rolfpennerforcwb.com

[RolfPenner]

Hello Agri-ville!

I thought it was time that I introduced myself to your forum. As you all probably know I'm running for Wheat Board Director in district 10 in Manitoba.

My platform gets right to the point. I'm in favour of, real choice, marketing freedom, and a voluntary wheat board that operates in a competitive market.

If farmers want to market their grain through the board I think that's fine but if they want to pursue other options I think that should be fine as well.

My election Blog, which I'm hoping to update with new material every day, is:

http://rolfpennerforcwb.com/

You can see my candidate profile at the official CWB election website here:

http://www.cwbelection.com/candidates.asp?id=41

and you can send me an email at:

pennerspoints@gmail.com

If you have any questions or CWB experiences that you'd like to share with me, by all means, fire away.

[agstar77]

What is your plan for making the CWB voluntary and how would you transition it? How would the CWB 2 relate to the private trade? How would you retain the expertise at the CWB which is really it's primary asset outside of the export monopoly? How would you capitalize the new CWB? By the way I am in your CWB district.

[RolfPenner]

Wow, that was quick! Here are my answers below your questions agstar.

<blockquote>What is your plan for making the CWB voluntary and how would you transition it? </blockquote>

First off to truly make the CWB voluntary I think that we would need changes made to the wheat board act. If the majority of the Board of Directors are of a pro choice persuasion after the election I think the first order of business is convincing Ottawa to change the act. Barring that there may be some things that we can do internally to get us pretty close to a voluntary status. A low cost buyback such as Organic producers are now getting may be one way.

As to the second part of the question I would like to see as quick a transition as possible, with the new crop year, August 1st as the target. The Manitoba pork monopoly as I remember was able to transition to an open market in a similar time frame.

<blockquote>How would the CWB 2 relate to the private trade? </blockquote>

I see it as a value chain deal maker which brings together all of the elements of the private trade, buyers, sellers, shippers etc. With the overcapacity in system right now I think the CWB is in an excellent position to negotiate hard on farmers behalf to get the best deals for them. Not being locked into one set of fixed assets like the bricks and mortar grain companies will also give the board the flexibility to pursue the best market options for farmers.

<blockquote>How would you retain the expertise at the CWB which is really it's primary asset outside of the export monopoly?</blockquote>

If someone is doing their job properly, hustling sales and bringing value to farmers I think they should be properly compensated for their work. I'm a big believer in meritocracy.

But I have to disagree with you when you say the export monopoly is the boards greatest asset. I don't believe that is the case. Everything I have looked at shows me that the single desk is the boards greatest liability, it is the reason why performance is sub par and producer returns reflect that.

<blockquote>How would you capitalize the new CWB? </blockquote>

In the short to medium time frames I don't see anything changing in that regards. I'm not looking to get rid of any of the government guarantees or the access to government credit which the board now currently enjoys. That is an advantage that the board will continue to have over the competition. In the longer term I think that it would be nice for the board to be completely separate from government and 100% run by farmers. But right now I don't think that's realistic. Right now the focus needs to be on the single desk and only the single desk.

When the time eventually comes to separate the CWB from government an idea worth consideration is the idea of selling shares to farmers with the federal government doing a one time only matching of that investment to sweeten the deal. Thereby guaranteeing that the initial investment automatically makes a profit. But I don't see this happening for a long, long time.


<blockquote>By the way I am in your CWB district. </blockquote>

Good stuff! Then I hope you'll put a number one beside my name on the ballot.

[RolfPenner]

Agstar, do you use any of the PPO's right now and if so what do you thing of them?

[parsley]

Waiting for a bill to pass through committees and readings and senate will tie everything up until 2050. Be realistic. I want no cost licenses the same as Ontario enjoys. They don't do a buyback. Why the hell should I?

Parsley

[RolfPenner]

"Like watching paint dry" doesn't quite do our parliamentary system justice does it?

A no cost license is something else that we can take a look at. And you point out a valid observation we in the "designated area" are subject to federal laws that only apply to us. Federal laws should apply to all Canadians equally regardless of where they live.

[craig]

agstar
Maybe you could explain the so called expertise within the CWB. Not sure I'm seeing that especially in the marketing and weather surveillance department. It would seem regardless of the expertise the board is structured so that thy do business the same every year regardless of the market situation.

[agstar77]

In other words you envisage the CWB as a Grain Broker. How would the Canadian grain brand be kept when all sales are turned over to grain companies. Who would bear the cost of market development? Would you see the current grade system changed to the U.S. system?

[parsley]

The CWB will simply continue to take money from your pooling accounts, agstar, as they now do, taking from the rich, so to speak, and contimue to pay for some of Robin Hood's packaging, thus giving to the poor, right? Nothing will change, and you'll continue to love it.


Penner, the present and past licensing legislation applies equally to all Canadians as we speak, much the same as the gun registry does. The problem would be like this if we compared the CWB wheat licensing to gun licensing.....both national...but if the gun license applicant from the West was refused every time, but everyone else in Canada got a license, you would be ticked. But that is what the CWB does. Everytime a Westerner applies for an export license, the Board denies it, saying, "You can't get the license, but ya can sell it to us, Babe"

[Zaphod]

WRT the "brand", there is none. The CGC monitors grades, not the CWB. Putting a label on some domestic brands of flour is largely useless. Warburtons does not put a Cdn flag on their bread. They are trying to promote it as UK bread, not Cdn. If you want an example of industry-driven market promotion, look no further than the Canola Council, Pulse Canada, Alberta Beef, Florida orange juice, California raisins. Need any other examples? Come on, the CWB has done squat. CIGI may be useful, but only if it is driven by industry goals.

[RolfPenner]

I've found through the years that different people sometimes define things differently, agstar, could you give me your definition of a "grain broker"?

As far as the 'Canadian grain brand' goes I'll have to agree with Zaphod, I don't see our oats or our canola suffering from some kind of a 'brand' problem. In fact now that I think about it canola acreage has been trending up in Western Canada while wheat acreage has been trending down. Maybe some of that is due to the Canola Councils branding efforts.

And I'm not sure if you're aware of this but most of the barley and about half the wheat that the CWB handles is already being sold by the grain companies who are registered as accredited exporters or as agents.

As far as market development goes, I look at how other grains do it. Again, lets look at canola, there's a check off which goes to a general industry organization like the canola growers who then look after it. Maybe there's a greater role for CIGI in this. I think the Alberta Barley Commission has done a good job of this as well. So there is a number of different ways this could be done.

Marketing and market development are two different things, I want to see the wheat board focus on marketing and maximizing returns to producers. I think that one of the problems at the board is that there has been too much focus on too many thing that have nothing to do with marketing.

You asked, "Would you see the current grade system changed to the U.S. system?" The answer is no.

[cottonpicken]

And why has legislation not been put forth?

Blah,blah,blah,blah

And the gun thing

blah,blah

income trusts

blah,blah

smaller budjets

blah,blah

good luck crack team of think tanks i might have a few questions.

Bye the way will wheat be higher or lower one year from now?

[mcfarms]

cotton

yes

[agstar77]

Canola branding is done by the Canola growers , with their big checkoff. I suppose you would be proposing we hand over branding to the wheatgrowers creating a new bureaucracy and another checkoff, so much for saving money. I am not a user of forward pricing, while I believe they are useful for some to lock in prices, it seems like it has distracted the CWB from its primary function. In order for me to put a 1 beside your name you would have to go into the CWB with an open mind about yielding the best return for farmers as opposed to a dogmatic view of marketing. Making an assumption that dual marketing will work is like jumping into a pool without taking swimming lessons. Dubious outcome and no second chance. Thanks for stating your reasoning, it is always useful to have all opinions expressed.

[parsley]

Rolf, It suddenly struck me when I was writing on my blog this morning, something I should have said yesterday, and that is Congratulations for letting your name stand. Lots of whiners but few candidates. Good luck. Pars