CWB DILEMMA.

[TOM4CWB]

Thalpenny;

Common sense experience Proves you and your communist theory are wrong.

Take one look at feed barley.

When the CWB dumps feed barley last year on the world market at $135.00/t, western Canadian farmers selling feed barley extracted, by your own admission, $180.00/t.

The CWB is the biggest weight on world market prices of grain, because the CWB works for grain handlers railways and multinationals, not for "designated area" wheat and barley producers.

2001/02 Feed Barley, CPS Wheat, 3Red wheat, Winter Wheat, Feed wheat all are proof that when the CWB needs to extract these grains from us, the CWB pays us less than market value, transfering the extra value to the other players in the value chain.

And If we seek to raise the price by going around the monopoly, you throw us in jail.

Thalpenny, "designated area" wheat and barley producers ARE political prisioners, until the CWB starts issueing nocost export licenses.

The direction the CWB Act gives to the CWB is to sell our grain at prices the CWB deems reasonable, and will promote the sale of our grain in interprovincial and international markets.

This in no way assures me that you will get fair market value, just that it gives you license to sell my grain at whatever price is in the national interests of Canada. It is obvious that the national interests of the Canadian economy (value adders and industrial complex combined) are well served by making the lowest price the law, and jailing anyone who would try to get a higher price.

I know you are trying to save the CWB and your own job Thalpenny, I believe your methods are destroying grain farmers in western Canada however, and this is sad when you will sacrifice your neighbours farms for a communist principal that has been proven over and over and over not to work.

Strawboss;

If the CWB became a co-op, with a capital base to back its decisions, then it could work.

THe Co-op hog marketing boards work without a monopoly.

If the CWB does a good job, then it will survive as well.

It seems to me the CWB KNOWS it is doing a substandard job.
The CWB knows any competition will prove this to everyone, just as the feed grains prove lack of CWB performance to us.

So the CWB says there are gone and out of here, if they are forced to compete and live up to all the claims they have made over the past half century.

The CWB theory of "extracting a premium" is a fancy theory to fool farmers in the "designated area" into giving up most of their high quality grain at less than fair market value, much of the time.

The PPO contracting system proved this in July.


Give us a daily monopoly cash price, after we have harvested grain in the current crop year, and we will see how good the single desk really is and what it does for us Thalpenny......

Would you take that challenge Thalpenny?

[StrawBoss]

My reason to vote on deleting all commodities from the CWB control is one way to legally strip the board’s monopoly on marketing Canadian grain.

If they have nothing to sell the CWB would have two choices become a co-operative or shutdown. I think as Tom4CWB suggested the co-operative way would still serve the producers that want to support it.

We wouldn’t have to care how long it takes to restructure, but I am sure things will speed up if all the CWB employees jobs are on the line.

I think if this could be accomplished it would be good for all farmers.

[parsley]

Good Morning StrawBoss,

I hope you've put up a lot of straw because with all the snow and cold weather,farmers will need lots of straw!

Your method will certainly work, StrawBoss. Farmers could vote off every commodity and leave the Board with nothing to market! Good for you for thinking of ways to get marketing choice and for putting it on the table for all Agri-villers to mull over. I have a little problem with the time frame we'd have to endure by going through this route, though, but that is probably because I'm not very patient.

Years of dealing with legislation and politicians, and getting politicians involved to open up the Act goes against any farmer's better judgement.Generally, there is a lack of trust in politicians.

Ideally, we need to get marketing choice in a more timely way, and that is what issuing licenses accomplishes, so that is why I put that one on the discussion-table. If the CWB's Licensing Staff was ordered to give licenses to DA farmers, that would provide us with market choice. Right away. The Board of Directors could make the order. Minister Goodale could make that order.

We both want amd need the same thing StrawBoss...market choice.

Parsley

[StrawBoss]

The CWB should come out of hiding and explain in a newsletter to all producers how they could operate and compete in the open market and they will be there to serve the producers that want to support it.

The CWB could easily add a question to the permit book and make it mandatory to answer by the producers and landlords “ DO YOU WANT TO DELETE ALL COMMODITIES FROM THE CWB CONTROL” Yes____ or No _____.
This would insure that all farmers would vote.

The CWB could also delete all the commodities off their control without a vote and give the producers a choice without a delay.
CWB why is it so wrong to see happy farmers have a choice to market their own products?

[StrawBoss]

First - to Adam Smith - how can you argue that there is single desk selling in Ontario? There isn't anymore. There are multiple sellers of Ontario wheat.

But again I think StrawBoss has this figured out. The debate is about having an open market versus having single desk selling. If there ever is a producer vote, I'll be curious to see if the open market proponents would accept the democratic wishes of their neighbors, or if it would be like the Quebec separtisits and just keep going on and on and on.

Parsley's issue of wanting a no cost export license is a shell for what the true desire is - an open market. The reason things are couched that way is because to call for an open market doesn't sell politically, so then there is the call for the dual market, or no cost export licenses, to avoid having the debate about the merits of the single desk selling.

Regarding a daily cash price from the monopoly as tom4cwb suggests - the issue I see he is seeking is price transparency, so he can guage effectiveness. Ideally, he would like to pick the cash price or the pooled price on any given day. He wants it both ways.

How would the CWB operate a daily cash price and a pooled account? The pooled account is always disadvantaged - getting less grain when the price is rising, and getting more grain when the price is falling. You can see the impact on the pooled price.

How would the CWB show a daily cash price when it may negotiate different prices for the same quality of grain on any given day, depending on destination?

This appears to be an accountability measure more than anything. Except, which prices should be shown on any given day? The tradable value to Japan or the tradable value to China? I can assure you they are different values.

Hence what happens in the open market - the law of one price. You don't see a separate cash price at PNW for the Japanese, do you? Does that mean that the Japanese don't ever pay a premium for US wheat, only for Cdn and Aussie wheat? I don't think so.

So the cosmetic language of no-cost export license and cash pricing from the monopoly all camouflage and diminsh the real outcome - get rid of the single desk selling. These arguments are geared to have simplistic policitical appeal, and to diminish their impacts. Except, they can't go all the way and say "end the CWB and single desk selling", because they know that argument won't win farmers' votes.

I have heard no one argue that the CWB may not survive in an open market as an organization. But the single desk benefits will not survive. And does western Canada really need another grain marketing organization (ie privatized CWB) if there is an open market?

Tom

[charliep]

Does the above arguements apply to both wheat and barley equally. What value does the CWB provide the feed barley market? Similar question for malt barley. The August/July CWB Grain Matters article (page 8) highlighted some issues but I was not able to find it at the CWB web site.

[parsley]

thalpenny,

"The reason things are couched that way", as you put it, Moderator thalpenny, is because that is the way the legislation is actually written!

I don't have any difficulty having to follow what Parliament instructs; that is democracy, but I do have difficulty with the fact that the Canadian Wheat Board refuses to follow its'governing Act.

They deny licenses to Prairie farmers. PLUS...They dip out money,... dip, dip, dip, to pay for accredited exporters, corporations and non-DA farmers' licensing expenses , out of the farmers'pooling accounts even though Parliament says the Federal Government must pay! PLUS...They break their Code of Conduct by allowing Goodale's appointee to dip into the pooling accounts to donate to the Liberal Party of Canada. PLUS...They won't give a Prairie farmer a license until he does the buyback, even though Parliament does NOT require farmers to do the Board's 'Made-up-in-the-Backroom Buyback' to get a license. And on and on.

Chairman Ritter, without shame, told the Standing Committee of Agriculture that he wasn't sure whether or not the CWB can issue no-buyback export licenses and he'd have to consult with a lawyer to find out, but this directly contradicts the fact that they are issuing no-buyback licenses all the time. This reflects the Board's disdain for not only elected representatives, but for the law. And for farmers.

But the Chairman is not the only one defending and condoning when the CWB ignores the law and bends the law and disdains the law. It is a common practice by the CWB staff, thalpenny.

Parsley

[parsley]

Parsley, below is the part of the regs that governs the producer direct sale.

What would you determine to be the 'pecuniary benefit' that exists by virtue of the prohibition of the export of grain? Obviously, the legislators understood that by granting the single-desk, it created benefits for farmers that would not exist if allowed to be cherry picked. An arbitrary no-cost export license would bid those benefits away for all, and therefore adversely affect the marketing of the organization.

Face it, you want to be able to do just that - access the US market unimpeded whenever the spot cash price looks better than the pooled price. You want to extract that value, even if it is less than the CWB may be capturing out of the US market and end up lowering the ability of the CWB to extract a premium. Again, then the North Dakota Wheat Commission will fire up the trade challenge machine for sure.


LICENCES


14. The Corporation may grant a licence for the export, or for the sale or purchase for delivery outside Canada, of wheat, wheat products, barley or barley products if

(a) the export, sale or purchase of the grain or products for which the licence is sought does not adversely affect the marketing by the Corporation, in interprovincial or export trade, of grain grown in Canada; and

(b) the applicant pays to the Corporation a sum of money that, in the opinion of the Corporation, represents the pecuniary benefit enuring to the applicant pursuant to the granting of the licence, arising solely by reason of the prohibition of the export of that grain or those products without a licence, and the then existing differences between the prices of that grain or those products inside and outside Canada. SOR/79-110, s. 1; SOR/86-160, s. 1; SOR/89-281, s. 4; SOR/95-338, s. 1; SOR/99-391, s. 1(E).

[StrawBoss]

Thalpenny

I realize that you are a moderator on this thread and also a Farm Policy Adviser to the CWB but this position doesn’t give you any authority to make policy change.

I would like to know if you are relaying to the CWB the farmers needs or just voicing your opinion what the farm policy should be?

I believe that the CWB can survive in the open market system with some minor changes. It is common knowledge competition is good in any industry.

I understand there is a lot of politics within the CWB to try and accommodate all farmers across Canada, which means rob the rich and give to the poor, but its not working very well so lets try something different. The Government should support the farmers in disaster areas not force the good farm managers to do so.

[TOM4CWB]

Thalpenny, when is Wheat Wheat, but Wheat not Wheat?

Thalpenny you wrote;

“What would you determine to be the 'pecuniary benefit' that exists by virtue of the prohibition of the export of grain (Wheat)?

This is an excellent question…, I will answer it with another question…

Why would the Ontario Wheat Board need to issue their own export Licenses, independent of the CWB?…

Well for a very good reason.

The CWB cherrypicks Ontario wheat Board sales information, and Ontario does not appreciate the CWB taking OWPMB’s “commercially sensitive” intellectual property.

SO, now we will talk about “the 'pecuniary benefit' that exists by virtue of the prohibition of the export of grain.”

Ontario and other non “designated area” sales of wheat and barley compete against CWB sales, and the arbitrary no-cost export licenses issued to producers outside the “designated area”,... as well as Seed Growers,... bid those benefits away for all, and therefore adversely affect the marketing of the organization…

Since the CWB licensing is universal to all of Canada, including Ontario, why does an Ontario wheat grower have the right to “cherrypick” the international market place, outside the CWB’s single desk, when Ontario is part of the CWB’s Single Desk Monopoly?

The CWB Act portions you quote (Section 14) apply equally to Ontario, yet the CWB does not extract the 'pecuniary benefit' from Ontario, CWB licensing is universal to all of Canada, including Ontario, why does an Ontario wheat grower have the right to “cherrypick” the international market place, outside the CWB’s single desk, when Ontario is part of the CWB’s Single Desk Monopoly?
WHY???

Further, Exporting our special Canadian planting seed varieties with NO-cost Export Licenses further undermines any premiums… You ask Why?

The CWB claims US wheat is not as high quality as Canadian, because of our special varietial quality.

A farmer in Sweetgrass Montana can grow the same quality as a Canadian grower at Milk River AB, if they use the same variety. Now a Seed grower from Alberta exports our special variety of wheat to Montana, using a No-cost CWB export License, cherrypicking all Canadian wheat and barley growers. Now after the Canadian seed grower got this seed out of Canada, then the one truckload of seed is reproduced and sold back the following harvest as commercial grain.

1000 bu seeded @1.5bu/ac is 750ac planted.

750ac at 30bu/ac is 22,500bu of Quality CWB grain ready to come back to any domestic Canadian or US miller.

10 truckloads of seed is 225,000bu...

Only 100, 5 axle truckloads, of wheat planting seed, creates over 2 million bushels of monopoly single desk destroying US grower competition.......

Thalpenny, if there was a real premium, don’t you think US wheat and barley growers would be smart enough to cash in on it???

And since US growers obviously normally don’t export wheat into Canada, shouldn’t this tell us another story?

Thalpenny, logic would tell me there is NO EXTRA PREMIUM… infact, the CWB must be a discounting heavily, or US producers would produce variety specific wheat for their own US millers who like our Canadian varieties.

Further these US Wheat growers should have the competitive economic benefit of transportation premiums being kept in their own pockets, because they live closer to the US Millers. Yet there is no premium for them. Why?

The most logical reason is that the CWB undercuts US Wheat growers.

So US wheat marketers as well as the OWPMB extract a premium from both domestic and the international market place, and continuously have the CWB following them around undercutting their sales efforts.

This has a ring of truth to it,… maybe… Thalpenny?

Are you absolutely sure the CWB Single Desk Monopoly is extracting a premium for the average “designated area” wheat and barley producer the majority of the time Thalpenny?

[TOM4CWB]

One piece of information that silences the ring that you describe is that the US own ITC recently found that in 59 out of 60 months, the CWB's price was higher than the corresponding US price to end-users. I think that finding speaks for itself.

Tom

[les]

I say get rid of the CWB period....