Ritz WTO position??

[parsley]

You'd wonder how organics ever developed, listening to you!

The CONSUMER trusted the farmer. They do it all the time.Check the surveys. But tconsumers DO NOT, I repeat, DO NOT trust Governments as much as they trust farmers.


Only numbnuts wanted to involve Government. Drooled and wet their pants to have Government involvement in organics, whispering, "You can't do it without me".

Intellect bleeding out their fingernails.

People who understand what organics really means never ever wanted Government involvement.

Oops. That went ove ryour head agian, didn't it agstar?

Parsley

[cottonpicken]

Get back in line Tom.

Theres no room for thinking or dissent in our ideology.For we are the protectors of freedom of thought.

And if our glorious idol amerika does something absolutely ridiculous we will simply defend the actions no matter how undefendable they are.God bless us and no one else.

[TOM4CWB]

CP,

I admit it... they stole my innocence in Halifax and Montreal!

But not my soul!

Grin!

Strange new world we live in... 2 years ago... who would have thought!

I must pinch myself... see if this is a dream... ouch!...no it isn't!

[wd9]

Well Tom4CWB, there has been significant progress made in the last little while. However given this letter there is as I posted earlier that power of SM5 and its' sole purpose to protect at the expense of every other industry including the view of Canada at WTO.

It is not consistent with what the Government of Canada and all WTO member countries agreed to on July 31, 2004 in Annex A - Framework for Establishing Modalities on Agriculture.

In the Sensitive Products section of the agreement it says “the principle of substantial improvement will apply to each product” and “…will be achieved through combinations of tariff quota commitments and tariff reductions applying to each product”.

The text goes on to say that “some MFN-based tariff quota expansion will be required for all such products”.

This agreement was signed by all WTO members, including Canada, as the basis for negotiations. That's where the schizo position becomes an issue.

The letter to the Ambassador is not consistent with Canada’s commitment under the terms of the framework agreement, nor does it align with Canada’s substantial export interests.

As I said earlier, this is unacceptable to the grains and oilseed industry.

[parsley]

Your exaggeration does you injustice cotton.

1. First of all , USA is the most highly sought out country for immigrants. Why do you suppose they chose USA? Why not Iraq? Or Nigeria? What makes a country desirable? What is it that most makes America the way it is? I would venture it is thsir political system that provides the backbone.


2.We have such a range of dissent in Canada. Polygamy is thriving! Sharia law is almost home-free. Heath care is so socialized, we have more administrators than healthcare workers. You feel you are lacking freedom of thought? Good grief. You need to read more

Parsley

[wd9]

Allllrighty then.

[TOM4CWB]

WD9,

Thanks for responding!

Hard to think now... !

[wd9]

The talks are going on and making significant progress. SM5 and of course CFA and the CWB would like you to believe otherwise as no deal means a good deal for them. Presence is required at the talks and the ministerials for any sort of movement.

The non ag sector (NAMA) has billions of dollars at stake in terms of goods and services and it baffles me why the are not more vocal to a government protecting the interests of less than 8% of the ag production and almost no exports. Other than maybe to secure votes in the east, there I said it.

It may be viewed that with good prices and an almost shortage of supply a good deal is not required, but is far from the truth. Biofuels is under tremendous pressure to be eliminated which would cause huge damage to prices.

A lot is at stake, unfortunately very few understand the scope of not only the talks but the importance of market access for Canada's exporters.

Talks are going on and making significant progress as the time comes to an end - that is how most talks work. Don't believe the BS of certain special interest groups representing even smaller special interests that nothing is happening. IT IS.

[parsley]

Stuart Garson, Premier of Manitoba, said in his 1948 letters to the Federal Government:


"On both pricing and allocation, there is a distinct conflict of interest between those who grow oats and barley and those who purchase them for feeding and other purposes.

"In such event,under your proposed policy and legislation, who will defray the difference, if any, between the market price and the Wheat Board price, the nation, or the producer of oats and barley?"


"...this is a fundamental matter of principle......"


Principles must come into play and be relied upon during the negotiations, Wd9.


Cheap captive grain in the West provided to Eastern feathers isn't exactly defensible. Neither is jailing the DA farmer who grows the grain.

That is why it is so important to understand the basic principles that uphold Supply Management.

These are the basic tools of negotiation.

Parsley

[TOM4CWB]

WD9,

Thanks!

It is hard to imagine any subject more political, more important, and at the core of every nation on the planet... than food supply!

Very interesting times!