• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CWB Press Releases

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    CWB Press Releases

    Just a note of a couple of interesting press releases. Check out ww.cwb.ca

    Could find this one so will paste.

    "CWB Now (Article written by CWB)

    Comparing apples to apples
    There are many differences between producing and marketing wheat in Eastern and Western Canada that make drawing a parallel difficult. What is good for Ontario farmers is not necessarily good for farmers in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta.
    Ontario farmers typically grow only about one million tonnes of wheat each year compared to approximately 11.5 million tonnes grown by western Canadian farmers. The annual wheat production in Quebec is even lower than in Ontario, so a comparison of quantity of grain production shows a vast difference.

    While the flagship wheat of Western Canada is Canada Western Red Spring wheat (CWRS) - a hard red spring wheat variety, soft red and white winter wheat varieties dominate production in Eastern Canada. While flour milled from CWRS is mainly used for bread and buns, the soft varieties grown in Ontario are milled into flour used primarily to make cookies, cakes and biscuits.
    Between 40 and 50 per cent of the Ontario wheat is sold to domestic millers and bakers located in Eastern Canada, compared to just 15 per cent of western Canadian wheat that is sold for domestic consumption. Most of the remainder of Ontario wheat is purchased by customers in the northeastern U.S., with a small amount purchased by the federal government for overseas food aid programs. Over 75 per cent of wheat grown in Western Canada is sold to customers located outside North America, so international market conditions govern returns to western Canadian farmers unlike eastern Canadian farmers.

    In 1999, the Ontario Wheat Producers Marketing Board (OWPMB) members voted to implement a direct marketing program. This program originally gave farmers the option of marketing up to 150 000 tonnes of wheat outside the OWPMB, and this amount was increased to 200 000 tonnes in 2002. This direct marketing program created a dual market in Ontario, with farmers able to sell up to the maximum limit of wheat themselves and the OWPMB also selling to customers. The Canadian National Millers Association is opposed to the dual market, as they believe it impairs their ability to secure consistent supplies of wheat. Compare that with the CWB's ability to provide domestic mills with a reliable supply of high quality wheat.

    At their annual meeting earlier this year, the OWPMB directors announced their intention to issue direct marketing licenses with no limit on tonnage for sales beginning in 2004. This will create an open wheat market in Ontario. At this time, the majority of the 10 farmer-elected directors sitting on the CWB's Board do not favour the open marketing system. They believe that the CWB is able to obtain the best returns for Prairie farmers using the power of the single desk system in North American and international markets.

    Farmers should be aware of the differences that exist in wheat production across Canada. It is not as easy as comparing apples to apples"

    #2
    I don't know if anyone from the CWB monitors this site but I am curious where the numbers come from. The indication is that 1 MMT of wheat are produced in eastern Canada but my numbers show 1.3 MMT (5 yr average) with a range of 1 to 1.7 MMT. Western Canadian wheat production (including durum) has averaged about 21.5 MMT over this period (not 11.5 MMT).

    Canadian wheat disappearance has averaged (5 yr) about 23 MMT. Off shore exports (excluding that to the US) have averaged about 12.5 MMT (54 %). Canadian wheat exports to the US have average about 2.3 MMT (10 %). Human food (flour milling) about 3 MMT (13 %). Seed 1 MMT (4 %). Livestock feed 4 MMT (17 %). Maybe cows/pigs don't count in their consumption estimates.

    I would also suggest looking at trends in the industry (declining wheat production in western Canada/increasing important N. America consumption/more wheat getting fed to livestock, etc.).

    An interesting CWB communication in the middle of a director election.

    Comment


      #3
      Charlie;

      Did you see this one?

      "November 7, 2002

      Nobody wants farmers in jail

      It was very disturbing to see 13 farmers taken into custody on October 31 in Lethbridge, Alberta. No one wants to see a farmer in jail -- least of all fellow farmers who know what it's like to work as a family to make a living from the land.

      I am a farmer too. So are nine of my colleagues who sit around the table at the Canadian Wheat Board (CWB). We were elected by other farmers in Western Canada to run the CWB on their behalf and to set its policies. In 1996, when some farmers were protesting at border crossings, we were not in control of the CWB. Since then, the CWB has been reformed to put control directly into the hands of a farmer-controlled board of directors, instead of government-appointed commissioners.

      Since 1998, 10 of the 15 CWB directors are elected by farmers. Farmers, not government, control the CWB. There have been other important changes since 1996. Farmers now have the ability to price their wheat and barley on their own, without undercutting other farmers’ returns, though a variety of payment options.

      Thirteen farmers chose to be jailed as a means of drawing attention to their concerns. Some of them are out of jail already, having decided to pay their fines. We believe being jailed was completely unnecessary, given the democratic process that now exists to elect CWB directors.

      It should also be pointed out that farmers who exported only small quantities of grain in 1996 (such as a bushel donated to a Montana 4-H club) may not have been charged at all, had they not removed vehicles that had been seized by Customs officials. Most farmers, however, exported commercial quantities of grain worth thousands of dollars. We had no say whatsoever in their sentences.

      The CWB operates the way it does today because the majority of farmer-elected directors want it that way. Nobody else is calling the shots. If we decide we want to expand our services to farmers, we will do so. Or if we decide that we want a grain marketing system like the one Ontario farmers have, we will have one.

      Most importantly, we are committed to doing whatever we can to maximize returns to farmers.

      Farmers do not all agree. But together, farmers will sort this out. All can participate in the election process that is underway in five of the 10 districts that we represent across Western Canada. As your directors, we are committed to an open dialogue with all farmers and to bringing about the kind of CWB that farmers want.

      Ken Ritter is a farmer from Kindersley, Saskatchewan who is an elected director and chair of the Canadian Wheat Board."

      Charlie, It should be pointed out that noone knows whether or not the seizures of the protesting farmers vehicles broke the law or not.

      The Minister of National revenue was supposed to have ruled on the legality of the vehicle sezures 6 years ago... and still has not ruled.

      It is clear that if the Minister of Customs ruled that the seizures were wrong... then not one farmer should be in jail today.

      If the Minister of Customs ruled the seizures were legal, we have instant recourse to the Federal Court of Canada, and then to the Supreme Court of Canada.

      It is obvious the Canadian Justice Dept. stands for anything but justice when it comes to dealing with farmers!

      When will people wake up... that there has been a major miscarrage of Justice in Canada, and all to protect the CWB?

      What is the CDN Justice Dept protecting the CWB for in this manner... if it strictly for farmer's benefit?

      Comment


        #4
        Maybe ken Ritter says, "The CWB operates the way it does today because the majority of farmer-elected directors want it that way", but that is not the way the CWB Act says they can operate.

        Their first job as Directors is to follow the Act, and we can see where they don't.

        Can you imagine what is happening in other areas at the CWB, that farmers know nothing about,that the Directors have decided to do or to implement or to take?

        Not because they are allowed, but because they WANT it that way.

        Good grief.

        Parsley

        Comment


          #5
          Parsley;

          If the CWB had implemented the Western Grain Marketing Panel Report... in the past four years, things would be very different today.

          The directors have failed to respect the needs of farmers, especially younger farmers who have large debts to service... and we will lose many of these innovative productive farmers this year...

          And the CWB is at least partially responsible for their demise... SHAME.

          Chairman Ritter is doing nothing more than exibiting a conflict of interest... and meddling in the election process... running the CWB like it is a branch of the Liberal political party.

          And Chairman Ritter is Chretien's right hand man... doing exactly what the liberal strong man wants... right down to the $400/plate dinner meetings!

          What a farce this whole thing is!

          Comment


            #6
            I have a question for Agri-villers.

            1. I get the impression that TOM4CWB feels that the CWB Dirctors take their marching orders from The Government. For example, "Deny the licenses, or no $500.00/day per diems. Granted, that kind of cash can certainly help to keep a farm above water. And the PM has already threatened Liberal candidates to tow the line or he won't sign their nomination papers. So Tom4CWB's theory would not be particularly shocking.

            2. On the other hand, are the Directors like a team of runaway horse, out of control, with the Minister oblivious to what they are doing internally? They ARE making policy to suit their motions. Certainly the buildup of the contingency fund has to be questioned. What kind of manipulation could they do tto stash cash in the C Fund in low cash times? Goodale has a Parliamentary duty to follow the law. Have the Directors put him in a position that will cause him to resign?

            So the question is
            Is what the Board of Directors doing
            #1 Government driven, or
            #2 Board driven?

            What do you think?
            Parsley

            Comment


              #7
              Parsley, I believe you have missed one option in your question of who controls the CWB: staff driven.

              Ralph Goodale is a cunning individual, and he proved it by creating a "mixed enterprise" to govern the CWB. This took heat off the governing Liberals as any criticism levelled towards the gov't re the CWB is shrugged off and re-directed to the CWB Directors.

              What everyone underestimated was how powerful the staff at the CWB really are. The directors of the wheat board look and act like puppets dangling from a string. We see and hear the same tired arguments and storylines from the directors that we used to hear from staff. There has been no real change at the board since the governance slight of hand.

              The changes to governing the wheat board have given the administration there great opportunity. They are insulated from public scrutiny and accountability by the directors.

              The Cosa Nostra can only dream of being so lucky.

              Regards,

              Braveheart

              Comment


                #8
                You are 100% right Braveheart, now here's an interesting little puzzle to ponder on a Saturday morning.....

                In a court case where it is proven that Prairie farmers have been duped for years and years out of money and that $$ must be recouped and damages paid:

                .........licensing costs for all applicants across Canada

                ..........licensing damages based on discrimination

                ........trade action costs that are not the responsibility of Prairie farmers

                Well, you get the picture. Who do you think is ULTIMATELY responsible for the actions of the staff and the Board and the Payrole Three if there was a combined DA class action suit? And who pays for damages?

                Parsley

                Comment


                  #9
                  I should learn to stay out but this thought has never stopped me before.

                  I start off with the responsibilities of the board of directors - approving a business plan and the longer term policies/parameters under which the CWB is moving the next 1 to 5 years. The operations (carrying out the overall direction of the board of directors) should be a staff function (directed by the CEO) with little interference(provided they are carrying out the activities of the operating/business plan within the parameters of their authority and are accountable for results).

                  Feedback I get is this is getting reversed at the CWB. A board of directors that gets too heavily involved in operations and CWB staff that operate freely in a vacuum of policy direction.

                  If I were voting for a diretor, I would be looking for someone with a strong business background/commitment to a logical/open planning process, can clearly articulate a vision for the wheat/barley marketing in the next 3 to 5 years and has a commitment/patience to push change forward in a complex organization/operating environment.

                  I agree that the CWB continues to have a minister responsible their activities that champions their cause in Liberal government and holds a high level of power due to loyalty to the current PM. Things change quickly in government and this may not be the case a year from now.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Just a couple of more comments.

                    1) If you read over Ken Ritters comments posted by Tom4cwb (http://www.cwb.ca/en/topics/chair/), the word we is used 13 times (6 times in one paragraph). Who is this royal we - the board of directors, farmers who favor the CWB, all farmers??? It is interesting when you put the names of people/groups in and look at the impact on meaning. You can also look at letters to the editor and see comments of others:
                    directors.http://www.cwb.ca/en/topics/chair/archives.jsp

                    I cannot find a full CWB business plan but the vision/mission statements and corporate goals are located at:

                    http://www.cwb.ca/en/about/vision_mission/

                    Comment

                    • Reply to this Thread
                    • Return to Topic List
                    Working...