Liberal popularity and the CWB

[TOM4CWB]

Question;

If one specific policy of the present liberal gov. were to be changed...

What would that be?

Would a move to allow real marketing choices with a referbished competitive CWB; would this change liberal fortunes and popularity in western Canada?

[agstar77]

Yes,they would be worse.

[silverback]

I think that many in this part of Canada have actually stopped putting any belief in things that are promised by the Liberals. I don't recall anything that they once promised actually coming true. There are still many that would forget, but not me or my friends.

How Ontario looks past these past wrongs is still amazing to me.

[WoolyBear]

How does Ontario do it? Easy...... CO in the morning by all of those commuters kills braincells faster than anything. The Liberals know this.......

Far more commuters than there ever were farmers in Ontario.

[parsley]

Change?

Have Martin appoint Svend Robinson as Minister of the CWB.

And then send him and the entire CWB Marketing team to Iraq to sell wheat .

Parsley

[wd9]

Tom4CWB, to answer your question how about no more farm support programs.

Net result would be a decrease in risk for the producer as the cost of everything which includes government programs would return to actual cost. We've become too far seperated from the markets, true costs, and associated risk.

Trade policy still has the biggest net affect on producers bottom line. It would be nice if the liberals had a trade policy other than supply management.

The CWB is simply a smokescreen to keep many groups busy and blind to the real issues that affect our bottom line.

[TOM4CWB]

WD9;

Is it not obvious that supply managed agriculture is accrued a huge benefit in cheap Canadian feed grain prices because of the CWB Monopoly?

Cattle and Hogs; are they any different?

Yet the western Canadian provinces are largely locked out of increased production because of supply management quotas and production limits out west.

Is there any wonder why the CWB management just gave the CFA $22,000.00 the majority of which was not even approved of by the CWB Board of Directors?

And the CWB has just instituted a new political policy to donate/contibute to what ever or who ever they please in the political world!

Out of my personal pocket... without my permission.

What happened to freedom of association and respecting my common-law property rights?

[wd9]

Imports of cheap corn and barley also greatly affect the feed price here in Canada - much more than the CWB. At 50 to 75 bucks (minimum) per acre in lost revenue, trade policy still has to top my list.

The topic and your first question seem to be different topics. Me thinks I'm thinking in the wrong direction you be asking. What exactly were you wanting to ask?

[Braveheart]

Tom, you have really asked 2 questions. Here's my answers.

First, the policy (if it can be called that) I'd like to see change immediately, is a Cdn $ back to the 80 cent U.S. level. This should help make us more competitive on exports and give some rise in commodity prices. I do agree with wd9's view of trade policy reform as vital to our ag industry, but currency revaluation would help our trade surplus immediately, while trade negotiations go on indefinitely.

Secondly, would a "referbished" CWB help Liberal fortunes in western Canada? Not likely. There are so few farmers left, their voting impact isn't on anyone's radar screen.

[TOM4CWB]

WD9;

The continuing abuse of western Canadian farmers must be felt and noticed by many in our society.

Yes harvest pressure south of the 49th does from time to time lower our feed prices... imports freely moving into Canada will obviously do this.

But why can't I take my barley or wheat south without giving the premium back to the CWB pool/contingency fund... if I find an arbitrage in the US or international market place?

The worst of both worlds... cheap imports can lower prices;

Yet we cannot get to higher international prices as the CWB pool system prevents it.

So the Liberals have blessed Ontario/Quebec (as well all CDN AG producers) livestock/supply managed Agriculture; with a lower cost feed grain scheme.

ANd this comes out of "designated area" grain farmer's pockets... the result being the lowest possible grain prices in the world!

[wd9]

To illustrate how little Canada has to offer, here are the EU and US proposals on market access:

The EU proposal that is getting the greatest attention is that tariffs between 0% and 20% be cut by an average of 30%; tariffs between 20% and 50% be cut by an average of 40%; tariffs between 50% and 60% be cut by an average of 50%; and tariffs over 60% be cut by an average of 60%. Also included in the proposal is a cap on tariffs at 100%, but the cap would not apply to sensitive products. The EU proposal includes a “pivot” to allow for flexibility in the tiered cuts, and the size of the pivot is linked to the number of sensitive products the EU says it would need. With a 10 percentage point pivot – more sensitive products within the tier could be cut by 10 percentage points less than the average cut, with an off setting cut of 10 percentage points above the average for another product in the tier. So in the first tier the minimum cut would be only 20%; the second tier 30%; the third 40% and the highest tier the minimum cut would be 50%. If they had a 10 percentage point pivot, the EU says it could limit the number of sensitive products to 200. With a 5 percentage point pivot, the EU says it would need 400 sensitive products.

The US proposal. Its proposal is for tariffs between 0% and 20% to be cut by an average of 60%; tariff between 20% and 40% to be cut by an average of 70%; tariffs between 40% and 60% to be cut by an average 80% and tariffs over 60% to be cut by an average of 90%. The U.S. also calls for a tariff cap to be set at 75% for all products, including sensitive products. The U.S. proposal includes the concept of “progressivity” which would cut higher tariffs within a tier by more than the lower tariffs within the tier.

And uh yah, Canada has the CWB guarantee. OK then. I wonder if grains and oilseeds will be a sensitive product?

Mexico did a great job of stabilizing their currency, something Canada could have done also, we just didn't. I think it is because the majority of the voting public in Canada see the rising dollar as a good thing - something to cheer on. The government must be doing a good job if the dollar is rising right?? Speaking of Leberal popularity.

I wish I could combine and not have any time to read Agriville......