Final Report Released "Producer Payment Security Mechanisms"

[charliep]

http://www.apas.ca/dbdocs//4a05f344a99ba.pdf

Busy time of year but worth reading when things slow down (or perhaps when you are using auto steer).

[Hopperbin]

Well that was a lot of reading or in my case scanning. Just have one thinking here maybe someone higher up can contemplate it, So producer would like to get paid for product they deliver, so how about calling the bank to hold funds when unload is done and grade and dockage is OK. Would that not work? A bank will hold funds and guarantee payment on a check if given a phone call, I believe it is no charge but could be wrong so check on that. But even if there is a charge I think maybe it is acceptable.

[TOM4CWB]

Hopperbin,

How much IP Canola have you sold?

It takes weeks to get quality checks after unloads; before check is cut.

I do not understand what is so wrong with the system we have today. We could easily improve it if we wanted... but to drop producer security is foolhardy.

How about dropping CDIC and bank assurance on our bank acconts too?

[classicalliberal]

No other businesses have a government body that guarantees accounts receivables other than those who participate in the EDC who have to pay a certain percentage of each receivable to get protection on up to 90% and that is if the EDC approves the customer at the other end. The CGC bonding system is a huge cost to everyone involved in the grain process: farmers, elevators, etc. No one guarantees Viterra's accounts receivables to ensure they get paid, they do that themselves. Maybe if farmers would check the credit rating and references of the companies that they do business with like every other business in the world and not sell to the fly-by-night company that has the highest price (probably it is high because they are not going to pay for it anyway) then we wouldn't need a government command and control organization to put such strenuous controls on those who buy grain. We are paying for it in the long run.

I don't want to have to indirectly pay for a government organization that forces SOME companies who buy grain (not feed mills, feeders or other kinds of users of grain) to not only borrow money to pay for the grain but have a line of credit equal to what they owe farmers because some farmers have been burned by not doing their homework properly like every other business does.

Unless of course you like socialism which the paternalistic government protects you from the ins and outs and arrows of everyday life.

[haveapulse]

It is not that complicated, really.
We need to do what Ontario does (yes for producer security and not just he wheat Board)what's with Ontario that their policy is much more pragmatic than our convoluted process that misses the mark?).

Ontario has short term insurance. YOu deliver grain, a short term insurance policy is activated.

The Ontario corn growers model is so efficient that the premiums actually decreased when the fund built up.

This model could cover any commodity you wanted including feed.

Bureaucratic eyes vested in employments numbers, glaze over at this one because, like the Pulse crop levy it requires very little administration to work.

It is quite simple and yes it works well in Ontario. But like dual marketing there must be something wrong with us out west that we do not endorse this without the numerous useless studies.. sorry but I did not bother to read APAS study as we really do not need a study to do this we need to

JUST DO IT.

[haveapulse]

PS.

HMMM does my memory serve me correct but it was not that long ago that SWP was on the verge?

Reality is: our current system fails to provide a bankeable level of security. Farmers need security.

Then the quesiton is:
What is the simplest most efficient method to deliver.

Risk insurance is the answer.

WE have been chasing this concept for nearly 20 years now, so maybe it is time to just do it.

There is no better way.