Will Goodale’s CWB take “C” Series contracted grain?

[TOM4CWB]

Hey folks, what about CWB 2002-03 marketing performance;

If the CWB refuses to take C Series grain offered by farmers, it will finish off the 2002-03 crop year with the perfect worst possible combinations of marketing decisions any marketer could make to maximise farmers grain returns.

1.In May/June/July of 2002 the CWB was selling new crop 02 wheat, at clear-out prices, while many farmers were seeing their crops roast and die in the field. The CWB was in denial, and didn’t wake up until too late.

2.In early August after the CWB woke up, it found it had committed a much larger than normal percentage of 02 harvest grain sales than it felt comfortable with, so what did the CWB do? They froze up and stopped selling new crop grain, claimed they were withdrawing from the market, then cleared out old crop instore grain to fill committed contracts.

3.Then prices plummeted through Nov/December 02 the CWB manipulated election results by holding up the PRO. The Nov 02 PRO (1CWRS 13.5) was 296/t, (Dropping from $312 in Oct) and by January of 2003 (the PRO down to $274/t), the CWB saw it needed to sell at least some of the 2002 harvest at good prices.

But the CWB soon found sales values were already down close to initial prices. So the CWB sold a little, but gambled that a spring rally would allow better pricing opportunities for the rest of the 2002 harvest.

4.March rolled around (the PRO was $256) and it was clear mistakes could not stop the pool from going into a deficit if the market kept dropping.

5.May brought the strategy of buying market share back internationally, and like DTN sales reported ($177US in store Brazil) to CWB sales in Brazil the CWB made sales at huge losses to the pool accounts.

6.Now the CWB directors are caught big time. The CWB speculated on procured grain when prices were high. To not accept “C” series grain because of early mistakes would be unforgivable to many farmers, especially when the February CWB contract was canceled, leaving only one contract to offer CWB grains for half the crop year, on May 30th. Would the CWB intentionally leave farmers holding the mistakes?

Could the CWB be this evil?

7.I speculate Minister Goodale recently got pressure from Manley and the Treasury Board, because the Canadian economy is falling apart while the CWB pool deficits mount higher daily.

Who will control the CWB, farmers, or Goodale (the villain of convenience he is) and Treasury Board?

[poorboy]

Heard they were taking no cps or 3 red wheat, but everything else

[TOM4CWB]

Poorboy;

Heard that they will take 1&2CWRS only from a neighbour who had a call from Agricore.

[TOM4CWB]

Charlie;

It really stinks when the CWB will tell elevators what they are accepting, but not release the info to farmers.

IMHO...What a bunch of cowards.

[nbertsch]

I doubt that they will take much or any of the "C" contracts. That doesn't surprise me in the least. Maybe, if we would all market our own grain, the CWB wouldn't have this hole to dig out of now. But what was I thinking?

[TOM4CWB]

nbertsch;

This adds a little perspective to CWB tactics;

"WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?

June 23, 2003

TITLE: Zwangswirtschaft Policies in Western Canada

For many years the policies of the Canadian Wheat Board have been compared to the communist policies of the old Soviet Union. No one thought to examine the economic policies of Adolph Hitler’s Nazi Germany.

In a commentary posted on the Le Quebecois Libre web site, Harry Valentine asserts

that the law under which prairie farmers were jailed for having exported wheat without a licence is more consistent with the Zwangswirtschaft system that was the cornerstone of the Nazi’s economic regulation (Zwang means compulsion while Wirtsschaft means economy).

Mr. Valentine quotes economist Ludwig von Mises, who describes this system in his treatise entitled Socialism. "Under the Nazi system of zwangswirtschaft, private ownership is maintained over the means of production, but the government tells the entrepreneurs at what price and to whom to sell.“ The Nazi slogan for this economic philosophy was Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz, or the commonwealth ranks above profit. “This certainly is consistent with the philosophy by which Western Canadian wheat farmers are regulated by the Canadian government”, adds Valentine.



In Canada, prairie farmers are forced, by law, to market their wheat and barley through the Canadian Wheat Board. Eastern wheat growers, it seems, are not. It apparently doesn’t matter that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms says all citizens are equal before and under the law.

On the subject of interventionist public policy, Mr. Valentine writes: “Despite a plethora of proof illustrating the consistent and long-term failure of state economic regulation and control, the national government continues to stand ready to use coercion and forcible compulsion against the productive activities of peaceful citizens, as the means by which to enforce such regulation and control. Canada's government need look no further than the decimation of the East Coast cod fish industry, to see proof that state enforced economic regulation and control can and does fail. Despite having had a large bureaucracy backed by an extensive staff of politically favoured experts to guide governmental action in the fisheries industry, a mega-debacle still occurred.

Recently, a trial balloon was floated from Ottawa suggesting that farmers may be allowed some limited freedom to sell their wheat directly to customers. Such a plan may ultimately resemble Ontario's recent electric power deregulation farce and its subsequent failure. In this debacle, a few minor cosmetic changes were made to the existing regulatory regime and the farce renamed "deregulation." Except that private producers could not operate under such a regime. A regime of limited freedom to privately sell wheat indicates the agriculture department's loyalty and commitment to Zwangswirtschaft and its refusal to abandon such a regime. Such behaviour from Ottawa adds credence to the western independence movement and what they stand for. Ottawa's own behaviour gives western Canadians little choice other than secession to achieve economic freedom.”

“Federal regulatory behaviour in Western Canada Agriculture (CWB) and the environment (the Kyoto Accord) ultimately justifies and adds legitimacy to the cause of Western Independence”, he concludes.



It is interesting how we in western Canada are perceived by some people in the eastern part of the country. Too bad it doesn’t rub off on the mandarins in Ottawa who are responsible for public policy.

Ken Dillen

Harry Valentine is a free marketer living in eastern Ontario. His commentary can be found on the Le Quebecois Libre web site at www.quebecoislibre.org. He has given permission for the Prairie Centre to use his material to inform our membership of how excess state control affects the prairie region. Where Do We Go From Here is a feature of the Prairie Centre Policy Institute."

[jensend]

Thank you for that last post Tom. I have long maintained that the feds want us here to farm grain only for the benefit of others. We assume the responsibility and liability for our operations but we are price takers on both ends. I didn't think of comparing the policy to Nazism but maybe there is a coincidental methodology and attitude. I don't favour separating from Canada for any other reason than that Canada doesn't work.

[nbertsch]

Maybe Mr. Bush could Liberate us next. We have oil, gas, and more important WATER. Even an reasonably good economy to bring with us.

[TOM4CWB]

I see the June 20th CWB calls for 100% of C Series 1&2 CWRS all CWAD and 1&2 CW Barley

[TOM4CWB]

Charlie;

I see the CWB will take zero percent CPS/CWES Canada Fd. wheat.

The CWB explanation is as follows;

Last updated: June 19, 2003

A delivery contract is a binding agreement between a farmer and the CWB. It specifies the type, grade and quantity of grain the farmer wants to deliver. The CWB announces an acceptance level after it assesses the amount of grain offered under all contracts and the market demand for that grain.

The refusal to take 3CWRS/CPS begs this question.

If the CWB won't market these grains, then why not allow farmers no-cost export licenses?

There is obviously a market for this grain, the CWB has an obligation to allow farmers the right to market this grain outside the CWB for human consumption, if the CWB is not up to the challenge!

This brings us to the point;

If the CWB doesn't like selling 3CWRS and CPS wheat, and doesn't want to take responsibility for all the marketing mistakes it took this year, then let this grain go!

Give us the right to market it as Ontario does, with an exemption! !

Beef farmers have it tuff, but grain farmers don't need the CWB blowing the bottom out of our feed markets AGAIN.