Where are the 85,000 farmers?

[Incognito]

OTTAWA, Ontario, October 17, 2006 - The Honourable Chuck Strahl, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board, today issued the following statement related to the eligibility to vote in the upcoming Canadian Wheat Board (CWB) Director elections.

"Canada's New Government is committed to ensuring that western Canadian grain farmers have input to the discussion on the future of marketing choice for western wheat and barley. This commitment includes making certain that the process to elect new directors to the board of the CWB is undertaken in a transparent and responsible manner.

"There is no definitive list of producers kept by the CWB or the Government of Canada, so the permit book system has been used to develop the voters list in the past. However, the current list includes a number of permit book holders that have had zero deliveries to the CWB in recent years. In fact, the CWB informed me that 16,169, or 36%, of the 44,578 producers on the preliminary list provided to the Election Coordinator made no deliveries in the past two crop years.

"I am pleased that the CWB agrees with the government that it would not be fair to automatically include the permit book holders that have had zero deliveries on the voters list. Instead, they will be eligible to vote in the same way as other producers of wheat and barley, such as feed grain suppliers, who do not currently hold permit books. Producers with zero sales can be added to the list if they file a statutory declaration with the Election Coordinator.

"I have asked the CWB to work with the Election Coordinator to compile the voters list on the basis of those who have actually sold and delivered grain to the CWB in the 2005-06 and 2006-07 crop years. It is my belief that this decision will result in a more equitable election process that empowers western Canadian grain farmers."

For more information on marketing choice, please go to: www.agr.gc.ca/cwb.

[craig]

The question that needs to be asked is what would have happened if the government had not brought this up? While the CWB is quick to jump on the democracy bandwagon, the CWB election process is still with it's flaws. The CWB knows it's to there benefit to keep as many older farmers as possible on the voters list. Keeping landlords who rent out their land but still crop share on the voters list is also a benefit to the CWB. If the CWB elections are to be representative of the views of western canadian farmers then in fact the vote should only be that of active farmers who produce and sell grain.

[wd9]

The canola growers are at around 63,000 including Ontario paid levy and those who request refund. 85,000 seems about 20k too high as I have trouble seeing that many not growing canola, but wheat or barley.

[AdamSmith]

The un-official new number is 65,000.

This is an excerpt from the CWB's response to the Marketing Force Task Force.

The single desk exists solely to benefit farmers. It allows the CWB to market wheat, durum and barley produced by some 65,000 western Canadian farmers as part of a strategic sales process.

[Incognito]

Single desk selling -Instead of competing against one another for sales, Western Canada's 85,000 wheat and barley farmers sell as one through the CWB and can therefore command a higher return for their grain.

http://www.cwb.ca/en/about/

[AdamSmith]

Oh my God It's worse than I thought!

Now their having trouble with their Abacus.

[wd9]

What ever happened to the election task force that looked into the process and weighting of acres etc?

[lakenheath]

Weighting of acres is backwards thinking. Should we have more votes in government elections based on the size of our bank accounts or the value of the assets one owns. I don't think so. The CWB has the same effect one a small grain farmer as it does on a large one.

[wilagro]

Don't trust this Tory government. They are listening to a small but vocal minority of wheat growers.

If they can skew the number of eligible voters, then they will win in their attempt to KILL the CWB.

[silverback]

There it is, the real issue about this vote at last.

Who can really trust who when it comes to a list of eligible voters?

All I know is that I cannot trust a gov't agency who is doing anything it can to survive.

They wouldn't try and cheat to keep the monopoly would they?

[TOM4CWB]

Silverback;

To be fair to the CWB... I believe Strahl has done EXACTLY what CWB wants on the present voters list in this Director Election (2006)

I believe it is a reasonable compromise... and no one can claim that STRAHL cherry picked the recommendations... on revision of who should vote.

Goodale had 10 years to figure this thing out and blew it.

DR. Doolittle did what he did best... nothing and watch things implode.

Gets rid of the problem... or lets someone else take the blame later.

[TOM4CWB]

Lakenheath;

"The CWB has the same effect on[e] a small grain farmer as it does on a large one."

To say a grower with 500 acres of grain production has the same challenges in economic terms as a 5000 acre farm is unbelievable.

It is this type of logic that will cause the end of the CWB.

You don't seriously believe this do you?

Please explain yourself!

If I don't manage risk and earn in the top 1/3 average price... on 5 or 10 thousand acres my farm is toast, broke caput.

Someone with 500 acres can easily use the pool accounts and cover up marketing problems with the day job wages.

NOT the same at all... in the real world of farmers 25-55 years old in the productive earning years of their lives.

What did I miss Laken?

[wd9]

<p>So, uh, what ever happened to the election task force that looked into the process and weighting of acres etc?
</p>
<p></p>

[Ron]

So as interested parties can my wife vote? What about my kids who are interested in food on the table (okay actually they only care about hockey equipment) and my landlords who are interested in me being profitable enough to pay rent?
I would like to get them all registered to vote at least once.

[TOM4CWB]

Ron;

If you pay anyone with grain... they can get a CWB permit book # as an interested party to the permit book.

I personally don't see anything wrong with this... but a weighting on production and grain sales would be fair... IMHO

But remember... the CWB was never about being fair... it was about being equal... sort of if you are a communist.