CWB Voter's List includes 43% non-growers

[bobn]

Dear Wheat Grower members:

The Wheat Growers have obtained a summary of the number of permit book holders who deliver grain to the CWB. The numbers are astonishing.
There's a huge number of people who are listed as "producers" (i.e. get
to vote in CWB elections), but who either do not deliver grain to the
CWB, or deliver very little.

The attached table gives you a breakdown of the number of producers who have delivered zero tonnes, or less than 33.5 tonnes to the CWB over the past 3 crop years. What it shows is that 47.4% of producers (i.e. eligible voters) delivered less than 33.5 tonnes to the CWB in the
2004/05 crop year. In 2003/04, the percentage was 42.7% and in the year before that, it was an astounding 57.8%.

We realize that some producers who have not delivered grain to the CWB
may be bona fide farmers, however we think it's fair to say that the
results of CWB elections are now being determined, to a large extent, by
"producers" who have very little real economic stake in growing wheat
and barley. In my opinion, if the CWB Election Review Panel process is
to be of any value, it must make sure this voters' list is cleaned up.

By the way, the deadline for getting comments into the Review Panel is
tomorrow, September 30. I know it's the 11th hour, but if you're not
out harvesting and still want to make some last minute comments on the
election process, you can email your comments to:
lewisjp@agr.gc.ca.

To see what the Wheat Growers had to say, you can view and download our submission at

http://www.wheatgrowers.ca/pdf/policy/CWB-Election-Review_Sep-08-2005.pdf

Cherilyn Jolly-Nagel
President


Crop Year Number of
producers with
zero deliveries

2002/03 49,013
% of total 43.1%

2003/04 32,199
% of total 30.7%

2004/05 36,739
% of total 37.7%

[WoolyBear]

I am for the record one of those farmers that doesn't not deliver much grain on CWB contracts..... for several reasons.

I have converted about 1/2 of my 1000 cultivated acres to forages. I've added sheep and increased my cattle herd in the last 10 years.

Most of my remaining acres are seeded to canola, barley and feed whts. Canola is not under the control of the CWB and the feed wht is either sold to my neighbors hogs for a fair price or sold for a better price to an ethanol plant. The malt barley is usually fed to my livestock as it seems nearly impossible to ever get malting barley accepted.

I am NOT a Wheat Grower that sits back and ******* about everything CWB. I don't own thousands of acres and I don't have a huge staff that does my farming for me.

I take out a CWB permit book for the sole reason of having continuity of that document should the government ever decide to base any acreage payments for WHATEVER reason. The elimination of the Crow Rate, and the resulting acreage payment was based on our CWB information and that payment was put to good use seeding acres out of cereals

PLUS sometime in the future I may have cereals to deliver or malt barley to sell.

Therefore even though my tonnes of product delivered lately have not been that great to the CWB, I still feel that it is my right to have the vote.......

Just because you might not always agree, or never take advantage of their programs for whichever reasons, that still doesn't mean that our vote can help to create a better system in the future.......

For the record, I never vote Liberal, but that never stops me from voting to try and make things better

[parsley]

WoolyBar:

You may not deliver to the Board, and I don't either BUT:

The CWB Act impacts upon all elevators and termials and railroads.

The CWB Act impacts upon our ability to export because we either get the license or not.

In other words, if what the CWB does affects every farmer, why should only large acerage farmers get a vote to determine policy?

Parsley

[WoolyBear]

Did the wheat growers investigate how many of those low or no tonne producers were affected by hail, drought, flood etc?

Parsley...... not sure if you are agreeing with me or not, but I do agree with you in that all farmers that grow some sort of grain should have the right to vote.

That right though is obtained when one fills and files a CWB permit book. Whether we choose to use it or not depends on alot of factors.

[WoolyBear]

PS.........

1 Farm unit equals 1 permit book and only 1 vote. If you choose to incorporate several family members into your "Farm"........1 VOTE!

A large farm should not have more votes.

[Ajax]

If one farm unit = one vote that wouldn't be so bad. Often one farm unit may have several permit books, or suffixes, by several farming members, some of which haven't set foot on a farm for a long time (ie sons or daughters that have ties to the farm and want to have the tax and other benifits that a permit book or suffix, may bring).

[GrainVac]

Gee, the last time I looked at how the "vision and future" of well-run company was determined, it listened to what "thousands" of stakeholders had to say. We all got to vote basis our interest level. IE one share one vote. The elections should be weighted to represent the actual acres of CWB grains in each book, just like public company ownership. One person one vote only applies to politics and that's the biggest problem in agriculture. Why do you guys want to keep going that route? Because there's been so much good come from it already?
Why should a permit book have any impact on GOV programs? The CWB spends lots of money doing pointless paperwork and accounting for "non-CWB grain" producers

[parsley]

GrainVac

I agree with the general idea of "how many shares you own is how many votes you hold".

Unfortunately, the CWB holds more power than a corporation because it is not only a player/marketer, but it is also a regulator via the CWB Act.

An example would be if Prairie Elected Directors voted to deny the ONtario Wheat Marketing Board export permits. (A not so-dandy way to stop competition from Ontario farmers!)

(They actually did this once but the Feds stepped in and made them hand over the export licenses)

The main function, nationally, of the CWB, is as a license issuer, but if the Feds take this duty away from them, I would be more inclined to support the value of user-votes.

Parsley

[GrainVac]

I wasn't trying to make this an EAST/WEST debate or one about liscensing, by "pointless accounting" I was refering to the huge number of permit book holders that do not market any CWB grains and only do the application "in case" there is a per acre government program using seeded acres from the permit book. Everyone in this industry has been slashing costs, where does empty permit books fit in on top of getting a vote for something that is of no concern to them?

[charliep]

Just to clarify, the suggestion is being made that only people who deliver grain to the CWB should be allowed to vote in elections? Given the impact of CWB regulation/influence on logistics for all export grains and oilseeds, aren't all crop farmers stakeholders in the CWB organization? If the CWB moves to a self financed pooling system (no government guarantees) and participation/delivery may mean some type of farmer equity position in a contingency fund, how will this impact farmers ideas about governace? What would the impact of a situation of a market where the CWB is not compulsory but lives along side an open market - farmers have some form of choice in how they market their export/domestic human food wheat and barley?

[WoolyBear]

The elections should be weighted to represent the actual acres of CWB grains in each book, just like public company

NO it should not. There have been MANY producers in the last number of years that because of drought, floods, hail or other marketing opportunities didn't have grain to sell to the CWB. We don't disagree with their policies, and even if we did, wouldn't a common 1 farm/1vote be a fair way to progressively change the system if something has to be changed?

If you aren't happy with selling milling wheat through the CWB, then find a miller that will buy your "Feed Wht" from you for a substaintial premium.

[parsley]

Haven't got a permit book.
Haven't got a cash advance.
Have millers wanting grain.
Have legitimate buyers.

Deals fall through because I have to go through the Board and the profit is then gone.

The Board has complete say over the elevators, grain companies, the terminals and containers. Everyone I need to do business with.

The CWB affects my business and yours.

Should I have a vote?

Parsley

[WoolyBear]

CWB probably already has all the info that a permit book would provide anyway.

Fill it out, and file it away where no one sees it. You'll have your vote.

[TOM4CWB]

WoolyBear;

A few years back I tried to sell all our wheat and barley off-board without a permit book.

I had off-board feed contracts; the CWB told the grain companies I did the contracts with to stop accepting deliveries.

I was told not to go near any elevator until I filled out a permit book.

The elevator managers were told to report me to the CWB if I went near any elevator.

I had to have a permit book; no choice.

Now if I have seeded grain acres in my permit book, why should it matter which grain it is; since the CWB effects the handling and transport of all of them?

If I farm more grain seeded acres in a high productive output area; of course the CWB effects my farm more: more invested means I need more opportunity to express the needs and aspirations of our farm business.

If the CWB monopoly is ended then you can do tonnage, CWB planted acres; or what ever other criteria you like... then it (the CWB)is supposed to commercial and should be run in a manner appropriate to commercial functions.

Obviously this is not the case when the CWB has a manditory monopoly to stop me from even delivering off board grains!

[wd9]

No parsley, you shouldn't be able to vote, because the CWB is owned and controlled by farmers. Excellent question and don't have an answer.

The biggest deception is that farmers think the board does most of the grain sales. Parsley, do you know the percentage last year of actual sales made by the exporters and grain companies?