Politicians and Farm Group Leaders

[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?

[bucket]

gust

I realize we have had some interesting comments towards each other. Putting that aside here are a couple of questions.

1. Wouldn't some of the re writing of grain contracts fall under the newly formed wheat commissions?

2. If not, couldn't the leaders of the appropriate farm groups, whether it be KAP, NFU, WCWGA, APAS get together on behalf of the farmers they represent and hammer something out?

Between all the groups, the leaders could compromise to something workable on behalf of their members.

[westernvicki]

Explain 4.

[gustgd]

Bucket, the GGC process is open for all to contribute. The Wheat Grower proposal has been shopped around much of the Grain Growers of Canada groups. And we've seen a couple of the others.
I've seen proposals from individuals and other interested parties.

I hope the commissions all submit their own ideas and best practices can be gleaned from them all.

As far as us and the NFU coming to a common ground, who knows?? Although we come from market based solutions first and they come from someplace else. I would say both groups would agree that the government needs to be an honest broker.
I understand that Cereals Canada will also have a proposal. It will be a good first test to see how "the industry" compromises behind closed doors.

If it comes out to far weighted in favour of grain companies. Farmers will revolt and fold the group. If it comes out weighted towards farmers will WGEA members honour their pledge.

If I we're to place money on an outcome and I am by continuing farming.

Contract terms will sway more in favour of farmers and delivery. Basis will widen to offset "risk"

Nice to see we can be civil again.

[bucket]

Westernvicki

The STB in the states hauls the railways in front of them to explain their shortcomings.

Why do you think there was no fertilizer shortage ? The railways were told by the stb to haul it.

The STB also told cp and BNSF to come with a plan to move grain.

Tranparent accountable and has teeth. CP didn't tell the US government to **** off like they did in canada.

[westernvicki]

Good point, on 4 will check this out.

What is our comparative: the CTA review /arbitration process?