SK Wheat Commission Glaringly Absent From Cereals Canada

[gustgd]

http://www.realagriculture.com/2014/08/sk-wheat-commission-conspicuously-absent-cereals-canada/

An excerpt

"While the priorities of Cereals Canada — advancing market development, innovation, advocacy and so on — appear to align with those of the Saskatchewan Wheat Commission, there seems to be one main hangup: the structure of Cereals Canada’s board of directors. The board is split three ways, giving farmers, life science companies and grain companies equal representation (a third each.) According to the strategic plan, this was “both deliberate and important. All stakeholders involved in growing, marketing or processing cereal grains are better off when the industry works together toward common goals. This is best accomplished if all links in the value chain have an equal opportunity for input.”

[bucket]

gust

They seem to be absent on every front.

I thought this commission would follow a path similar to that of the north dakota wheat commission. Commenting on markets, transportation, varieties etc.

It seems those checkoff dollars don't seem to have a ROI yet. And maybe never will.

Sad when you consider Saskatchewan has a large stake in bettering the wheat industry.

[Hopalong]

Wonder if SWDC directors will get back to wingy dingy ideas of support for NFU and wheat board monopoly now that deadline for levy refund is nearly here.

[gustgd]

I can't see them doing any monopoly studies just yet.

Although wait until next spring when we start to pay for political ads attacking Ritz and Harper

[jdwerker]

Whose money is paying for this new cereals group? I bet it isn't Mr. Ritz or Mr. Richardson. Maybe it's the grain commission and their new check off. Kudoes to SaskWheat for staying out of this cluster****.

[jdwerker]

Do people think we are all too dumb to see that equal producers to grain companies and to chemical companies means producers are a third and that isn't the same as equal.

[Oliver88]

I will be greatly disappointed if this commission wastes any money on political ads.

They better do what is in the best interest of farmers else they will not be funded.

[CptnObvious]

The farmer wants to make as much as he can growing grain, giving as little as possible to the grain and chemical companies. The grain and chemical companies want to squeeze as much as they can from the farmer. Why would farmers join a group in which they would always be voted down 2:1 and in which tacit permission would be given to the industry to squeeze even more from the farmer because, well, "This is what farmers really want, 'we' voted on it."

[jamesb]

I am planning to attend the annual meeting of SWDC. I'm thinking its at Saskatoon with the other commissions in January. What I am interested in is what they have invested in for me, where they have attended meetings on my behalf and what their plan is for moving forward. If those aren't answered to my satisfaction I can exercise my right and receive back my check off.
I admit to being concerned that I am not getting good value for my check off. One thing I do know for a fact that the days of the single desk CWB is over, never to return, right or wrong. I am not interested in funding anyone who persists in trying to turn the clock back. I am hoping we can move forward.

[TOM4CWB]

WHO IS CEREALS CANADA?

"Our goal is to ensure a profitable and vibrant future for all links in the cereal value chain.

What do we mean by value chain?

You are a critical part of the cereals value chain. Farmers make up one-third of the membership of Cereals Canada’s board of directors, which has equal representation from producer organizations, grain handling, export and processing firms, and crop development and seed companies. Each sector also pays one-third of Cereals Canada’s budget.

This equal representation is deliberate and important. Everyone involved in growing and marketing cereal grains is better off when the industry works together on common goals.

The alternative is each sector retreating to their individual silos and viewing everyone else as a competitor. That approach will quickly lead to duplication, wasted efforts and investment flowing to other commodities and other countries."

"It is Cereals Canada’s goal to help lead the industry away from the politicization of industry direction and focus on solutions that will maximize the sector’s competitive advantages in domestic and international markets.

Getting everyone involved in the industry and sitting around one table is a critical step to ensure we remain focused on markets and not politics.

Cereals Canada has also been established to co-ordinate market development and innovation efforts. One of the first steps is to develop a clearer understanding of the quality characteristics that will draw a premium from the market and which customers are willing to pay that premium.

Our customers demand these quality characteristics, and they should be the primary focus for both market development and research. It is the goal of Cereals Canada to help build that bridge between market development and innovation.

Canada has a strong reputation for high-quality products in the international marketplace. This time of transition in the cereals sector presents an opportunity to build on the Canadian brand in all markets.

Taking advantage of these marketing opportunities will increase the value of Canadian cereals for farmers, grain marketers and crop development companies, while delivering strong value to our customers."

JD... this is NOT about everyone beating up on each other... the Canola Council of Canada is the pattern which this new organization is reflected from.

Is beating our chest and glaring at folks; a way to grow innovation and better serve our end use customers with food that better meets their needs?

[CptnObvious]

Tom, you appear to be a plant.

[farmaholic]

A cannibus plant? Get it?

Just kidding Tom, comic relief.....
Combine fatigue has got to me.

[gustgd]

JD. As I understand the budget comes equally from each sector. It's not a vote on what gets decided more of a consensus system.
Everyone gets heard and has an opportunity to present.
If farmers have 1/3 of the seats it effectively a veto as everyone has to get along or they pull out.

If there is a contentious issue it just doesn't come from that table. No saying that if growers have a position they can't bring it forth from their own channels.
The grain cos have the WGEA
The Life science companies have Crop life
Farm groups have the Grain Growers of Canada

So far I haven't seen an indication that the SWDC can play well with others. Here's to hope!

Capt obvious. Great rebuttal where did you learn that style the YouTube comment section

If you don't agree with Tom or anyone post something intelligent.