Where are the incumbent CWB directors?

[charliep]

Just a comment on your last statement Tom4cwb. What would happen if farmers invested the time we are taking in debating CWB issues in gaining marketing expertise, finding opportunities,etc.

I sometimes look through the Commodity Marketing threads and look at the blend of market outlook/strategies and CWB policy issues. I look forward to the day when sites like this deal more with opportunities and less with politics.

[Kasro]

Amen charliep

[TOM4CWB]

Charlie;

Marketing is hard work, any way you want to slice it!

There can be no doubt that the CWB debate is making us think "outside the box" and for this all of us will be wiser and better marketers!

Hopefully now we can build, a better marketing system, if we know exactly what we need.

This painfull process can be profitable, if we choose to make so.

I can agree many times I have thought about what sacrifices have been made to bring this debate to a resolution.

However, just like Gandi working for independance in India, timing is everything!

The first time, Gandi tried to bring about independance, the people were not ready for the responsibility of what they were working for.

The second time, they got independance from England.

Are we ready for marketing choice now?

[melvill]

I'll echo Charlie's comments on two fronts.

1) I'd like to see farm managers use these discussion threads more for trading and sharing market opportunities and market strategies. There are often great opportunities in local areas or regions that aren't shared because, other than this forum, there really aren't many methods to do that. My clients are always testing my ear with market strategies that they've thought of. Again, if they're good, they need to be shared.

I confess that I would like to see this forum used for something other than political debate on the pro-CWB-anti-CWB issue. Not that the debate isn't needed but when there's nothing else . . . . . Kind of reminds me of a debate I was invited to participate in between two international visitors that I was helping to host on a bus tour of Alberta farms. The debate was between two visitors over which was the "best" religion to follow - Islam or Christianity. Both were adamant that theirs was the only "true" faith.

There is one thing that I'm reasonably certain about in the Board debate based on my nearly 16 years in this work. If the Board goes or there were to be a dual system. There will be winners (those with astute marketing skills) and losers (those with limited marketing skills) and, at the moment, that latter group is larger. (Now we'll see the postings fly!)

[parsley]

tom4cwb,

About Mr. Ritter's article.....The CWB is about as innocent in this entire debacle as is an entire Board of Directors who sicks a dog on a group of farmers. The farmers get injured. The Board blames the dog, and maintain they were just innocent bystanders!

melvill, farmers will read your threads on marketing triticale etc. that you will post. I presume you will start some new threads.

But some farmers might be interested in the threads about the CWB. Because the election is so near, it is important that farmers have the opportunity to discuss what is happening. Agri-ville provides that forum. I'ts rather interesting you choose not to encourage full-bodied CWB marketing debates at this particular time!

The CWB most likely supports your lobby, melvill.

Parsley

[Everest]

I have to say I agree with everybody’s thoughts here. I too would like to get passed the monopoly vs. dual market argument. I would like to concentrate on marketing my production to the best of my abilities. But this is also prime time for the CWB debate. The director elections are upon us.

But I am hearing precious little from the incumbent candidates. I believe we need to hear from them. They have a record to defend, as after all, it is under their command that all this controversy swirls. The CWB has obviously not brought satisfaction to many farmers, or there would be no debate.

It has been a full week since I started this thread. And there still is no response from Macklin, Hill et al. I think we need to hear what they have to say. Either in the discussion rooms here in the Community Center, or out in the public.

And just to reinforce……what we do not need is the PR machine at CWB headquarters doing their campaigning for them. Like others, I want to hear the incumbents speak for themselves, and explain and defend their record of performance. Tell us how they will improve wheat and barley marketing for farmers.

For example, in their long-term strategic plan, have they planned for the day when they compete for grain without the single desk authority to ‘guarantee’ it? If they haven’t planned for that, do they not think that they may be putting the CWB’s future in jeopardy? Choice for farmers will make a difference in how and what the CWB does.

There is a lot to talk about. Lets hear from these guys.

[melvill]

Parlsey, you've thrown down the gauntlet and I have accepted - new thread today. I wonder what the participation will be.

[parsley]

Everest,

I'm particularly interested in the contingency fund...

The incumbents have been stuffing the Contingency stocking, but I want to know

With how much $$$$$$$$$?
Debited from where?
For what?

I think the Incumbent Directors have an obligation to respond because they are the only ones who know anything about it. If they are proud of what they are doing let the farmers be Ballot judges!

Parsley

[parsley]

I'am just a farmer but one question. If the farmers were not charged under the law for exporting wheat without a permit or convicted of the charge. How could you be held responsible for leaving the border in a seized vehicle. Seized for contervention of what law may I asked. If they were charged with exporting wheat without a permited and found not quilty the charge of removing a seized vehicle should not not enter the question and be dropped due to the want of prosecution.

Hey I do know a lawyer and it was so cold the other day he had his hands in his own pockets.

[TOM4CWB]

Kernel;

On top Appeals were launched on the seizures of the vehicles, and the CCRA Minister refuses to rule whether or not the seizures themselves were legal.

Yet Customs officials proceed with jailing those who they do not even know... if they are guilty of removing seized vehicles to begin with...

On top, I refused to remove my vehicle, and Customs officers were actually disappointed and acted frustrated that I hadn't removed my vehicle!

This whole situation was a setup... from square one... and has nothing to do with truth or justice!

The CWB has given special plaques to Custom Ports who did extra special good jobs for the CWB...