The NDP sponsored plebiscite really does not mean anything.....the Dippers simply used taxpayers money to sponsor a political campaign against the federal government....nothing more to see here!

Could someone please explain to me the differece btween how the CWB opperates and how the USSR stole from their farmers for 75 years?

"It's hard to believe an NDP government in the same city in which the majority of nearly 500 CWB employees are headquartered would do such a thing."

Thanks Kate. Now I have to clean my screen after spewing my Pepsi from reading the above. Hey....maybe we need a control board for Kleenex! Should be worth a few billion bucks.

Does sound suspect doesn't it?

Atleast the question they asked was about as clear as you can get.

Mr. Anderson wants to muddy the waters by adding a third choice. "Dual market" which he believes to exist.

No one has been able to explain to me how such an option would work. Only claims that it would.

Maybe it would work, who knows. Dealing with a company in that much flux.... in a business where stability is always an issue.... is not something I would wish to become involved. In that even if Mr. Andersons Dual market eventually works its way into being the odds of it lasting long enough to become a viable option for my farm are not very good.

In that sense the NDP are correct (ugghhh, must wash mouth out with soap) in their question... Choose A or B (not a grey area C)

The 4 farm organizations are:

1)Keystone Agricultural Producers

KAP is Manitoba's largest general farm policy organization, and its job is to represent and promote the interests of the province's farm families. Everything that we do is directed by our members, and that is our greatest strength.

2)Agricultural producers association of Saskatchewan

APAS envisions a future where agriculture is profitable, rural communities are viable and the role of agriculture in society is recognized and appreciated.
Our mission is to improve the economic well-being of Saskatchewan's agricultural producers and to support viable rural communities and infrastructure through lobbying for progressive agricultural policies.

3) National Farmer’s Union ( Canadian Chapter ):

The National Farmers Union is Canadian farm families sharing common goals. Each family member - farmer, spouse and children, ages 14 to 21 - are full members of the Union and enjoy all rights and privileges within the Union. This structure recognizes that every family member contributes to the farm by working on it, or providing supporting income through off-farm employment.
Associate Members are a valued part of the National Farmers Union family as well. Associate Members are non-farmers that understand that food issues are everyone's issues and want to help farmers build a sustainable and nutritious food system in Canada.

4) Wild Rose Agriculture Producers

is Alberta's largest producer funded general farm organization. It is an organization comprised of farmers and ranchers who wish to have a voice in shaping the future of their farming operation. Unlike many other farm organizations, there are no check-offs or major corporate sponsors. Nearly 85% of the money raised each year comes from membership and membership services. Wild Rose Agricultural Producers was founded in 1996, an off-spring of the old Unifarm organization.

Okay, references keep getting made to the wheat board "monopoly". Is it just me, or should this actually be referred to as a monopsony?

"No one has been able to explain to me how such an option would work"

Couldn't this be as simple as allowing farmers to sell independent of the Wheat Board without dismantling it? If the majority of farmers want to market exclusively through the board (as these surveys seem to suggest), the CWB should be able to provide its farmers the benefits it currently claims to while allowing freedom to the minority that wish to market their own product.

BOHCA.

Barley Oats Hay Carrots Alfalfa.

How would that work Denis? Would they be required to choose and sign a legal document to that affect?

Les

You're right Denis.

The CWB doesn't want a dual market system, because that would force the CWB to be accountable to the farmers. i.e. if the CWB gets poor prices for the wheat and barley is sells, the farmers will then have the freedom to take their grain elsewhere.

As it stands now, western Cdn farmers are forced to sell through the CWB. If the board gets crap prices for those farmers, oh well.

It would also make the Directors of the CWB think twice about the optics of giving every employee a $1000 bonus, when they consistently got less than average market prices on the grain they've sold in the last year.

It also seems clear that the individuals who came up with the ballot question are not big proponents of strong ethics or integrity.

"It would also make the Directors of the CWB think twice about the optics of giving every employee a $1000 bonus, when they consistently got less than average market prices on the grain they've sold in the last year."

I thought it was a bad idea but it was Measners replacement that came up with it. The feds gave him a 6000./month raise.

Les

Winnipeg really lost it's dominance as the Prairie's business and financial centre when the Wheat Board killed off the private grain trade. The 500 CWB employees are a drop in the bucket compared to the big money that left.

The Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan membership map shows that only half of the rural municipalities are members.
w3.apas.ca/modules.php?name=Sections&op=viewarticle&artid=21

"How would that work?"

The farmer loads the grain onto a truck, drive across the border and sells it in Chicago (or wherever).

If most of the farmers choose to stay with the wheat board, the board would be able to keep the bargaining power it has now.

So have I got this right? I, as a farmer, grow some wheat,or barley, or John Dillinger's left ear. Now you are telling me that I HAVE to sell my product to whoever SOMEBODY else tells me I have to, at a price that may be lower then what my budy farmer in Ontario is selling for? And we have the balls to call ourselves a democracy??? LOL

Les:

http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/005257.html

"Bill Toews says it was not an easy decision but he stands with his choice.

Toews is one of the Directors of the Canadian Wheat Board that voted in favour of giving employees of the CWB a $1000 bonus this Christmas.

He says that he knew it might not be a popular decision but he thinks it will turn out to be a good business decision."

The bonus was the board of directors' decision.

justthinkin: By jove, I think you got it!

"How would that work Denis? Would they be required to choose and sign a legal document to that affect?"

I guess that depends on who you mean by "they" - those who would choose to market with the board or those who wouldn't.

If we're talking about those who would choose to market with the board, I assume they would enter into a contractual agreement to sell through the CWB (though I guess the CWB would have to decide for itself if it should purchase non-contract grain). For those who opt out, nothing would be required because it wouldn't be CWB's role to regulate all farmers, just to market the grain of those who choose to do business with them.

The farmers in Ontario voted to go open market and their market is primarily domestic. Western Farmers market is International. I believe they sell to over 70 countries. I doubt that the U.S. is going to let 85,000 farmers drive their product across the border. I could be wrong but I can see barriers going up if that happens. So assuming that Western Farmers want to keep their International customers, how do they deal with things like transportation? The Federal paper on the Wheat Board II said this would be a problem but haven’t addressed it.

Les

When was the last time that Manitoba EVER spoke up to benefit anybody but themselves?
I would not be surprised to learn that this move was orchestrated by the Federal opposition party in an attempt to discredit the Conservatives.
Manitoba EXISTS on the spoils the Liberals serve up to them, without the Libs in power the disolution of the province of Manitoba will continue to spiral down the toilet. And they know it.

"The bonus was the board of directors' decision."

And for the first time ever they came up with this idea within ( what what it.. 2 days? ) after Measners replacement. And he got a 6000. raise from the Feds.

Denis.

That's been tried. Ontario tried it. What happens is that Farmers ( even though they signed future contracts ) would hop in and out of the board. If they found a better price elsewhere they went that route and ignored the contract they signed. If the Wheat Board gave them them a better one they'd sell to them. The Wheat board was unable to meet it's contractual obligations to International buyers because the farmers broke their contract. At one point they had to buy wheat from India (?? I think that was the country ) to meet their obligations to another International buyer.

Les

The problem in Manitoba is the NDP government which exists because of the Urban socialists of Winnipeg.

Farmers in MB are just like farmers across the west and understand what they want very well.....it's only the political BS that's muddying the waters.

Speaking of which I just received a Information Bulletin supposedly from Stephane Dion...a cheap little pamphlet printed on low grade paper that is nothing but a load of unmitigated BS ..... who's paying for that? I wonder!

The wheat board can be fixed....so fix it!
All this hysteria is useless.

Mr. Anderson wants to muddy the waters by adding a third choice. "Dual market" which he believes to exist.

No one has been able to explain to me how such an option would work. Only claims that it would.

Barcs??? Hello????

The CWB started as a dual market and it still is.

It ended being a dual market in 3 provinces because of inflationary pressures during WWII as a temporary measure.

It still is a dual market in Canada because farmers in Ontario and Quebec grow wheat and don't use the CWB.

And somehow with all the advantages the wheat board provides, farmers out east, in the nice parts of Canada, IE not subject to sovietization,... they get more money.

But at least since it was given a monopoly people in Manitoba and Saskatchewan have been leaving the farms in droves so its good for something.

And the monopoly gave 1000 per worker bonus's for christmas so all that money drained from rural western types was well spent in Winnipeg....

makes me sick,

There’s a Provincial election coming up in Manitoba. The Conservative party has said that their Federal counterparts should listen to the majority of farmers and have a fair vote. They know the majority support the Wheat board. Are they wrong to support a fair vote on the matter or are they just saying that to get elected?

Les

Les (re: Ontario),

All that shows is the Wheat Board wrote lousy contracts and was (is) poorly run. If they are so incapable of doing their job, why would forcing farmers to market through them be a benefit.

Les, the only "fair" result would be 100% in favour. Anything else is tyranny against those who do not choose to take part in forced servitude.

Denis.

No, it doesn't. When you sign a business contract to supply goods you are expected to deliver. The Wheat sold those goods based on their contracts.

Les

Maybe there should be a news persons board pay them all 40k/yr and as long as most are happy force all the cbcers to get a pay cut.

If farmers vote no the province will ignore this quick.

Les, all politicians say stuff to get elected, doh!
What's the $66.7M per year of CWB operating expenses? Shipping, salaries, "bonus", benefits, pensions, infrastructure overhead (lighting, heating, cooling, prop mgt, et al).
For all you farmers out there, (all 85,000 of ya) my employer charges our labour out at 3x our compensation. What's the ratio for CWB operations?
$66M/500=132,000!

"No, it doesn't."

Yes, I would argue it does. Most businesses depend on suppliers to deliver goods or services so that their business can be successful.

If you can't attract suppliers, there's a problem (e.g., not offering competitive rates or levels of service).

If your suppliers aren't delivering based on agreed contracts, there's a problem (e.g., you have poorly written contracts or your rates are so uncompetitive that it makes better financial sense for your supplier to pay the penalty for breaking the contract & sell to someone else).

The inability to manage suppliers points to inadequacies with the board, not with a free or dual market system.

“Les, the only "fair" result would be 100% in favour. Anything else is tyranny against those who do not choose to take part in forced servitude.”

Our entire system, from Federal, Provincial, Municipal representation is done thru the voting system. Shareholders or corporations vote for board directors which make decisions on their behalf. When major decisions are made that would affect all shareholders a vote is held. There are always voters who don’t get their way but that’s the way our system works. I’m not sure why this should be different.

Les

"Are they wrong to support a fair vote"

Yes. My fundamental issue with the CWB is not that a the majority is being ignored (which arguably is not happening), but that the individual's freedom is being unfairly limited.

"Yes. My fundamental issue with the CWB is not that a the majority is being ignored (which arguably is not happening), but that the individual's freedom is being unfairly limited."

Then all marketing boards should be dismantled that control the production of anything. I could go with that argument.

Les

David Emerson made a goof in an interview he had with the Western Producers a few weeks ago. He said that producers of eggs, milk, etc should get ready for an open market too. The immediate outcry from producers in Ontario and Quebec caused panick and within hours they had up on their website how much they support them. In fact they splashed it across the papers too. I have no doubt that they’ll go that route if they get a majority, but for now, it would be political suicide. The Wheat Board is an easier target and doesn’t represent as many votes.

Les

Dismantle the healthcare, education, union.... marketing boards too.

I think I could live with that too Les.

"Shareholders or corporations vote for board directors which make decisions on their behalf. When major decisions are made that would affect all shareholders a vote is held. There are always voters who don’t get their way but that’s the way our system works. I’m not sure why this should be different."

However, they are not forced to stay within the corporation. If a shareholder or partner in a company disagrees with the majority's position he is free to leave - sell his stock and move on. If he was a working part of the company, from there he can join a competitor, work as a consultant or even start up his own competing business. What the current CWB policy is saying is "If you want in this line of business, you work for me or you don't work". These are very different scenarios that you are trying to equate.

"Dismantle the healthcare, education, union.... marketing boards too."

You may get your wish.

Les

"Then all marketing boards should be dismantled"

I've never argued marketing boards should be dismantled, not even the CWB. I only argue the individual producer must have the option of whether or not he sells to the marketing board.

maybe the power, Gas, water marketing boards too. How bout SGI??

How many things are our choices limited in that we accept??

Was it Paul Martian that said "it's not about the majority, it's about peoples rights, we cannot have mob rule". He was talking about a vote on same sex marriage though! would this be a similar situation?

The problem is Property Rights - who owns what prairie farmers produce? The wheat board or the farmer?
The WB was another War Measures Act - like income tax. Neither are legal because they something from citizens by force, without accountability. Taxes should be collected on property only; the state agrees to protect citizens investments (property) in exchange for payment of taxes on owned property. Tax money allows the state to buy military equipment, insure immigration allows only honest immigrants, foreign trade rules and regs etc. etc. - people who chose not to own property pay taxes indirectly through rent.
The WB runs small farmers who choose to grow wheat and Barley out of business. The prairies grow the highest quality wheat in the world so the monopoly has lots of 'grading' leverage to lower the price an individual farmer is forced to accept. Quotas are another method of 'weeding out' the little guy - a big farm (like the ones Hutterites and other collective arrangements run) are not affected by quotas - they have lots of members with quotas - it only bankrupts small individual farmers.
This is the Doer/Calvert plan to eradicate the individually owned farm from the landscape. It has been working for 50 years. If a government gets all citizens economically dependant on the government, the citizens are powerless - if they rock the boat they are economically starved out. See Yukon Territory for proof of this phenomena.
Property Rights must be re instated in the Constitution of our Country. Canadians must squawk and squawk about this until the politicians are forced to address it.
Crack open the WB books to find out how many millions that outfit has kicked back to organizations and individuals within and outside of the WB mandate and then see the reaction. Even collective outfits do not like to be victims of theft.

Denis that is the same thing. If you start taking large parts out it becomes simply a company. No longer a marketing board

I being wholly ignorant of farming, I can say this if the CWB is forced into competition because the farmers have a choice to whom they can sell it will over night become a remarkably more efficient operation and miraculously farmers will begin to get better prices out of them.

The downside is of course being a government agency they will turn around and say see we cut the best deal for the farmers and the single desk is the only way to go.

It certainly would require dillegence to keep in mind that it took competition for CWB to tow the line. Of course being a government agency with unlimited resources at their disposal can play a waiting game for a very long time. Governments don't undertake anything with a time frame involving anything less than decades.

"maybe the power, Gas, water marketing boards too. How bout SGI??"

I would be interested in seeing in what ways these are similar (or dissimilar) to the CWB. I have a feeling there are very different, but not necessarily less important, issues involved.

SGI for example (I assume your talking Saskatchewan Government Insurance), while I do prefer private insurance I think the issues are quite different than those we are discussing in relation to the CWB.

A few different ones to be sure. But lots the same. not the least of which is your argument for freedoms. (unless you are reconsidering that one)

Postal, welfare, "Human" rights, CRTC, affirmative action, Kyoto marketing boards.

None of which have my best interests at heart, none of which are voluntary, all of which curtail my economic freedoms not to mention freedoms in general. (very short portion of the actual offenders)

being wholly ignorant of farming, I can say this if the CWB is forced into competition because the farmers have a choice to whom they can sell it will over night become a remarkably more efficient operation and miraculously farmers will begin to get better prices out of them.

from my understanding, there are 5 main buyers in the world, all giant corporations. I prey that the farmers will get better prices, but I'm afraid that these big 5 will absolutely kill individual farmers. The proof will be in the pudding. Hey Kate, how about a thread about equalization and how Sask. (among others) is about to get the shaft from the tory/alliance party? No?? no surprise there.....

"See Yukon Territory for proof of this phenomena."

After living there for three years, I can honestly say I prefer the Yukon and the frontier spirit to Manitoba and its resigned averageness.

This place -- Winnipeg -- sucks the life out of you and your wallet.

Thanks, though, Doer, for all that lovely in-province advertising you're doing. I'm sure it has nothing to do with an upcoming election, eh?

Les, can you really not see the difference in half the country being forced (sometimes at gunpoint) to sell to one buyer only, while the other half is free to market to whomever they like?

Les,
"Dismantle the healthcare, education, union.... marketing boards too."

"You may get your wish."

And dismantling these things are a bad thing?

"I'm afraid that these big 5 will absolutely kill individual farmers. "

There is a bit of a problem with this logic.

First of all, if multinational corporations are going to rape and pillage farmers without the CWB, how come it's not already happening with other commodities. Don't forget that wheat and barley are the only two commodities that go through the CWB. Many other commodities are actually more profitable than Board grains, not less.

Secondly, all these scary multinationals are the current business partners of the CWB. They're called accredited exporters. The CWB only sells something like a little more than half of what farmers deliver to it, they get ADM,Cargill, and all the other scary multinationals to sell the rest for them. Why would the CWB subcontract with them to sell farmers grain if they did such a lousy job? Because the "big scary" thing is a convenient myth.

Check it out for yourself. Do a search for "accredited exporters" on www.cwb.ca.

Yes these Manitoba and Saskatchewan farmers that love the" Prarie Wheat Board" as it should be named are a fun group.. for people that loved brokeback mountain.. these farmers will bend over forwards for you also! Look at the screwin they take year after year, easier than staying home from the curling rink, that selling your own grain, try it boys.

I do support a dual marketing system, but with these results, I believe Harper has no choice but to hold a plebiscite for the entire prairies. I think the real solution is ask all three options and have a run-off if none of the three options get above 50%. Some say a dual marketing system can work others say it cannot, but I believe the farmers are smart enough to decide for themselves. In addition a proper campaign where both sides can express their views will avoid anyone from being misled.

No, not reconsidering my position on freedoms :)

"Postal, welfare, "Human" rights, CRTC, affirmative action, Kyoto marketing boards."

The postal service I don't have a big problem with - I can and do use other methods of delivery as need dictates. CRTC I see no (or at least a very minimal) use for.

Not sure exactly where you're going with welfare (taxation?). "Human" rights is so dependent on definitions I'm sure I could find issue with some things called human rights :)

Affirmative action & Kyoto - got real no love for them.

But perhaps to your point, I do think we should be seriously examining all things which reduce individual freedoms. That's not to say they all need to be abolished or even reformed, but I'm sure there are many ways our big government could be reduced which would benefit Canadians in general.

As a non-farmer, I don't understand why farmers across the country don't have a choice.

Why can they not pick and choose to whom they sell?

Whether they are in Quebec or Alberta it seems like the various marketing options should be a choice each farmer makes, as opposed to a decision forced upon them.

Specifically, it would make sense to me as an example, that any farmer, should they choose could split their projected future crop and pre-sell 20% to the CWB which remains an export-based marketing agency and route the remainder through a public exchange system where they would receive current market prices for whomever wanted to buy from that exchange (it really doesn't matter if that exchange is in Canada or Chicago as long as the delivery location is specified on the futures contract).

In such a fashion the CWB has to provide value-added service for the farmers to opt-in. Should they fail to provide that service (most likely measured in terms of profit and security of income), then the farmers have other options.

But bottom line is it seems to me the if the CWB wants to represent and sell Canadian Wheat & Barley, they should have to compete for that right against other marketing agencies or exchanges.

Perhaps Les, who does seem to know a lot about the pro-CWB position could elaborate and blow some holes in my random musings.

Thanks so much....Matthew.

Give the western wheat and barley farmers the same arrangement as the farmers in Ontario. CHOICE.

Matthew,
Les will drudge up old retoric to answer your thoughtful and insightful observations. I commend you on having a practial view of the issue, I wish so many more that comment publicly would have the open minded approach as you.

Les, does the freedom to sell your produce as you see fit mean the same in Sask as it does in Quebec?

Answer that question first, then you can spew your vile lies.

Perhaps I can attempt Matthew.

While all companies are capable of hedging on a commodity exchange the CWB also uses a price pooling account in which every seller gets the same $/unit out of. Since the CWB sells grain throughout the year the entire range of prices it gets goes into that account.

Such actions result in more price stability for the producer. We know what we are going to get at the end of the year and we do not have to go through the added risk of hedging ourselves, or betting on when the price will peak.

Farming is quite a risky business (weather, price of inputs, price of product). Much of our risk is out of our hands with the weather. And even price contracting can lead to trouble (ex - we forward contracted only 1/2 our expected mustard production this year... but produced only 1/3 of the usual amount due to drought... buyout is expensive).

Anything that serves to help stabilize my business is an advantage to me. On my farm I already hedge much of my inputs with retailers (ex - 2/3 of the fertilizer I am likely to use is already in my bins at a December price that has already jumped several $$ per tonne). We often forward contract 1/2 of the expected production of anything non-board. (almost made the mistake of signing on to a Y. Mustard contract at 22c/lb last week, it's 22.5c/lb this week.)

Second to Stability is marketing fees. I am aware that as a government organization it is considerably less efficient than others. But on the other hand it cuts down on my marketing costs. I spend hours/days/weeks talking to companies and building business relationships surrounding my business and in the marketing of my grain (checking prices, basis, trucking rates, distances etc etc.). That time and effort is considered opportunity cost and is very expensive in comparison to the 1/2 per year I spend marketing ALL my board grains (in the past). The board has in the last couple years opened up some options that I am going to learn to maximize my options.

Third, one of the efficiency's of the CWB is the designated area. In that area the CWB controls the marketing of all board grains. While the amount fluctuates year to year based on planting and weather it is largely predictable by part way though the year what grains will be available for sale. Knowing that can increase the marketing options and time period they can use their options in (hopefully leading to an increased price). Individual companies have only their contracted grains to predict on and those are almost always immediately hedged upon receipt of a signed contract to protect the company.

In the end support or lack thereof goes to the option you believe will make you the most money. And most importantly where people believe their greatest costs are.

Today I still support the wheatboard. The cost and risk analysis I do for my farm says it is a wash to a slight gain for me to deal with them.

As I said earlier risk and stability is as important as the profit line. I do not believe a dual market can exist, but I have been wrong before. Risk assessment however dictates that I do not do business with a company in a deep state of flux (as the CWB would be in the few years following a dual market decision) Whether or not a dual market will eventually exist. It does not for me and thousand of others in the short term. And losing business in the short term is bad for business in the long term.

When did you live in the Yukon, Yukon Gold? The Dippers managed to win a territorial election here in 1985 - they shut down all mining and thus made the territory a totally dependant territory - dependant on transfers from the Federal gument. The Liberano PM Cretian 'gave' the Yukon to his wife - she wanted a park of her own. The Yukon produces nothing but 'hot air' from Whitehorse now.
The Yukon used to be a great place to live - the Yukoners with that Frontier spirit you speak of have almost all left here now - we have been replaced with people from the south who have/had favor in the Dipper/Liberano ranks and lefto Americans - these individuals were given high paid gument jobs and moving perks and subsidies - all paid for by the S. taxpayers. Not much Frontier spirit here - the territory is a mini torrana spirit now because that is the ilk who have moved here.

Barc:

So basically you want to be 1/2 a businessman and let someone else manage your business.

You put up a compelling argument in your last post. How can you make a case when you do not know the costs?

How long should the Canadian taxpayer subsidize agriculture if no one wants to change within it?That question has been around for since '68.

You can go on a rant about the US of A and their subsidies - but for the past 3 years when both Libs and Cons tried to trade off single desk selling for lower world subsidies, the left came unglued.

Two questions:

1) Why could the CWB not generate a premium last year with the lowest s/u ratios ever and lowest stocks in 25 years in wheat?

2) Why are average handling across western Canada, $20.00 higher on CWRS than they are on canola?

These are not a myths - they are facts. Check QUOROM. REG's own litle pet project. Lets say you harvest 1000 tonnes of wheat. For 20K, how much more time would you invest in your business?

Both sides in this argument make outlandlish statements - and none are made on hard evidence.

And please don't quote any UofS study and I wont quote any Lyons & Carter or Martin study.

This is an argument of rhetoric and Prairie religion. My grandfather got screwed in the 30's; therefore, the same will happen to me in in 2007.

You can't change the 15% on the right nor can you change the 15% on the left. However, 70% of farmers are unwilling to participate in any meaningful discussion - and therein lies the travesty.

Best,

" Les, does the freedom to sell your produce as you see fit mean the same in Sask as it does in Quebec?

Answer that question first, then you can spew your vile lies."

It's difficult to have a reasonable. I don't call your opinion vile lies.

First of all, the quebec and Ontario producers had a vote and got to decide.
It's not that I don't understand the position of the farmers that want an open market. I just want what best for the majority of farmers. And I'm taking the position that the majority of farmers know what's best for them. I've heard all the arguments, both pro and con, and both sides are full of it.
Both sides have spent money trying to sell their position. Both sides have tried dirty tricks. Farmers don't deserve this.
This isn't a decision that should be made based on your political bias and what you think is best for them. I've read the gov'ts report and proposal. There are a lot of issues they do not address. The time to address them is before they make the market wide open, not after. The Fed's admit that there's no such thing as a dual market. You can't have a wheat board monopoly within an open market. You either have a monopoly or an open market. They present a plan ( called Wheat Board II ) where the possibility exists that a Wheat Board could exist in an open market. This would require that the competition ( the major grain companies ) co-operate, sell the Wheat board old or used facilities and the farmers invest money to keep them alive. They don't show a lot of confidence that it will survive and on top of that, they say it will be the farmers fault if it doesn't.
Anyone hear of AT&T? Why couldn't they survive in a Canadian market when telephone service was privitized? Is it because they have a bad business plan and don't know how to function in an open market? Why did the Federal gov't need to intervene via the CRTC to give them a fighting chance? Think about it. Especially those who say that the Wheat Board will fail because they have a bad business plan. For the same reason AT&T would have failed. When you're thrown into an open market with compnies that own everything ( in this case major Grain companies that control 80% of the world market) with no infrastructure and no capital, the result is obvious. The Federal Conservatives know the Wheat board will fail. It's not because they aren't good business managers ( the were rated in the top 200 North American companies ) and spend 2% on administration and the rest goes back to the Farmers. I find it strange that the Americans find the Wheat board an advantage.
The Manitoba gov't under the Conservatives privitized the Manitoba Telephone System. They said it would benefit Manitoba consumers. It didn't. SaskTel is doing better than manitoba Tel, is ahead in technology and serves the residents of Saskatchewan better than Masnitobas does the rsidents of Manitoba. Manitoba Tel is now foreign owned. Sask Tel hires the employees we fire. Manitoba has the second highest telephone rates in Canada. And Manitoba rural residents ( farmers ) will never get high speed to do this wheeling and dealing for deals because it won't make the shareholders money. So I, like all the other rural residents of Manitoba, will be stuck with 26.4 dial-up or less becacuse there is no competition and no incentive to do so.

Les

Barf alert!

Its simple PROPERTY RIGHTS!!!!!!

If its MINE its MINE. I will decide, it is not anyone elses concern.

Barcs.

I'm not a farmer but I live in a farming community. Your message is familar and I support your decision.
Many don't seem to see the benefits of an open market ( money wise ) but know that the Wheat Board gives them a guaranteed price and a guaranteed income is better than no guarantee at all. Especially when the additional profits that "could" be added are very small and the risk is much greater. I support whatever decision you make. After all, it's your livihood. The Canadian taxpayer does not support you nearly as much as our American counterparts do on the open market, so don't let their insults deter your decision.

Les

Are there any blogs out there that specilize in agriculture and ag policy I am a frequent reader of this great Blog as well as the
www.agri-ville.com website forums. As a younger farmer I get more out of open discusion here than letters to editors in the Western producer and grain news thanks KATE.

"Are there any blogs out there that specilize in agriculture and ag policy I am a frequent reader of this great Blog as well as the
www.agri-ville.com website forums. As a younger farmer I get more out of open discusion here than letters to editors in the Western producer and grain news thanks KATE."

I wouldn't count on letters to the editor either. Some are genuine but the Conservatives did hire an advertising agency to write letters supporting their position so it's hard to tell which one's are real and which one's aren't.
In my last local paper, 1 letter writter was with the conservatives and 3 were against. I did a background check on google on all the letter writers. The one for the feds proposal was a Provincial Conservative candidate with all their election contributions online. They did not identify themselves in the letter.

Les

We as producers in Sask.and the rest of the western provinces grow the best wheat in the world and yet the CWB can only get second rate prices for it. This year they sold our wheat for a lower price because they didn't think it would go any higher (shortages world wide wasn't a good enough indication that it could reach record highs)They say sorry... A few years ago they thought we were in a huge drought so they removed us completly form the world market. We had a bumper crop that year. Again sorry... This is not an excuse my banker will listen to. They have to be accountable for their actions and I have to be able to sell my product where I will be able to make the most money. If the CWB is unable to do that than I will find someone who will. Wheat right now is a rotation crop not a cash crop.Why?? I guarentee all the producers that voted in favor of the CWB, grow crops other than just wheat on their land and they have no problem getting these grains to market. This debate is nothing more than political propaganda trying to fluff over the real issue THE CWB HASN'T WORKED FOR THE WESTERN PRDUCERS IN DECADES...

..y know what? I haven't heard a good ole Scotty Brison joke for a long while. Anybody got one?

This CWB thing is tiring me out, anybody else?

Free the sellers I say.

There is a must read in today`s National Post regarding CWB by Morris Dorosh the publisher of Agriweek...i think he is dead on!

OT...In the same paper there is a column by Peter Foster called "Inside Dionomics"...priceless!

NDP's TJL*: AG DAZE IRKS MAN's KULAKS.
...-

NDP LEADER IRKS FARMERS BY CONFUSING SARS, BSE
It was all acronym soup at a speech by Jack Layton at Manitoba Ag Days on Wednesday. The federal NDP leader left agricultural producers looking at each other in wide-eyed wonder after a speech about farm issues in which he repeatedly referred to the "SARS" crisis which affected the Manitoba cattle industry.
national newswatch
*Taliban Jack Layton

Right on Becky.
If the job the cwb did this year selling malt barley is any indication of their expertise, then i would just as soon sell it myself!

And to all those that think your gonna have to haul your grain to the USA to sell it...do you do that with your canola flax peas canary oats or feed wheat and barley? No, you take it to an elevator near you or pick up the phone and make a few phone calls...and a truck pulls in the yard.....is that so hard?
I can get more selling my barley for feed than the cwb got selling it for malt. So what do i need the cwb for? other than waite for them to steal another 500.000 in bogus bonus cheques. Or to give my grain to algeria for tens of dollars a tonne less than anyone else will sell it for.

PMSH isn't suggesting doing away with the w-cwb, he is proposeing choice for those who want it. Like farmers in ont. and quebec have. To those that want to stay in the commie thing fine. I don't know what your so worried about, after i'm gone you'll still have your majority!...

Good point Maz2, taliban jack probably doesn't even know what bse is!... this was just a photo opp for the little jerk!
I wonder what taliban jack would say if we said lets have an open vote on gay marriage?

Manitoba is late, really late to the CWB plebiscite party.

"......A total of 16,151 farmers registered to vote, which far surpasses the approximately 11,000 votes cast in the CWB Advisory Committee elections held in the fall of 1994. On the question of options for barley marketing, 10,452 producers voted in favor (of open market) and 5,395 voted against. For wheat, 9,701 farmers voted Yes (for open market), while 5,890 farmers voted No." - Alberta gov't press release Dec 06 1995.

Please note that more Ab farmers (10452) voted FOR an open market in 1995 than the total number of Manitoba farmers (7434) that voted in their plebiscite in 2007.

Manitoba Ag Minister Wowchuk and others say that Chuck Strahl 'should pay attention to the numbers'.
He absolutely is, he absolutely is.
And it's about bloody time that this crooked Liberal Party gravy train was stopped.

Speaking of lousy barley prices, check this out:

Barley prices in Montana, barely (sic) prices at the CWB

And compare it to this:

CWB malt barley prices barely more than feed

"You put up a compelling argument in your last post. How can you make a case when you do not know the costs?"

- Do you know the costs of changing the system? I can tell you the costs I have in marketing this year. How can you claim that I cannot make a credible argument to stay at status quo when you are using the (albeit much more in depth) SAME INFORMATION to argue to change??

"1) Why could the CWB not generate a premium last year with the lowest s/u ratios ever and lowest stocks in 25 years in wheat?"

- Simple. Bad job of marketing. Some years you do better than others. Remember a few years back the price of mustard shot waaayy up?? We had almost 1/2 forward contracted that year at 23 c/lb. Very good average price at the time. Sold most of what was left at 33c/lb, and the last truckload (cutting back on seed for next year) when the price hit 42 c/lb. The price ended up over 50 c/lb for a time. Tell me, how much did I not get on the 15,000 bushels I sold that year (conversion to lbs = 750,000lbs) adds up to what $200,000 price premium I missed on?? But it was an better than acceptable price at the time.

Some years I will do better than the CWB. Some years I will not. It is probably a wash.

2) Why are average handling across western Canada, $20.00 higher on CWRS than they are on canola?

- No idea. might have something to do with how bad people want the oil and where most of it is grown.... as compared with wheat which is grown everywhere.

"1000 tonnes of wheat. For 20K"

- $20 a tonne wheat would sit in the bin and rot as it is unlikely to pay shipping and marketing costs let alone input costs.

"1/2 a business man?" Why does it matter to you whether I use CWB, CGF, Montana Specialty Mills or oh lets say Weber Commodities to sell my grain?

"Both sides in this argument make outlandlish statements - and none are made on hard evidence."

That is something we can both agree on. It is why I try to do (somewhat unskillfully) risk reward analysis for the things I do in my business. Equipment, inputs, sales are all especially important to the business. Until someone can make an argument on hard evidence without the outlandish statements all I can do is try to work with the system in place and keep an open mind and argue rationally (not always easy for me in an emotionally charged debate, I am sure sometimes it shows).

Why does it matter to you whether I use CWB, CGF, Montana Specialty Mills or oh lets say Weber Commodities to sell my grain?

None whatsoever.By why would you argue against that logic for those who want to market their own wheat. For the record, i haven't brokered domestic grain for 18 months; for a couple reasons 1) no time and no desire 2) tired of the left wing whacks saying Weber is talking his postion re. CWB and would benefit if they were gone.

"Do you know the costs of changing the system? I can tell you the costs I have in marketing this year. How can you claim that I cannot make a credible argument to stay at status quo when you are using the (albeit much more in depth) SAME INFORMATION to argue to change??"

http://www.quorumcorp.net/

Do the math on your farm..

""1000 tonnes of wheat. For 20K""

you missed the point.

Best,
LW

Les, the dual market is *already* happening, and with the blessings of the CWB. They already allow certain chosen farmers within their boundaries, to sell to the buyer of choice.

I don't know where you are going with comparing telephone companies to the farmers' situation.

You are the consumer, for the phone company. [Do not cell phones work in rural Manitoba?]

The farmer is the producer, the supplier, of the product for the CWB.

In fact, you are getting a taste of what the independent-minded farmer is saying. They want choice in where to go, (not to buy the product), but where to sell it.

I found an interesting link that might solve something else you seem to be alluding to...how will the farmer be able to keep tabs on the market, having only dial-up to the internet. Was that one of your points that would hobble them?

3w. remotesat.com/

Internet and satellite for remote areas.

Knowing what I know about farmers, they will have been looking for something like this, as many already have satellite systems, if dial-up seems unreliable for their marketing needs.

"http://www.quorumcorp.net/"

Looks like an interesting site. I've got some reading to do.

Thanks,

Barclay