Farm Support: Liberals 1 - Conservatives 0

[Incognito]

http://www.saskatoonhomepage.ca/news_view_story_2147496306.php?story_id=2147495466 &cat_id=2147483654

Protesting farmers in Ontario or struggling grain producers on the prairies should not be expecting any additional ad-hoc assistance from the federal government.

Following a meeting with his provincial counterparts Monday in Harrison Hot Springs, B.C., federal agriculture minister Chuck Strahl said ''he has no authority nor plans to have another ad-hoc program. We accelerated the GOPP (grains and oilseeds program) payment of 755 million dollars to get it out to producers as quickly as possible."

As for CAIS (Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization), it does not sound like the agriculture ministers want to scrap the program. In fact, the word used in the official communique was ''transform'' CAIS. Strahl said "the provinces were very keen that we don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. Work needs to be done to make the program more bankable and predictable."
________________________________________

The Liberals announced the 755 million dollar program and the Conervatives kept it.

Your admiration for the Ag Minister, Tom should start to wane. He sounds like he is still in Opposition.

When does the effect of having all those farmers/farm background in Parliament pay off?

It reminds me of Ritter and Flaman....Why is it elected officials forget where they came from as soon as they get their first cheque?

[agstar77]

Does it come as any surprise? Look at all the whining about daycare cuts. Farmers will have to take drastic action if there is no breakthrough in trade talks. It means production cuts and a drastic reduction in exports, especially in low value crops. We can't just turn all our grain into pasta and bread and export it. There will have tobe some land diversification into alternate uses. Government isn't going to bail us out to export grain below the cost of production.

[Incognito]

If you think your farm can make it until the trade talks are completed Agstar, you are in a sparce crowd.

[agstar77]

I'll be pushing up daisies by the time trade talks succeed, the it won't matter!!

[dalek]

Strahl: "Nothing for Farmers"
"I'm sure that if the feds trot out some cash, the provinces won't mind - but that's not in the cards," Strahl said.
The Woodstock Sentinel-Review
By Hugo Rodrigues - AGRICULTURE REPORTER
Tuesday March 21, 2006

The federal agriculture minister admitted Monday that despite his party's campaign promise, Canada's main agricultural support program won't be cancelled.

Speaking to reporters via teleconference at the conclusion of a federal-provincial agriculture ministers' meeting held in Harrison Hot Springs, B.C., Minister of Agriculture and Agri-food Chuck Strahl said the Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization (CAIS) program won't be scrapped.

"CAIS will continue into the 2006 crop year," Strahl said in his opening comments. Ministers did discuss a series of changes to the program, but Strahl later confirmed in questioning the program will continue.

"The message I'm getting from the provinces is they are very reluctant to replace CAIS," Strahl said. "So the wording we agreed to was to transform CAIS… the provinces were quite adamant and they made the strong case for CAIS."

It's a deviation from the Conservative Party of Canada's promise, which clearly said the infamous program would be replaced. The pledge, made by Stephen Harper during a campaign stop in southwestern Ontario, was a key part of the Conservative platform.

Some farmers have long criticized the program's inability to respond quickly to declining incomes and also note the program does not respond well to trade injury. Record low commodity prices, particularly amongst grains and oilseeds, have not been adequately addressed within the existing program.

The program has also faced significant delays in processing applications - particularly in this province - with some farmers still receiving correspondence and payments from their 2004 applications.

"I'm of an open mind in terms of what we end up with, but the provinces are very keen that we not throw the baby out with the bathwater," Strahl said. "It will be part of some very quick discussions of transformation we will have over the summer months."

Strahl's counterpart in Alberta, Doug Horner, repeated his comments, saying the provinces were unanimous in their support for the program.

The agricultural industry needs stability, Horner said, and the provinces see the potential in changing the existing CAIS program to address its failings.

Strahl rounded out his comments on the program by stressing that CAIS will remain in place for the 2006 crop year and urged those farmers who haven't yet joined the program to do so. For those who already participate, he urged them to file their application as they have done since the program started in 2003.

The Conservatives also promised during the campaign to increase federal spending on agriculture by $500 million a year, something Strahl said would start taking shape when the new government brings down a budget this spring.

For the time being however, he said there would be nothing else for farmers other than the $755 million Grains and Oilseeds Payment Program announced by the Liberal government.

"I'm sure that if the feds trot out some cash, the provinces won't mind - but that's not in the cards," Strahl said.



Anybody else vote Conservative in this last election that feels the need to call their MP?

[dalek]

Sounds like Ontario farmers are going to Ottawa the first week in April. Anybody want to join us?

[silverback]

Is there some law out there that says farmers need taxpayer money - or else! ?? I don't recall anyone ever saying that it is up to the gov't to keep me eating!

If all the provinces tell the new guy that CAIS is ok, what is he supposed to say?

How about if gov't just gets out of our way and helps out with getting new value added industries going? Sitting around waiting for a cheque is just a recipe for failure.

[parsley]

If you are asking for Government money to bail you out, then you can expect the Government to tell you exactly what to do and how to run your farm.

He who pays, says.

Is that what farmers on Agri-ville really want?

One more thing.....if you got $50.00/acre gift from the taxpayer, what do you suppose would happen to the price of fertilizer, spray and all the rest?

Do you actually think a 2006 cash blanket would cover your cash needs next year? Or would you be back asking for more cash?

Don't farmers have to rethink how they operate their farms?

The basic question as I see it is this:

Is the way you farm economically sustainable? (We all know it isn't).

So what can you do to make it sustainable?

More of the same isn't working.

Parsley

[lakenheath]

Parsley,

I agree 100%. It all comes back to sustainability. I am tired of the band-aid programs. They do not get to the core of the problem.

[TOM4CWB]

Incognito;

I am not at all surprised by, or disappointed by Minister Strahl's response.

Knowing that Agriculture is a shared constitutional issue, and comparing us to Argentina, Australia, and the FSU... how do we become comptitive with in a sustainable integrated way?

To get the $755mil up front....unlinked, with improvements coming is a great start.

I am off to Yorkton... will report back when I get back on Friday. Hope to know more.

I would say it is Conservatives 1... the Liberals are not in this game!

[sverchomin]

Props to all the guys seeing that an ad-hoc payment is not the solution. I think we all know that 2005 was extremely difficult year given the low crop prices (although Wheat and Canola have been showing some strength of late) and 2006 is not much more promising given increased costs to fertilizer, fuel, and labour. However, I am not to sure how an ad-hoc program is a long-term solution. What happens if chemical prices shoot sky high next year??? Should there be another payment?? Ideally a program that analyzes the grain and oilseed sectors economic status and supports it likewise would be preferred. CAIS has the right idea with the anlysis it's just a matter that it is not the best at being cash flow responsive. I think changes to the CAIS program is the right step, lets not ruin a good start.

That's my two cents and I'm sticking to it.

[Incognito]

Agreed on the band-aid solutions.

But if the government wants to be involved in grain marketing and they are - CWB, CGC, CIGI, Canada Ports, Pilotage fees, charge charge charge, yadda yadda yadda, either get out of the road or fix the income problem.

You cant have it both ways.

Vader: Why do you hate ADM so?

Have you ever sat down with Andreas?

Before you start talking price fixing you better make sure your house is in order with this oil-for-food inquiry in AUS.

[cropduster]

I agree on the oil for food thing Incog.Lets have a full CANADIAN enquiry.I don`t think Sasch Pool paid all those "trucking fees" on their own.If the CWB will `drop their drawers` 12 bucks a tonne on price, I can`t see that they aren`t "dirty" on the rest of the Iraq transactions also!!Am wondering who kept the notes when the Aussie`s where here to share info.Did the directors even know??

[Vader]

Incognito, I don't hate ADM or any other corporate entity whether it be Cargill, Monsanto, John Deere, Microsoft or Nike. I am truly amazed by their corporate success. I wonder what share of the retail food dollar those in the food industry command, and how that compares to the share of the retail food dollar that farmers receive.

I happen to think it is important for farmers to understand what their relationship is with "the big 5". They have their business objectives and farmers have theirs. Some of these objectives are shared and some are not.

It is certainly of no concern to firms in the food industry, whether individual farmers are profitable or whether they survive or not. Farmers and the large grain companies do business with each other and at a transactional level they are in direct competition. This relationship has some similarities to me and the implement dealership. When I negotiate the price of a piece of equipment the dealer wants the highest price and I want the lowest price.

Farmers and grain companies both have a vested interest in the success of the supply chain and its ability to serve the end user. Farmers might be well to question who is responsible for supplying food to consumers. Is it the farmer or is it the grain company, packing plant, miller, baker, processer, wholesaler, broker, retailer or anybody else in the supply chain. We all consider the consumer to be our ultimate customer. The farmer could consider everybody between him and the consumer to be "service providers". From that perspective it might be said that the people that we have hired to get our product processed and delivered to the consumer, our "service providers" as it were, are too expensive. In this current business model our service providers eat up all the profits and leave the farmer, the original producer of the food in a loss situation.

It has often been said that farmers are not efficient and that they must become more efficient to survive. I beleive that farmers are as efficient as they can be. Maybe those other operators in the supply chain, our "service providers" are inefficient in that they are costing the farmer too much in the performance of their duties in the overall supply chain. Perhaps they need to trim their costs and profit margins to maintain the retail price levels while allowing the farmers to receive their fair share of the retail food dollar.

In any event the grain companies are not the farmers partner the way the industry is structured today and they have no responsibility and I would argue no concern about the welfare of the farmer. I do business with them and they provide services that I have little choice but to employ. They are not my partner nor are they my friend. We simply do business. I do not hate them nor do I love them.

I would if I could cut them completely out of the supply chain that leads from my farm to the consumer were that possible. I have no vested interest in their survival other than when they perform an essential service. Now if I had shares in one of those companies or if I held a seat on their board of directors then I might talk differently but then I would not be speaking of behalf of farmers.

[Incognito]

Thanks for the explanation.

My astonishment when you whack them is that they are your customer and you wouldnt do that to the JFA - so why do it to ADM?

How many tonnes of grain would ADM buy from the CWB in any given year?

Do you know or is it a trade secret?