News Item

[parsley]

Oh vader, I should add, don't make up your facts.

Parsley

[TOM4CWB]

Vader;

Why must the CWB insist on marketing feed grains when just about everyone agrees the CWB does an awful job of doing?

RIght now the CWB is offering to export feed wheat at 75% of market value... astounding!

Why are no cost buyback licenses... just like the CWB does in B.C. and Ontario EAST;

Not issued on feeds grains in the "designated area"?

Why can't we look after our own marketing and avoid your little game?

[parsley]

Tom4CWB,

I want to differentiate the difference between a "no-cost' license and a 'no- buyback' license because they mean very different things. And it's important because it's about losing or keeping ownership.

1. A no cost license is when you sell the grain to the Board and buy it back at no cost because the Board has jiggled around the price so there is $0.00 difference between the price of grain you sold to the Board and the price of grain you bought back from the CWB.

The important point here is that you are still losing OWNERSHIP of your grain to the Board.

2. A no-buyback means that you keep ownership of your grain and sell it directly to the buyer in Ethiopia or Nigeria or Mexico, and bypass Board marketing and pooling. Ontario does no-buyback, all seedgrowers bypass the Board, all feedmills bypass the Board, and some individuals in the DA bypass the Board. No-buyback licensing.

What you want is no-buyback licenses, right?

Parsley

[TOM4CWB]

Parsley;

Right.

[parsley]

Vader,
I am eagerly awaiting your facts.

Parsley

[Vader]

parsley, I would suppose the reason there is no NAFTA challenge as you would have us believe on the basis of some prohibition is that there is no prohibition. There is a procedure whereby wheat and barley can be exported be the acquisition of a licence. You can have that licence as soon as you buy the wheat from the CWB. To do otherwise would interefere with CWB marketing.

[parsley]

Vader,

One of the fundamentals of Canadian law is equality; whereas NAFTA is based on preferential treatment.

The CWB differentiates between "board" grain and "non-board" grain, but hopes when the Americans scrutininize NAFTA , they won't notice notice the difference.

CWB policy does not allow "non-board" wheat/barley (grown in the designated area) for human consumption, to exist as a good of trade and commerce in Canada.

Only "board" grain is in the stream of trade and commerce in Canada, and it can also be exported. So no contravention of NAFTA.

Not so however, with farm milled flour and feed wheat and barley, which are both allowed in the stream of trade and commerce as "non-board" goods. But CWB policy does not allow these "non-board" goods to be exported.

I suggest to you that it is dangerous to look at the lack of a challenge by the Americans as proof that there is no NAFTA violation. Once they decide to take issue with how Board versus non-Board works, livestock people should be very nervous because it's their industry that is on the line.

Parsley