CANADIAN WHEAT AND BARLEY - DUAL MARKETING - UPDATE

[malleefarmer]

read below post

[TOM4CWB]

News release
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT FOLLOWING A MEETING WITH FARMERS ON MARKETING CHOICE FOR WHEAT AND BARLEY

SASKATOON, Saskatchewan, July 27, 2006 - The Honourable Chuck Strahl, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board, today issued the following statement after participating in a meeting with western Canadian grain producers, chaired by David L. Anderson, Parliamentary Secretary for the Canadian Wheat Board, regarding marketing choice for wheat and barley:

"Canada's new government campaigned on the idea that western Canadian wheat and barley producers should have a choice about whether to market their products through the Canadian Wheat Board (CWB). Today's meeting provided an occasion to outline and discuss the options for a successful approach, one that provides greater freedom of choice for farmers, delivers greater returns, and preserves a strong Wheat Board.

"I am pleased to have been able to meet with a cross-section of western Canadian farmers and stakeholder organizations, as well as others who support marketing choice. By working with supporters of dual marketing, Canada's new government will develop a road map for the transition to a new marketing environment while maintaining a strong and profitable Wheat Board that benefits western Canada's farm families. This will allow Canadian farmers to clearly choose marketing options for wheat and barley in which the Canadian Wheat Board will thrive and serve the needs of western Canadian grain producers.

"This was a preliminary meeting that provided information to be used in future discussions with western Canadian grain producers. This included views on possible corporate structures to allow the CWB to operate effectively in an environment of marketing choice; additional financial or marketing instruments for farmers or the Board; and the best way to implement marketing choice so farmers can sell directly to any buyer, including the CWB.

"At the end of the day, the contributions of farmers and other stakeholders will help the government achieve its overarching goal of maximizing returns for Canada's farm families. We will take and review the presentations, advice and comments heard here today so that we can determine how best to proceed. We will continue to move towards our objective in a deliberate and transparent way."

-30-

For more information, media can contact:

Media Relations
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
(613) 759-7972
1-866-345-7972

Jeff Howard
Press Secretary
Minister Strahl's office
613-759-1059

[agstar77]

The key words CWB will be able to thrive . Under the dual market scenario the CWB would die a slow death at the hands of the grain companies and railways. No one has come out with a realistic plan for the CWB after a dual market is allowed, so dream on. Most of the groups that support the dual market also supported the demise of the crow. We know how that turned out.

[wd9]

Given the non-existent response from CWB die hards, it would seem the government is correct. This is what prairie farmers want. It has been a couple weeks now, and well, nothing.

[charliep]

Agstar

Have you read the material posted on the Alberta Agriculture website?

Why won't the CWB survive in an open market? They would have to change operationally but they have to any way.

I note there have been many benefits from a change in crow including expanded value added and a shift to higher valued crops in a time period where world wheat and barley trade has been flat/there is more competition from new exporters.

I don't think anyone has the answer. What are your suggestions for a changing world (and domestic) wheat and barley market?

[stubblejumper]

charliep are you saying the end of the crow was a good thing

[charliep]

Yes. Why should government subsidize the export of raw product at the expense of value added? Would also have held western Canada back from making the changes to be competitive in world markets.

[GALAXIE500]

Good morning gentelmen! This is a response to Charlie Pearson saying the demise of the crow benefit was a good thing. First of all it wasn't! If we would have had support for our farm sector like our neighbors to the south of us and across the pond , then yes it would have been good. The day that subsidy was taken away farmers lost 50 cents a bushel or more to their bottom line, but when you live in a country that has sold its soul to the Americans and the WTO what else would you expect. This "sink or swim" attitude that this country has towards its farmers is good , if you have your bills all paid and some money in the bank. Not everybody is that lucky nowadays.