The Real CWB Balance Sheet

[parsley]

chaffmeister:

I need to comment on what you have stated several times on agri-ville:


"I’ve often said I would be a big CWB supporter if the CWB simply proved its value".

I cannot agree.

Even if the CWB cranked out wads of cash stacked in old butter-churns, I could not support their methodology.

Putting someone in jail for trying to sell what they grow is just plain wrong. Even if the CWB pays well.

This is ultimately about principle.

There will be those who will claim that farmers made more money when purebred breeders had a monopoly on selling bulls.

But, the monopoly breeding program in Ssaktchewan was run into the ground by the breeders themselves, because of dwarfism. The monopoly made the cattlebreeders more money, BUT did not provide a freedom of choice to the commercial farmer, who ended up having to buy breeding stock that should have been butchered.

CHOICE could have prevented the inevitable harm that resulted in the commercial herds.

Choice provides a mistake valve, chaff. If somebody is not doing a good job, there is an alternative. Choice is not negotiable.

Just getting more money doesn't represent success. Money is one part of success, but not success.

Apply what you say to the principle and see if it works. Over the years, governments have had to look at what they do to see if it mirrors Canadian principles.

In the 1950's every one over 21 could go to the beer parlour,"except Indians".

The 1920's Election's Act stated women weren't persons and couldn't vote.

The big picture is not about the money, chaff. Even if the CWB attained $40.00 per bushel, it is irrelevant.

The big picture is about farmers being able to sell what they grow

Parsley

[chaffmeister]

Sawfly - please reread my post clearly. It said a total of $60 million - that's from $20 per tonne on 3 million tonnes.

That's $20 per tonne - not $60.

Historical prices have shown that there are incentives - sometimes hugh incentives to sell AT HARVEST for SPRING DELIVERY. Between the carry in the futures and the better basis for spring delivery, I've seen as much as $1.00 per bushel "incentive".

Farmers sell about half their canola before Christmas. This selling pressure pushes basis levels to the likes of $40 or $50 under. If the CWB priced differently to farmers and allowed you to respond to market signals on wheat - that is, sell and deliver more on the basis of price - then you'd sell less canola. Less canola sold at harvest means tighter basis - on the whole crop. To suggest $20 per tonne like I did could be light. 3 million tonnes could be light as well if all non-CWB crops were included.

So don't simply look at fall prices compared to spring prices (which it seems you did). Look at marketing according to market signals.

Perhaps the biggest problem at the farm level is poor capitalization, which in turn forces marketing actions that most would not make unforced. If the CWB marketed according to "the market" - or allowed farmers to respond to market signals (price), then there wouldn't be the selling pressure we see on non-CWB grains.

By the way - glad to see you acknowledge that the CWB forces canola growers to sell in the fall. That's exactly what I'm talking about.

[TOM4CWB]

Chaff;

With good advance planning, normally a year in advance; commodity canola has been sold at $12/t under the Nov. futures in AB for years.

If I want to deliver my Canola with out forward booking... THEN I pay the higher price to access the system.

THis is significantly different than the CWB... which will not allow the market to draw in our grain in advance; Non-board grains "pull" the supply in...to fill economic demand... .

[chaffmeister]

Ah Parsley, you've seen right through me!!

I don't think I ever have said, "If the CWB makes more money for you, I'd support it". I've always referred to "value".

Value, like success, is measured many ways. And like you say, money isn't the only measure of success or value.

If the cattle breeders truly provided value - to the industry, not just their own constituents - that's what I'm talking about.

Value. To the whole industry and western economy. Not just money, but opportunity, growth, vitality, community, prosperity (for all).

I don't believe Kenny Ritter for a minute when he says the CWB cannot operate in an open market. (What he's really saying is that the single desk can't operate in an open market.) If operated differently, in an open market, I beleive the CWB could provide value simply by giving farmers one more choice - another way to look at choice is to see it for what it really is - competition.

So yes - I would support the CWB whole-heartedly if it provided value. But value, true value, would be next to impossible with a single desk. I could be convinced otherwise but without some sort of saftey valve (competition) I really have my doubts.

Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

One size don't fit all.