US PRICES FOR DURUM AND HRS

[agstar77]

Even if true , that's over 30 days to adjust something they knew needed adjusting!!

[Fransisco]

That's an extra 2 weeks your board of directors dragged their heels agstar. It starts and ends with them, they are the ones playing politics with your initials. If you are going to play the blame game blame those whose fault it really is.

[parsley]

http://canadagazette.gc.ca/partII/2007/20070822/html/sor183-e.html#REF1

That's the official Canada Gazette page, agstar, do you suppose it's true?

QUOTE

"Vol. 141, No. 17 — August 22, 2007
Registration
SOR/2007-183 July 31, 2007
CANADIAN WHEAT BOARD ACT
Regulations Amending the Canadian Wheat Board Regulations

P.C. 2007-1193 July 31, 2007
Her Excellency the Governor General in Council, on the recommendation of the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, pursuant to subparagraph 32(1)(b)(i) (see footnote a) and section 61 of the Canadian Wheat Board Act, hereby makes the annexed Regulations Amending the Canadian Wheat Board Regulations.

REGULATIONS AMENDING THE CANADIAN WHEAT BOARD REGULATIONS
AMENDMENT
1. Subsections 26(1) and (2) of the Canadian Wheat Board Regulations (see footnote 1) are replaced by the following:
26. (1) The sum certain that the Corporation is required to pay producers on a per tonne basis under paragraph 32(1)(b) of the Act in respect of the base grade of wheat sold and delivered to the Corporation during the pool period beginning on August 1, 2007 and ending on July 31, 2008 and known as No. 1 Canada Western Red Spring (12.5% protein content) is
(a) $147.50 for straight wheat;
(b) $139.50 for tough wheat;
(c) $132 for damp wheat;
(d) $139.50 for straight wheat, rejected on account of stones;
(e) $131.50 for tough wheat, rejected on account of stones; and
(f) $124 for damp wheat, rejected on account of stones.
(2) The sum certain that the Corporation is required to pay producers on a per tonne basis under paragraph 32(1)(b) of the Act in respect of the base grade of wheat sold and delivered to the Corporation during the pool period beginning on August 1, 2007 and ending on July 31, 2008 and known as No. 1 Canada Western Amber Durum (12.5% protein content) is
(a) $144 for straight wheat;
(b) $136 for tough wheat;
(c) $128.50 for damp wheat;
(d) $136 for straight wheat, rejected on account of stones;
(e) $128 for tough wheat, rejected on account of stones; and
(f) $120.50 for damp wheat, rejected on account of stones.
COMING INTO FORCE
2. These Regulations come into force on August 1, 2007.


REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT
(This statement is not part of the Regulations.)

Description
Section 26 of the Canadian Wheat Board Regulations establishes initial payments for the Canadian Wheat Board (CWB) pool accounts. These payments are paid to producers upon delivery of grains into the elevator system over the course of a pool period. The amendment establishes initial payments for the 2007-2008 pool period, with a comparison to those set a year earlier, for the base grades of wheat (an increase of $10 per tonne) and of amber durum wheat (an increase of $26 per tonne).

Alternatives
Alternatives considered were to establish the initial payments at lower levels. Initial payments are announced to reflect to producers the market conditions in which their crops must compete. These conditions are based upon current and forecast supply/ demand relationships for wheat both domestically and internationally and which can change very rapidly as markets react to a multitude of market factors. Although world production of wheat in 2007-2008 is forecast to increase from the level of 2006-2007, the strong world demand for wheat and the projected decline in end-of-year world stocks of wheat for 2007-2008 are expected to result in higher world wheat prices in 2007-2008. However, the stronger Canadian dollar in relation to the US dollar in 2007-2008, compared to 2006-2007, will moderate the increase in wheat prices in Canadian dollar terms.

Benefits and costs
The initial payments established by these Regulations indicate the returns anticipated from the market, as of mid-June, and thus transmit appropriate market signals to producers. This allows both large and small producers to make their marketing decisions more efficiently based upon anticipated returns to their individual farms.
The higher initial payment for wheat will result in higher returns to producers on a per tonne basis. Government policy has been to avoid using initial payments as a means to providing farm income support. The higher initial payments for wheat and amber durum wheat will transmit to producers the appropriate market information. Initial payments can be increased during the pool period, depending on international market prices and conditions. There is no environmental impact of this amendment.
Consultation

This amendment has been discussed with The Canadian Wheat Board and with the Department of Finance.
Compliance and enforcement
There is no compliance and enforcement mechanism. These Regulations govern payments made to grain producers for deliveries made under the Canadian Wheat Board Regulations governing delivery permits."

UNQUOTE

[charliep]

agstar77

Just curious how much it cost the CWB to send out an adjustment payment? Isn't it more cost effective to wait until November when more information is known and send out one bigger cheque versus a whole bunch of small ones. Would note the August adjustment (regardless of who is delaying) would be based on the July PRO information - only a small increase at that time. A major increase in the August and likely another round of increases on September 27. Initial payment spreads have remained relatively consistent with the PRO ones but will be a need to review once the crop is in the bin. Farmers who need cashflow (as has been highlighted before by others) have several CWB producer pricing options to choose from).

If you put politics to the side, November/December is a much better time for the federal government to announce adjustment payments versus a whole bunch of small ones. Perhaps you disagree. I am also curious as to whether you would recommend using the PPO alternatives the CWB offers to generate cash flow?

[chaffmeister]

Agstar:
The CWB and 5 others filed level-of-service complaints against CN (Sept 5).

The CWB and nine other grain shippers were core interveners in a previous case (July), which was also supported by the governments of Alberta and Saskatchewan, other grain-industry organizations and major farm groups.
http://www.cwb.ca/public/en/newsroom/releases/2007/090507.jsp

So tell me, how did the CWB effect the result of the first claim? I guess if it had been "successful", there'd be no reason for the current claim.

Just how is the CWB contributing? Wouldn't the process we're seeing still happen even without the CWB?

[charliep]

To bring back to your question tower, I would review alternative for dealing end of the crop year marketing decisions. This year is a prime example of why change is needed. Farmer decisions about which crop year to price into impacting old crop payments (reduced payment potential by $5/tonne according the the July 2006/07 PRO information). Extended crop year (well into August in many locations this year) which plug the elevator system up with grain that may or may not have a sales commitment (inventory plugging the system). Old crop deliveries that is priced in the new crop pool and will likely reduce the current crop year returns (why the monster adjustments over and above the current crappy basis levels).

[AdamSmith]

tower, it appears the "it" in "makin it work", to you, is the cwb.

for me and many others the "it" in "makin it work", is the entire market structure.

As it exists today, the cwb is a huge impediment that stands inbetween farmers and the opportunities farmers have in making the most out of our farms. Or more precicly it's the cwb's single desk authority that is the impediment.

Should you ever come to accept the notion that it's better to have the solid commitment and support of 30% of farmers and zero annomisity from the other 70% within a voluntary cwb/free market system, than the disdain of well over half the current forced membership, you might find that there is good value in being able to accomodating those who truly and freely choose the cwb as a marketing partner

That in my opinion is the cwb's only salvation.

Doing the best you can for those who freely choose the cwb will, give the cwb a new lease on life and the goodwill of all.

Continuing to fight everyone who opposes the monopoly will, in my opinion, only guarantee the cwb's demise.

[Barleyman]

Tower and friends- just wait until the next round of cwb elections. You're toast unless several pro choice people run against each other and your guy slips up the middle.

[Fransisco]

Further to Adam's comment, tower you once said that a big problem in your eyes is the number of changes that have been made to try and appease those of us who are not interested in being in the CWB tent. That will not change until you let us out of the tent.

We are not interested in being appeased, we simply want out. The status quo will not change our mind and neither will a bigger stick.

Your chances of running a successful business are a lot greater when you work with like minded individuals who want to work with you. Tieing differently minded people, who don't want to work with you to the CWB mast will not make the ship sail any better. The opposite is true, you start to take on water.

[agstar77]

Chaff you don't get it . How do you expect the individual farmer to get cars to ship grain without going through a third party, considering the way the railways drag their feet and ignore or interpret rulings to satisfy themselves. Until we see open running rights nothing will change.

[chaffmeister]

agstar - you don't get it. What's any of that got to do with the CWB?

You're saying that with the way it is right now you just about have to ship/sell to Viterra. And without the CWB, I guess you're saying you'll still have to ship/sell to Viterra.

Where is this great countervailing power the CWB is supposed to have over the nasty grain trade?

At least with freedom to go wherever with your grain, you're not shackled to the CWB/Viterra machines.

[silverback]

Ah, the old shell game again.

Those big mean railways are the problem right now, they are the reason we can't pay world values for your grain. We have to fight them tooth and nail. Then we will take on the multinationals. Don't ask us why your pro's will never match world values it's not our fault.

Keep grasping redstar.