Stay in 05-06 Advance Payment by Minister Strahl

[JD4ME]

OMG what an unbelievably ridiculous stance Tomrade, The interest that the supply managment is worth a month is bad but the free interest the advances give grain farmers is good??? Keeping grain prices high helps farmers in 3rd world nations that live on less than the interest you save ???Interest free advances are a subsidy admit it or at least admit youre only a free trader when it suits your skewed vision of the agricultural industry.
How many other businesses in Canada can sit on inventory when they haven't planned cash flow needs properly and expect the government to cut them a cheque interest free until the prices improve. I'm sure the major oil companies would love a piece of this action. I can hear the aurgument now "But it's good for all the little 3rd world oil producers if we can sit back until the market gets to 100 a barrel"

[TOM4CWB]

JD4ME;

The "single desk" failed to market part this years crop, the governement is helping growers by to charging penalties for the CWB's failure... and you suggest this is unreasonable?

Very interesting.

By the way I refuse to take a fall advance in any of our grain production through the ferderal gov program... but use the spring advance.

We do get advances from the trade on some IP production; outside the gov's. program.

I do appreciate the market influence of cash flow management that advances have in leveling prices... which makes it easier to supply our customers year around. Generally Supply managed produce is a more constant output that does't have a pressure harvest period like grain in the fall here... and doesn't need the same leveling for inventory.

Grain growers contribute massive gov. tax revenue from inputs we purchase in the production of our crops. Monopolies have been created and allowed by gov. which allow extraction of massive amounts of our revenue. THe competition laws in Canada are a bad joke.

Therefore a small incentive (Produce advance programs) to encourage orderly marketing of Ag products is a reasonable expectation of our governement... IMHO.

So am I to understand... you think they (Ag produce advances) are an unfair subsidy (they need be removed)... and supply management is good and must be retained?

What about the CWB "single desk" pool that averages lows and highs in grain prices... shouldn't this program with the same effect be removed?

And what about the CWB forcing us to hold our grain interest/storage free... which is a subsidy to livestock consumers of feed grains (as the CWB is the only competition) shouldn't the CWB be forced to pay storage/interest if they require me to retain their grain off the market and store it?

How does any of this come even close to resembling the Canola market that pays me storage; gives me an advance outside gov. programs... or an increased revenue flow to compensate?

Did you notice there was no need to stay canola advances?

[TOM4CWB]

The "single desk" failed to market part this years crop, the governement is helping growers by [not] charging penalties for the CWB's failure... and you suggest this is unreasonable?

We need an edit spell check button Charlie!

[JD4ME]

You better read a little closer Tom , what I'm saying is twofold I believe agriculture is a business and subsidies distirt market signals hence distorting the industry. I stated earlier I do not enjoy competeing again supply manged commodities for the same land base especially when fromally valueless quota can be sold for millions to buy farm land. Quota values were created by government and the value should accrue back to government when turned over.
The board question may/will be soon moot will you give up the adavnce/subsidy fully then?

[TOM4CWB]

JD4ME;

When the governement has effective anti-monopoly and implemented competition laws that stop price fixing; racketeering, and supply / demand markets driven by dependable transparent pricing signals then:

I would expect competition and fair service from our railroads;

I would expect fair and honest arbitage of fertiliser pricing that makes our grain industry a level playing feild on input pricing;

Dito for ag chems;

Energy/fuel pricing that delivers competitive transpartent supply without monopoly type extractions on pricing;

USA and Canadian grain growers from coast to coast working under the same rules that are transparent and dependable...

In this case JD4ME I would welcome a market driven grain industry.

How close do you think we are to this reality? Could it ever happen in our lifetimes?

[wd9]

JD4ME, just a tidbit of info, the cash advance is a federal program under the programs marketing act. The cash advance is not owned by the CWB, just managed where the pool covers administration costs. That management could come under CCGA, or banks, or any other group if the board no longer existed.

It probably would no longer be 'free' however. In the real world, costs need to be recovered from those who use the service.

[JD4ME]

I'm quite aware of the background of the cash advance and yes in the in the "real" world interest is always paid by someone in this case it's a federal government program and it's a subsidy. As for Toms reply I'm absolutely bemused to talk like that abut every sector above us in the food chain that way while constantly campaigning for the end of the wheat board. I may have to print that out and frame it a classic example of hypocracy if I've ever read one. On one hand youre constantly demanding market chioce and access to the free market on one hand yet here you are thinking the other players in the free market need to be controled? Talking out of both side of your mouth at the same time doesn't win many arguments.
I'm going to take the next two weeks while we're at the lake and try and forget all about why famers are their own worst enemies in this system we've so carefully screwed up here in Canada.

[wd9]

Oops, misread your post and your last statement. I must have been too giddy thinking about all the subsidies we as Canadians get when the other countries we compete against get so little, LOL.

[TOM4CWB]

WD9;

We will only take an advance from CCGA because they respect our farm... and as a matter of principal refuse to take a CWB advance because of their policies.

THis costs more... and the sooner we can get services for wheat from another service provider... the better.

Perhaps the CWB would allow CCGA to issue wheat/barley advances... if CCGA would allow the CWB to issue advances on non-board grains?

Then we could have freedom of choice!

[TOM4CWB]

JD4ME;

"When agrarian utopians attack markets in the name of human nobility and high aspirations, they seem to lose sight of what markets do best. And by losing sight of the bottom line, they lose touch with an important reality.

Then they blame reality for not conforming to their utopian dreams.

This vicious spiral of utopian dreaming explains why prairie farmers supported the Crow rates for so long, and why they distrusted the Winnipeg Grain Exchange, and why so many still support the CWB.

But one can oppose or ignore reality for only so long.

Eventually the dream ends.

Even the NDP must eventually balance its books."

Quote by Barry Cooper, a Globe and Mail columnist and a Professor of Political Science at the University of Calgary

[wd9]

The only trouble is Tom4CWB, if you had a choice between 'free' and an application fee to get the advance, CCGA would do little business. Pretty much only yours and mine and about 4 other people

As an aside, should canola have been requesting a stay?

[TOM4CWB]

A stay on individual cases that can't make delivery on Canola would be reasonable.

It would be an easy step to harmonise the CWB and CCGA fees, and simply stop subsidies form the CWB pool accounts.

It doesn't cost more to add more grains to the CCGA advance... and if the Pool subsidy were eliminated on the CWB side... then it would be fairer all around.