winter wheat buyback 107.00/tonne

[disker]

I looked into buying back some winter wheat to ship it to a feedmill in the US that we buy feed from and I was told that I would have to pay 107.03/tonne or $2.91/bus. I have never asked about this before so there may be more to it yet but is the CWB really taking $2.91/bus for handling etc. I was told that I could use the FPC to price the wheat to the board and then I would pay the 107.03/tonne back to them to get my wheat back. I don't think I even had to move the grain, that was just to get the export permit and I don't know about freight, elevator charges to do the transaction etc.
I suspect there is some extra built in to prevent too many guys from buying back but I was thinking the number would be less than $1.00/bus.
All I can say is WOW!
Disker

[kamichel]

Some more questions to ask. What does it cost to buy back organic wheat? Parsley should comment, as I thought now organic producers have a simpler lower cost buy back. And also why should your wheat be any different?

[parsley]

Interesting questions.

First of all, I want to say whether or not you are organic or you are conventional, the CWB will not provide you with an interprovincial license to ship a load of milling wheat ferom Alberta into a flour mill in Ontario.

They refuse the interprovincial license.


Now the CWB insinuates, they are only going to charge a fee.


Obviously they don't read their own regulations, which states:

"14.1 The Board may grant a licence for the transportation from one province to another, or for the sale or delivery anywhere in Canada of wheat, wheat products, barley or barley products, but no fee shall be charged for such a licence"



So good on you for wondering what the hell this feee is all about.

Parsley

[disker]

OK I found some clarification on this buyback. The 107.03/tonne is over the initial price, so for yesterday you would have to pay 247.03/tonne to buyback your CWRW Select 11.5 protein. This is non organic as the CWB rep I was speaking with said the organic system is different and I would have to speak with that dept to get a quote.
So, if I was to buyback my grain yesterday and price on the FPC I could have done it for $7/tonne for the CWB's part. I am still checking on elevator costs etc.
Sorry for the confusion/heart attacks
Disker

[liberty]

Disker,

Could you outline this process step by step starting with the wheat on your farm and ending with the wheat in a U.S. elevator, just to clarify it further?

[parsley]

2007-08 Organic Fixed Spread Contract (OFSC)$/mt

JAPAN:
Wheat $5.20
Durum $15.02
Barley $3.38
Designated Barley $3.38

European Union:
Wheat $3.71
Durum $3.38
Barley $3.38
Designated Barley $3.38

USA:
Wheat $3.38
Durum $3.38
Barley $3.38
Designated Barley $3.38


CANADA:
Wheat $3.38
Durum $3.38
Barley $3.38
Designated Barley $3.38


Parsley

[melvill]

Parsley, I'm obviously not a lawyer and have no desire to be one but I'm curious about your interpretation or your lawyer's interpretation of 14.1. I note that the phrase "The Board may grant a license . . . " doesn't say "shall". My lawyer tells me that "shall" is the one to look for since it means the same as "must".

As usual the devil is in the details.

[parsley]

The legislation says the Board may (and obviously the converse.. may not) grant a license.

So u have to ask, why deny?

Deny all women?

Deny all baptists?

Deny all Ukranians?
Deny just Drummhellerians?

What basis can the CWB deny upon?

Surely you would agree the law would take not take kindly if all Hamilton, Ontarians were denied a CWB license, based upon an arbitrary CWB decision!

So we u have to resort to the constitution.

Answer this question:

Can licenses be denied based upon location?

If your answer is yes, then Hamilton farmers could indeed be in trouble.

Parsley

[melvill]

Parsley, as usual you have pretty compelling agruments and, on an intellectual basis, I don't disagree with you.

I talked to my lawyer-friend after the Calgary court decision. He was quite unequivocal about his comments. His optinion was that when interpreting law the literal interpretation is more likely the one that will carry the day. My own personal lawyer also pointed out that the law is not necessarily about what's ethical or moral or "right". It's about what parliamentarians thought was the best solution at the time the law was passed. Of course, we all know that, for that reason, some legislation become out-of-date over time.

He also had an interesting comment about the potentially larger implications of the Calgary hearing. He suggested that if the feds had won, the case was likely to head to the Supreme Court because of the precident it would set. The reason? A number of other interest groups, quite removed from grain production, might be very worried about the implications to other legislation that could be changed without parliamentary approval. It's likely the Calgary judge had that in mind when she handed down her decision, although I'm not bored enough with my life to resort to reading judicial decisions for recreation. Wonder if tom4cwb has read it?

[parsley]

You have to read history.

Notes from the parliamentarian's meetings were very clear at the time.

They wanted a national tariff.

They did this through licensing.

They didn't apply licensing to just the West, they applied identical licensing reqirements to all of Canada.


If they wanted to license differently, they would have made licensing applicable to the DA onlyin the Part III marketing part of the Act.

You are right. We have to go with the legislation that was written, and it so happens that is to be applied equally to all applicants throughout Canada.

However, the CWB made an in-house secret policy decision to deny licenses to only a select group of farmers in a select area.

Substitute that with denying licenses to only catholics.

And chew on it for awhile.

And see if Canadians would be pissed.

Parsley