Flaman Claimed Buybacks Not Legal

[parsley]

Vader,

There is the cost of licencing for those INSIDE the designated area, too.

Inside DA Licensing cost outside DA Licensing costs = Federal Government pays

Surely it can't be that difficult to understand.


Parsley

[parsley]

Should read:

Inside DA Licensing cost outside DA Licensing costs = Federal Government pay both

[parsley]

The plus sign won't post!


Inside DA Licensing cost PLUS outside DA Licensing costs = Federal Government pay both

[Vader]

Tom,

You asked what did you miss?

You missed the whole point of single desk selling. If the CWB issued no-cost export licences there would be no single desk. People would be free to go into our premium markets and compete indiscriminately with the CWB. Some people would no doubt see it to their own advantage to price slightly lower than the CWB.

Tom, tell me this. Would the Japanese food agency be willing to pay you more for wheat than they are now paying the CWB? Would Cofco, the Chinese single desk buyer be willing to pay you, Tom, more for wheat than they are now paying the CWB?

Tell me which buyer you think you could get more money from were you allowed to compete head to head with the CWB.

[charliep]

How would farmers answer these questions when they don't know sales prices and other components contracts to these customers? If you argue their are premiums in Cofco sales, what are they?

As the CWB goes to the pricing contracts, will the payment/price signal always be a spread to a base grade? Or will the CWB allow price signals in their contracts directly? Example - soft white wheat/winter wheat sales to domestic millers reflect the actual price paid.

What is wrong with allowing some pricing outside the pool? A example today is malt barley. An example today is malt barley. The only tool is a fixed priced contract (heavily discounted for risk) based off current PRO forecasts (already heavily discounted for risk). Why not allow maltsters to forward price with farmers directly in the spring?

[parsley]

You haven't addressed the issue of who LEGALLY is supposed to pay for the total cost of national licensing, Vader.

You are trying to tell Agri-villers that Parliament made the Government pay for everyone BUT the DA farmers costs.


The full truth is that Parliament made the Government pay for everyones licensing costs, INCLUDING DA farmers,

Aren't you being a bit deceptive?

Charliep, The really good thing about the organic business, is thankfully, the CWB doesn't market organic grain at all, so liason with organic buyers remains both enjoyable and profitable.

Parsley

[Vader]

Charlie,

I am not at all opposed to pricing outside of the pool. I believe that the pooling system does not send proper price signals to farmers. We should be devising a system whereby the end user (including the maltsters and brewers) can send price signals directly to the farmer so that he can decide if this or that crop makes economic sense.

But single desk selling is still of utmost importance. This prevents farmers from competing against farmers and driving down prices. Single desk selling is the only way I can see where farmers can exercise market power. Take away single desk selling and ultimately the multinational grain companies will merge to the point where they have the only monopoly in agriculture. Then you will see how bad monopolies can be.

[Vader]

Parsley,

In case I hadn't said it before, you are absolutely right. The grovernment is legally responsible for licence costs outside of the designated area. However it has been decided that for the few pennies that it would be worth to farmes it is simply not worth going after. The CWB needs to use its political capital wisely. There are large issues of national and international importance in front of all of us right now.

Your single minded determination to go after an issue such as this is evidence that your only goal is to submarine the CWB. There is no constructive thought here but simply an attempt to send a lethal shot that might sink the good ship CWB.

For anyone not familiar with the licenceing issue the CWB has one person whose mandate is to administer licences. The portion of their time which can be allocated to non-designated area activity would amount to about $1200 per year.

Farmers such as parsley who are making a big issue out of this will ultimately cost farmers tens of thousands of dollars in legal costs. This simply becomes an issue of who has the right to manage the CWB. Is it the duly elected directors of the CWB or a group of renegades. These renegades should be made to pay all of the legal costs when the dust settles so that they get the message that they cannot continue with a political agenda at the expense of others.

[parsley]

Vader,

Name-calling suits you, it seems, when you want to avoid addressing the issue and you have again sidestepped the issue, Vader.

Let's put it out there again:

The government is legally responsible for licence costs INside of the designated area, as well as outside the DA. You claim $1200.00 for outside DA costs. BUT, how much are the costs inside the DA that the Government is responsible for paying? It will account for all the remining licensing costs.

Isn't the Board of Directors and policy makers within the CWB who ignore the Act that governs them that are actually the renegades? You seem determined to nail farmers at every opportunity. You must hate your fellow farmers.

By the way Vader, ALL, I said ALL licensing costs are the Federal Government's responsibility, including lawsuits on licensing issues. When the Feds get the litigation bills for licensing, they will not be happy.

The Feds are responsible for eating the costs, not Prairie farmers as you again claim. Prairie farmers are so accustomed to being saddled with EVERYBODY'S costs by the good old Wheat Board, it's hard to get used to the idea of what the CWB ACT allows. Read it, Vader. And then reply.

Parsley

[Vader]

Parsley, perhaps you are right about licencing costs inside the DA. I am not a lawyer and I cannot make such a determination. For those such as yourself who must focus on these type of issues I would say again that the real fight is over who should govern the CWB. When the courts decide and IF they decide that you were wrong then I would say again those farmers who launched the court action should pay for their mistake.