the opportunity to opt out of the WGRF. We will try to maintain the same type of check-off system.

Smile Parsley... be happy!



The plans of the diligent lead to profit as surely as haste leads to poverty

[parsley]

It's not about deductions from MY grain earnings, and you know it.

It's about the principal of not having a band of thieves scheming to gain automatic deductions from each and every grain cheque; not just mine.

And saying my checkoff will be exempt while wilagros and furrows will not, is Wheat Board thinking, no matter how you dress it up.

Heaven help all farmers if we replace parliamentary schemers wanting cheap grain to pay for WWII committments, with 2011 industry schemers demanding free research they can patent.

Have you ever heard of of the notion of standing on a principle, Tom?
It's sad you are unable to acknowledge a forced participation parallel....with farmers legislatively obligated to pay.

The more farmer dollars in the pot, after all, that's the crux of the scheme, the more governments borrow to shell out. Neither farmers nor governments can afford the larger scheme on the drawing board.

And you're prepared to suggest arbitrary selective-exceptions; a personal one for me?

Textbook Wheat Board communism, Tom.

For those sitting on the central planning committee that is scheming to expand the checkoff participation, plus the amount of the checkoff, make sure you include communist-logo tattoos in your health plan.

That way you will only get into bed with one of your tattooed-own.

I hope I haven't been too subtle with you Tom. I can be more forthright on Fridays.

Parsley

[agstar77]

Wow! If this is an indication of the co-operation post wheat board, aren't we going to have fun!