Politicians and Farm Group Leaders

[Hopalong]

Discussion on other threads about leaders acting on advice from civil service and employees.
Think it is important for a leader to listen to different sources, giving more weight to opinions of those with most credibility.
Populist views tend to be flavour of the month and not so good for longer term policy.
Always have to wonder about those who ask governments for help without suggesting how it is to be paid for.

[bucket]

Interesting. Hermanson identified transportation problems in 1997 and no one has done shit since. Not even to look at the capacity needed for exports.

That's just one example.

[charliep]

Are there examples of organizations/groups that have worked well with government to make positive changes to agricultural policy? Everyone likes to list failures but are there positive examples than can be modelled?

Examples. Grain Growers of Canada and their ability to represent a wide range of farm organizations in Ottawa and interact with all levels of government including opposition parties. As much of their work is working with the federal ag minister to influence both other members of cabinet (including finance as highlighted by braveheart elsewhere) and members of the opposition.

Canadian Canola Council - Their ability to represent the whole canola supply on policy issues in Ottawa means they can be an effective lobby force for change.

Pulse Canada has worked on the transportation issue for a long time. They continue to take a leadership role today.

What is the expression. "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."

[Hopalong]

Have to admit that popular farmer messaging on rail transportation has been long term.
It is that we want capacity but are not willing to pay extra to get it.
Recall a prairie pool delegate being asked what they were doing to prepare for changes to crow rates and answer was we are not going to let it happen.
Similar shortsightedness from those today who say no to changes in revenue entitlement.

[charliep]

I note your discussion started with farm groups lobbying government and the pitfalls. As government guy (not a politician), I always ask myself what our role and how much we can influence.

Perhaps the challenge is for the supply chain to come up with practical everyday solutions and if government leadership or perhaps worst regulation is needed, have these ideas come up from the grassroots versus being imposed from the top.

On transportation, I don't know if increased capacity as regulated issued issue rather than market based is the answer. I don't know if getting rid of the revenue cap and have opened ended transportation rates is either. The challenges ahead is to improve efficiency and provide reliable service at fair costs to freight users on the one and fair compensation to railways on the other. A component that I don't think is being addressed enough is developing more value opportunities closer to home. A customer is your neighbourhood is worth a lot more than one half way around the world.

[farmaholic]

What percentage of the value of a tonne of grain do you want to give up to ensure adequate transportation service? Remember, to a large extent you are a price taker for your commodity and don't have allot(if any) of ways of recouping any increased costs to you. Maybe there will always be a need for some regulation.

[bucket]

The day that the railways pay for what was given to them for ensuring a rail service in canada, then I will be ok with paying full rates.

They have held this country hostage for too long.

We are the youngest nation on this planet and have already allowed an efficient transportation system to be torn out.

And I do blame politicians for it. They had no balls to say it made no sense. They negotiated with the railway terrorists.

Our politicians lack vision and intelligence to make decisions to continue to grow our country.

[Hopalong]

Charlie, on the point about value added close to home, it was often brought up in the Great Crow Debate of years gone by.
Some saw higher freight rates on raw commodities as an incentive to local value added.
A solution more popular with farmers was to extend regulated or subsidized rates to value added production.

On changes or end to revenue entitlement,WCWGA floated a suggestion to allow RRs to receive more revenue from shipments in peak demand period. The idea was to encourage additional investment for surge capacity. Seems not to have been popular with members and do not hear much about it now.

Agree that politicians,including farm group leaders, are driven by voter sentiment. It is part of a democratic process.

Perhaps a factor in the demise of prairie pools was leaders paying too much attention to members in order to get elected and not enough to preparing for future. Can see the same thing happening to present day grower commissions.

Value chain councils have more attraction to our farm and a business oriented type of thinking. A bit concerned that they will concentrate too much on a particular commodity and not enough on a range of crops that we grow.

[bucket]

Can anyone name a farm leader with real credentials? With vision for agriculture as a whole? Or a plan for the future?

I could write one up but then I would have to deal with politicians and staffers that have difficulty implementing a plan.

[gustgd]

Hopalong to many on this site mix up policy with politics.
I'll admit to being a card carrying Conservative. Most days proud of it other days frustrated. Like many when Duffy is mentioned I'm embarrassed.

On our farm while we cash the cheques when they come we don't count on government programs.

Agriculture has policy advantages that many small business don't enjoy. (No Agriinvest or Agristability, or crop insurance in the local hardware, restaurant business). We also have the disadvantage of being at the mercy of the elements. It's part of the business we are in, that I'm sure was apparent when we bought in.

The programs are not perfect but the Feds are looking at ways to improve.
Ad hoc are the worst answer.
I don't know how we will deal with the rail system when oil increases as well as Potash. Maybe we will grow a different mix of crops? Maybe we will pay more on a per tonne basis. Maybe it will be more after harvest to try and buy capacity? Maybe it will go out in a different value added form that transport costs are less of an issue.
Who knows but that is also part of our business.

It's also a matter of foresight and priorities. Some farm groups have staff to allocate to many issues. Others like the WCWGA have one staff member and use directors and members. Either way you have to be at the table to influence policy. Name calling doesn't get you invited to table.

Tom I sometimes agree with you, other times disagree, but you've always tried and for that I give you credit.

[TOM4CWB]

Thx Gusty

Having a solution other than a trip to the mail box to pick up a hand out is often unpopular.

I agree about counting ad hoc out to fix. Income problems on the farm.

We have tried so many... Lift, grip, nisa, agrivation... Billions have been spent.

Crop Ins. Is the base... As it should be.

Those willing to put the cash up front each year... Should be stabilized the best.

Keep your chin up and don't blink!

All the best.

[bucket]

Here are some ideas for ag.


1. Transparent and public reports of resources similar to the USDA.

2. Since farmers are building the storage make the cca 100 percent the first year.

3. Allow rail sidings to be owned by someone other than the railways so farmers can capitalize on number 2. Get the grain to a better position.

4. Implement a surface transportation board that has teeth..

5. Rewrite the grain contracts to reflect the new marketing in western canada.

There are a couple more but all of the above could be implemented within 30 days without being invited to a table. That just proves some people like meetings as opposed to getting something accomplished.

[gustgd]

Let's flesh out #5 did you submit your proposal to the CGC to help reflect new marketing realities.


What do you propose?

[ado089]

gustd, The contracts need to have a more reasonable delivery schedule. As it stands the standard contract is delvery in the stated period plus 90 days. That's damn near half a year. That is completely unacceptable. Not only is does it unfairly put a financial burden on the producer it also prevents other parts of the value chain from contributing to change. For example if the grain companies where held acountable to taking delivery of contracted grain in let's say a 45-60 day period or required to pay storage for non compliance do you think the would just sit back and wait while the RR's make the problem worse. Another option would be for late contracts to revert to a ROFR after that 45-60 day period, or both.

Further to buckets suggestion on storage and rail access, we need to have the non compete clauses removed on all farmer owned elevators with rail access. They are probably the number one tool out there right now that could help ensure the open market is actually open. Most of those contracts where signed with the pools and UGG and there is nothing resembling those companies left anymore.

I've said time and time again we need scheduled service. There is no reason what so ever that the majority of rail traffic can't be pre planned. SO far the only scheduling I've seen is that producer cars show up on holidays and long weekends. (seriously, christmas eve, easter, may long, july long, I'm expecting cars today but I'll put money on them showing up august long).

To help the trains stay on schedule transport Canada needs to regulate train length based on temperature. A friend of mine works for CP and he's told me they've spent up to 3 shifts trying to air up a train. They try for a couple of hours than pull off a couple cars and try again. This is absurd and possibly dangerous.

These are simple fairly non-invasive steps that would help lubricate the grain industry to be a little more effective for producers and consumers while holding those in the middle a little bit more accountable.

[gustgd]

Great suggestions Ado.

We've got a member with a suggestion on the non compete that we've been working on.

If we can get our submission to the CGC online I'll post link.
It's to wordy for a cut and paste.

Interested to see where other groups line up on submissions.

Will there be some commonality or will it be divide and conquer?