Check Offs, royalties and levies

[farmaholic]

What about the R&D on varieties that don't meet the needs or perimeters in Canada but work perfect in another countries environment so breeders take it there and sell it. Canada farmers pay for R&D on varieties that become our competition. Potentially driving down the price of wheat world wide.

Do you honestly think they care? ...the world governments or the plant breeders? Laws are in place to protect the latter at the expense of the Producer.

[bucket]

Wide angle view here but when dummies in Canada can be convinced that they can help the environment by taxing their citizens.....it looked like easy money....go to any other country and try the shit they are with this seed tax....

[Braveheart]

So what I'm hearing from Mallee's experience is there really is no real gain from trailing royalties. It sounds like just a massive redistribution of wealth.

Are you listening AAFC, CFIA, WCWGA, Tom? Value Creation should be renamed Value Redistribution.

[farmaholic]

It's not a true free market, its a captive market with a yearly hostage ransom.

**** THE PROPONENTS!

If it was a free market I would/could choose to use their product with viable options, like good varieties that were de-registered in preparation for this scam.

[Braveheart]

Also, if this goes ahead, if I'm investing in R&D by virtue of an EPR or trailing royalty it stands to reason I should share in any profits. If SeCan or FP Genetics gets investment money from me it should translate into share. Otherwise, sounds like racketeering.

[malleefarmer]

So what I'm hearing from Mallee's experience is there really is no real gain from trailing royalties. It sounds like just a massive redistribution of wealth.

Are you listening AAFC, CFIA, WCWGA, Tom? Value Creation should be renamed Value Redistribution.

Breeders are trying hard to improve all the time.

Govt and univesties washed there hands of plant breedings maybe to expensive maybe not enough bang for there buck invested hence send it private breeders. So epr needed for them.

But levies for R&D at times not well spent bureacrosy etc red tape.

THE CHAIRMAN of one of representative organisations (ROs) responsible for overseeing the Grains Research and Development Corporation (GRDC) says getting the organisation’s new five year strategic plan right will be critical in terms of satisfying levy payers.

There has been criticism from some grower-led research groups there was not enough consultation with grass roots growers before the plan was created, but Grain Producers Australia chairman Andrew Weidemann said he felt most growers were happy with the direction GRDC was taking.

“I would say the investment process is not too bad from growers’ perspective at present,” Mr Weidemann said.

“The GRDC is currently implementing its five year plan and there are several key themes emerging,” Mr Weidemann said

“It is the start of the cycle and they are processing what people feel should be the research priorities and getting that mix right.”

Mr Weidemann said making sense of farm data was a new area that farmers were looking at and welcomed GRDC’s commitment to digital agriculture.

Earlier in the year, GRDC managing director Steve Jefferies said with the fast-evolving nature of technology in agriculture, digital ag would be a research priority.

Mr Weidemann said farmers had also conveyed a number of agronomic priorities to him.

“Over the last couple of years there have been a number of devastating frosts and people are very keen to see further research in terms of frost tolerant varieties.”

Grass roots participation in advising the GRDC of research priorities has come under question from some grower-led research groups, who have said growers need more input in terms of research priorities.

There are several other key areas Mr Weidemann said had been identified by growers.

Pulses, which have become one of Australia’s most important crop exports in recent years, were highlighted by Mr Weidemann as aan area needing more research dollars.

He said finding the best way to create alignments between grower groups, consultants and researchers would be important in GRDC delivering the best possible services.

A lack of consultation has concerned some grower groups in spite of the organisation citing a number of opportunities for growers to have their say regarding its future direction.

Damien Scanlan, chairman of the Grains Research Foundation (GRFL), a Queensland-based grower research group said he was unhappy with the level of engagement shown when developing the strategic plan.

“If you compare what they said they did to what happened in terms of getting grass roots growers involved, it was not the same,” Mr Scanlan said.

He said while the GRDC got grower input via the two ROs more interaction with the production sector is needed.