crop development

[wmoebis]

I read where the CWB is spending $300,000 dollars along with our money from UofS crop development and AAFC, to study fussarium in barley. This is all farmers/tax payers money. In my opinion this is fine, until I go to buy new seed that is tolerant from a seed company and have to pay through the nose for development. How many times do we pay for the same thing?

[clancey]

Incidentally, the CWB money is matching funds only. You raise an interesting point -- with so many commodities having check-offs to finance new research -- why are public entities such as the CWB also spending money? I guess the barley pool is looking awfully good.

[melvill]

Understand that I'm not defending the CWB, but much or likely all of this money comes from uncashed producer cheques. I always wonder why producer cheques remain uncashed. Are these cheques - final payments and deferred ones - that went to estates that executors don't know anything about? Or are they to people who deliberately don't cash them for tax reasons?

Scratching my head . . . . . . .

[wmoebis]

Well I don't know but you can bet that when you go to buy tolerant seed or chem to control a good part of the price will be for R$D.
Those uncashed cheques should stay in the pool accounts they came out of. If the grain hadn't been there it could have reflected on our price. This isn't free money we paid for it.
We already support CIGI for R$D. I'm not only concerned with the CWB share it is the whole idea.

[parsley]

melville and charlie,

I am interested in all the checkoff money that comes from farmers' pockets every year.

Do you have a consolidated up-to-date list of farmers check-off contributions to the varying recipient institutions, ie, Alberta Barley Comminssion, Western Grains, etc.. so that we can get some sense, online, and transparent, of the amount of moanye that is being deducted?

Thanks,

Parsley

[melvill]

Can't help you with that one right off the top of my head, parsley. I'll send out a few e-mails to see what I can find out. Give me a few days unless Charlie knows.

[charliep]

I haven't seen an absolute number either although would be small. I realize that small is still an issue in todays tight margins.

I might back off a little and highlight that money spent on research and development as well as market development is a key issue to competitiveness.

The issue started with a reference to fusarium research. I will let someone from Manitoba comment on the cost of this disease to a farmers bottom line. Money invested here is well spent if it moves western Canada to a solution for this disease.

What farmers want (or what I hear) is transparencey in this process. Will take the heat but what I will highlight is that farmer research funding gives you/your representitives a seat at the table when decisions are being made.

I am a part of the federal government sponsored cereal grain round table (barley working group) with all members of industry present. I can tell you that funding research is a major topic at these meetings.

[parsley]

charliep,

We can discuss the reasons/legitimacy of the check-off in another thread, as well as how much research development the different levels of government have financially downloaded on the producer.

In another parallel example, Saskatchewan landowners have ended up paying for 90%, in some school districts, of the school division costs, with absolutely no seat at the table. In fact, not welcome at the negotiation door. We don't want the same to happen with research, do we?

So charliep, I do not wish the request to be diverted.

I just want to address this one question here, online:

What is the total amount of check-off money that farmers contribute via the various commodities?

I think the information is very accessible.

Parsley

[parsley]

PS charliep,

With your particular interest and involvement, and the acute concern about funding, your data will indeed be up to date, and I thank you for it.

Parsley

[charliep]

Lee and I can do some research. I have checked the public Statistics Canada information and this information not broken out. Can check with others more in the know. I can go through annual reports from the organizations and do a summary (would take a while). They all have financial statements. In most cases, farmers can request their money back if they do not see value.

As someone who has likely been in government to long, I always look for the question behind the question. I will leave the question as to whether the CWB should invest the money in fusarium research alone. That is for the farmer participants to discuss. I will note the new way to research is private (including farmer) and public sector investment. The share everyone brings to the table and who controls the agenda again is open to discussion.

I only note that research and development is an important part of competitiveness.

[parsley]

Would very much appreciate the research, charliep.

It is much easier for farmers to discuss R and D funding with Government , knowing farmers are already putting their money where their mouth is. Let's just find out how much.

"Is farmer funding a result of government downloading?" can be a future question once farmers total what we are putting on the table now.

Thanks for the work Looking forward to the numbers.

Parsley