Life After CWB

[parsley]

That very thing is happening....the next generation potential farmer-child gets that very message over and over Chas. If you don't like it, leave. Well, they don't like IT. IT is the money. IT is the lack of having control . IT is peer groups that say if you don't like the status quo, leave. IT is trying to make them accept the false premise that everyone's economic contributions are equal. Next generation farmers are leaving in droves. They've trained in other areas where they can get jobs, and the smartest have done just what you are advocating. Leave . Other countries snap them up and are grateful to get Canada's bightest, educated farm children with a good work ethic. And you say leave. Now that's planning.

[TOM4CWB]

I would like to throw another log on the fire.

In Ontario the Wheat Board there was told originally that they needed over 2/3 majority in favor of the monopoly for it to continue. I beleive this is only fair.

Why?

Because we now have the situation where 40% of the farmers vote in CWB elections and 60% are either too mad to vote or could care less. This means that the 60% is not worried about the monopoly continuing!

Add the 52% of the 40% that voted for marketing choice, and presto we have an overwhelming 81% of western Canadians that do not support a manditory monopoly.

This is why the Alliance Party could run anti CWB platforms without worry that it would hinder their chances of being elected!

The fact is, a voluntary CWB is what the average western Canadian farmer considers most reasonable.

[chas]

Your reading lots into to what I say Parsley. Check this website www.fna.ca
I have two sons farming with me that done have your attitude and several neighbors who like the CWB. Don't verbally distroy yourself. I think you will complain about anything, look in the mirror for the solution.

[parsley]

Chas, you say that you want to put a leash on big corporations, they make lots of money and they are not sharing the money. In the feed industry, the CWB allows "corporate America" to bypass pooling. Tom Halpenny won't address that. Are you and your neighbor Board supporters in favor of not pooling the wheat and barley profits from the feed industry? You seem to want farmers to pool through the CWB but corporations to not pool through the CWB. Then you criticsize corporations for not pooling. Then you want more boards patterned after the CWB to do more of the same. Please be clear. Do you think the CWB should continue allowing the feed mills to buy millions of bushels of wheat and barley directly from farmers, not pooling, and then issue no-cost export licenses to the mills. Alternately, do you think that the CWB should continue to tell "pasta" farmers that the potential pasta plant can buy their durum on the farm, but after they have manufactured the pasta, the CWB should continue to deny all export licenses unless they go through the pooling? I'm interested in what your mirror reflects.
Parsley

[charliep]

I should learn to leave this issue alone but I have to crawl back into the debate.

Leaving the issue of fairness alone (I'm an economist with two hands - on the one hand and then on the other hand so I always have trouble with this concept).

I'm going to stick my neck and suggest feed mill trade is an example of something that works in the current evironment and a good thing.

Reasons for this:

1) These feed mills are buying more grain in the local cash markets creating more competition/sales opportunties and likely improving price.

2) Feed mills are able to operate at higher capacity bringing down their cost of the mill. The mill also is able to employ more people in the community with all benefits of having a mill in Canada versus across the border.

3) Margins may be better on this feed than that processed for the domestic market and contribute to better profits for the mill - I don't know. Is this bad? Your reply is that you would like access to US feed mills to make sure you have access to competitive markets so I acknowledge and say no more.

4) This program has been in place for a while and no one (to my knowledge) across the border has challenged it. This is likely because Canada is providing a valuable service in terms of providing complete feeds in areas that don't have access to these products otherwise in their own local market.

I realize that you fight is over direct to the US market outside the CWB buyback program and you are highlighting the fact that some groups have in your eyes priviledged access that no else enjoys. My comment on the other side is that two wrongs don't necessarily make a right. In some sense, thus program is a working model that may suggest other alternatives for dealing with US sales.

Thoughts?

[parsley]

CharlieP...I think Chas is more capable of answering my question from the farmer's perspective. Chas, because he has a real vested interest here, has an opportunity to indicate if he as a farmer, approves of the following double standard that's clearly in place....

Tthe CWB secretly issues export licenses to multi-nationals, and the CWB openly denies licenses to the producer trying to value-add.

This was my question to Chas:
Do you think the CWB should continue allowing the feed mills to buy millions of bushels of wheat and barley directly from farmers, not pooling, and then issue no-cost export licenses to the mills. Alternately, do you think that the CWB should continue to tell "pasta" farmers that the potential pasta plant can buy their durum on the farm, but after they have manufactured the pasta, the CWB should continue to deny all export licenses unless they go through the pooling?

We're dealing with a principle here CharlieP, and you should be able to recognize that, but I'll respond to your comments after Chas makes his response. I would appreciate Chas, if you will share your thoughts with us.
Parsley

[TOM4CWB]

Charlie, I like your logic on no cost licenses for feedmills, now if you would extend it to grain farmers we would have our problem solved!

It works like this!

I will sell my wheat outside the CWB, making sure it will not have a Canadian Grain Act Grade name when it is sold. This will decrease the amount of wheat the needs to be marketed through the CWB.

Now with a reduced supply, the CWB can concentrate on selling into the higher value markets that it says it can extract a premium from.

Presto, we have freedom of marketing. The CWB should be happy, its markets are maintained and saved for the farmers who want to sell through the CWB!

This is no different than your logic on feedmillls, is it?

[chas]

Parsley and Tom4cwb
Charlie thanks for the support your point is good but I think this answer is likely closer to being right. If a prepared feed such as barley or wheat, which under the trade rules established by the two Governments(USA & Canada} stipulates what maxium percentage of grain can be in the mix, would indicate to me that it is so it can be easily identified by export officials as being a processed feed that is designated to an end user in the USA. Where a whole grain shipment could end up in their export system which is heavily subsidized. Therefore American taxpayers would be sudsidizing grain that was not grown in the USA. It has and will happen again if the feed processing is not enforced. Charlie explained why there is no buyback for economic and competative reasons for feed mills to export more grain. So you see parsley the rules are to protect farmers in each country its not somethink the CWB is punishing us with, its caused by the fact that we are two different countries. AS far as the pasta plant is concerned maybe the plant could be rebated for the freight portion of CWB price, being the freight portion would end up in the pool account anyway when its not used to pay the railroad. The plant should not pay anymore than it has to and farmers should not receive less, fair I think. This is my first shot at the pasta problem excuse me if the solution is so simple. Tom I hope this helps clarify your question also.I think as farmers we whine, complain, be negative about our problems, ask unanswerable questions and blame others for are problems when he should be spending are time developing positive solutions that would benfit us all in a more stable and sustainable farming buisness. Parsley the only way we are going to beable to truck grain south is to declar war on the USA and then surrender to them before they can fire a shot. Chas

[parsley]

CharlieP...I said that I would get back to you. Let's pretend!

Farmers got together and built and own a durum pasta plant. (A greedy bunch that wanted to pay their taxes, and buy fertilizer) Let's pretend that the CWB were forced by the courts to issues no-cost export licenses to those pasta-durum farmers .I've used your very arguments....quoted with PASTA substituted...... to defend my case against the farmers down the road that say export licenses should never have been be issued to those greedy farmers:
Remember, These are your arguments CharlieP,

"I'm going to stick my neck and suggest PASTA mill trade is an example of
something that works in the current evironment and a good thing.

Reasons for this:

1) These PASTA mills are buying more durum in the local cash markets creatin more competition/sales opportunties and likely improving price.

2) The PASTA mill also is able to employ more people in the community with all benefits of having a mill in Canada versus across the border.

3) Margins for PASTA-PLANT FARMER OWNERS may be better on this PASTA than the raw DURUM offerred in the export market and contribute to better profits for the province- I don't know. Is this bad?"


4)PASTA plants that export have never been in place in the Designated Area(to my knowledge)..........


and everyone across the border quit their noisy cheering. This is likely because Canada is not "unloading" durum- a valuable premium commodity, There is finally some more competition now that Western Canada has pasta plants.

Surely you will recognize CharlieP,( if logic is the father of premise), that the following premises should be interchangeable:

If
the CWB grants Export licenses for large feed mills
the CWB must grant export licenses for farmer pasta mills.
Parsley

PS
Chas, I studied the web page as you asked. I'll get back to you. And thanks for replying.

[parsley]

Chas, I made good my promise.
Let's examine what you say Chas and compare it to what the CWB has done. You tell me WHY the CWB is doing what it is doing and you make the point that wheat and barley going to the USA must be identifiable so that the American taxpayer isn't supporting Canadian grain...

Look at the Creston-Wyndell area of British Columbia. While it was still part of the designated Area, the farmers in that area asked for no-cost export licenses from the CWB. And got them. The farmers in that area, for years, routinely applied for export licenses and the CWB granted them just like they do for the folks in Ontario and Quebec. A few years ago, when the CWB legislation was opened up and changes made to it, that area was quietly taken out of the Designated Area. But when they were still in the DA, farmers there got no-cost export licenses granted by the CWB . Interesting isn't it Chas?

How did/does the USA identify grain that comes from Canadian farmers? Well, who gets export licenses? Canadian Creston-Wyndale grain was certainly in the US system , and not identifiable, but the CWB said "give them export licenses". What about Alberta barley growers, not identifiable, who applied for an export license? Denied. Ontario grain is not identifiable, is sold and mixed in the US system. The CWB said "give them export licenses". Quebec grain is not identifiable, sold and mixed in the US system. The CWB said "give them export licenses". One grain that is clearly identifiable is seed producers and they export to the US ....and The CWB said "give them export licenses"! Another grain that has a documented audit trail is organic grain, but the CWB said "deny them licenses". Grant, deny, grant, deny.

Let's imagine the CWB were in charge of voting instead of issuing licenses ... how would you ever figure out what the criteria for voting would be? Sometimes grain-for-food exported is granted a license and other times denied.
Some identified grain is granted an export license, other identified grain is denied. Imagine the CWB were in charge of voting instead of issuing licenses ... how would you ever figure out what the criteria for voting would be?
You say the rules are there to protect farmers, Chas, but to protect WHICH farmers Chas? How many other groups have been issued no-cost export licenses in the backrooms of the CWB that the Chas's of the Designated Area don't even know exist! To be a birdie on the wall to hear what the terms involved in the negotiations were!

You gave me a WHY the CWB does as it does, Chas, but you didn't really give me an idea where you stand on the big issues. What are the principles you stand for?

If you support the concept of pooling, (one of the pillars of the CWB), you should be able to easily agree, and indeed promote at every opportunity, that the grain that the feed mills buy, should be bought through the CWB,and the profits pooled with all farmers. Only under that condition (for a supporter of the pooling system), would export license be issued for feed. I didn't feel you fully answered that in my question #1. .......... Should CWB allow corporations to buy directly from farmers, NOT POOL and then get no-cost export licenses ? ....but I am concluding from you, that you are generally quite pleased that the feed Muli-nationals are not pooling , and that pooling only matters to you on certain days. Or months. Or on full moons Or with certain groups.

I also am concluding from you , that the CWB should continue to deny all export licenses to every farmer unless they go through pooling . Including the registered seed grower. And Ontario growers. (I should tell you though that those farmers will get pretty mad if they get their no-cost export licenses yanked)

I am concluding from you, that you approve of the CWB making deals behind closed doors, because this is how you put a leash on Corporate America and teach them a lesson they'll never expect or regret.

I am concluding from you, that if elected farmers on the Board are kept in the dark about any secret dealmaking, as was the case with the Export Manufactured Feed Agreement, that it's ok with you. Just as some farmers should definitely be denied export licenses, some elected farmer Board Members should be denied information.

And I also conclude, from what you have provided, that you would like to see all other commodity marketing modelled after the CWB.

If my conclusions need correcting, please do so clearly Chas . I've had a few problems understanding Tom Halpenny and CharlieP and I seem to have to repeat questions over and over. CharlieP shows a lot of patience, and finally answered one question so I could understand, but Tom Halpenny must have quit his job.

I did look at the website you suggested , and I think voluntary purchase-pooling is a great idea Chas. If we agree , does that mean I'm getting some common sense?

Your penpal, Parsley

[TOM4CWB]

Chas,

I find it interesting that you blindly beleive that the CWB is actually trying to help you market your grain.

My experience is that if I want to I can profit from the pooling account, and steal money directly from your final payment.

But, some of us do care about right and wrong. So I refuse to allow the CWB to buy me off.

Now I am in a real jam.

I must deal with a corrupt CWB, against my principals, and cannot market my own grain and leave your wallet alone.

I would only like the opportunity to be left alone, and if the CWB insists on cross transfering money through its wacky weird idea of social engineering, fine. But at least leave me alone, I do not appreciate being included in those who want to covet and steal from their neighbour!

Can you please give me this much?

[chas]

Parsley & Tom4CW
Parsley I'am sure there is a good explanation for the no cost licenses, an maybe it was supplying a niche market that USA had difficulty filling in an in time delivery and aggreements were allow. Parsley put the question to your elected farmer board member to get a satisfactory answer to those questions that you have. The CWB is operating with far to much government interfence but I'am sure our elected members will be more involved from now on in looking after are interest. Afterall our elected members are just getting their feet wet on the policies but yes you deserve an answer. A dual market or a completely open market will leave us to the vultures and no place to voice an opinion. The CWB has not been perfect but I had a cheque bounce dealing with open market companies. Think about what you could do if a grain company in another country stiffed you for your grain, there would likely be no recourse for you, in Canada the Canadian Grain Commission when to bat for me and I was paid within a week. I think the way the CWB is being realined it's the best course to take to gain some strenght in the market place. Governments won't let go because of food security and poltics will haunt us forever. Lets forgive the past as we can't prove anything now and try a poistive approach to a marketing board that handles all grain and oilseeds in Canada that are for domestic and export sales and done with alot more farmer control.
Tom4CWB
It sounds like you could lay crimial charges but hearsy and coffee shop rumors are not allowed into evidence. Accountablity is what we want on all issues but pricing, unless the other grain companies tell us what prices they are receiving at any given time.. I trust my elected member to the CWB to gain this information in confidence to look after my rights. The answer to a sable sustainable farm is a farmer contolled marketing board. Who can you trust. Trucking South is not going to happen unless American farmers also see that a marketing board is the only way producers can gain power over their industry. Color me CWB. You boys are starting to show signs of being poistive. but just a very small glimmer. Chas

[parsley]

Chas, I've got the good explanation you were asking about...... A whole load of CWB supporters...all farmers.... drove into Winnipeg stuffed in the box of a big grain truck , all shouting and demanding that the CWB staff "give those 'Corporate America' feed mills free export licenses".That's how they got them in the first place, maybe.

And by the way Chas, lots of farmers asked the CWB Directors what was going on about the EMFA, but mostly they 're like a bunch of mushrooms. None of them had even heard about the EMFA so they sure as heck can't explain. Maybe staff did though, and you will have a lot of pull with Tom Halpenny since you both approve of how the CWB shines up to the big mills. Get him to answer some of the questions about the CWB...after all, you've been stressing accountability several times, Chas.

Chas you really fit the profile of a typical CWB supporter to a T! You write a lot like halpenny and you have the same kind of reasoning as halpenny...... Tell you what, you ask him, on line, why the CWB isn't marketing all those millions of bushels of wheat and barley that the feed mills buy from the farmer. How come the CWB just refuses to pool all that grain? Put his feet to the fire. If you talk him into replying, and I get the big questions answered, I'll see if Agri-ville will forward you an anonymous surprise package because you've been a darn faithful penpal. Am I on, Chas?
Parsley
PS rosco, and Brigette and Tom4CWB, looks like we missed that trip to Winnipeg.

[chas]

Parsley talking to you is getting to be a habit.
I know your main concern is to beable to move your grain across the border South without a buyback from the CWB. If the board gave everybody a no cost license to move grain across the border I'll bet your advantaged market would dissappear in a hurry because SWP, cargil or Agricore or someone else would fill the market cheaper that I or you would want to do it for. Or more in likely some American farmer would shoot you for filling his market. I can over look the value added feedmill license but like you I can't ignore no cost license to other farms in Canada when the rest of us have to tow the mark with buyback. I must confess that I farm in the Camrose area of north central Alberta for me to cash in on markets South of the border are provided by trucking cost, so out of sight out of mind in this area. But don"t bogg yourself down with this question to much because I think you have hit a soft spot with the wheat board directors and they won't be embrassed again with their lack of knowledge on what is happening. Parsley give me a positive solution on how we should be marketing are grain. I have laid out my theory in Rural Issues in a letter I wrote to ValueChainFX its a lofty theory but in my mind it is the only way to create a sable and sustainable industry. Chas

[parsley]

Chas, don't confuse what I say for what you promote. I will make my position clear once again. And compare it to your world, colored CWB.

1. Parsley says....I want export licenses issued to farmers because I think farmers are valuable. Chas you are so worried about what your neighbor might get, you'd sooner see him go hungry than make a good sale and pay his banker. You refuse to give farmers licenses. (What about issuing export licenses to farmers within provinces, Chas? Is that horrifying, too? )

2. Parsley wants export licenses issued to corporations because I think corporations are valuable. Chas thinks they are greedy and need a leash. So Chas gives them free export licenses!

3. Chas believes in pooling , but Chas likes the feed mills to buy grain directly from the neighbor but NOT POOL that grain!

Chas, the Canadian Wheat Board has trained you well. You'd make a good director. And you'd get on staff for sure.

I'll read your theory later, but first I had to review the principles you stand for in this thread. You'll probably apply them to your next recommendations in Rural Issues.

Parsley