just wondering,
don't look at the plebiscite in the context of who can we prevent from trying to jump over the low bar, but in the context of how high do we place the bar in order for the whole exercise to be meaningful.
Instead of telling a whole bunch of old farts and non-commercial farmers they can't enter the high jump,
tell everyone that they are welcome to enter the high jump, but if you want to move on to the next level you have to clear at minimum of 6 feet.
This is how the real world operates. You establish a criteria based on what you are intending on achieving.
What is it we are intending on achieving?
We are trying to determine what is needed for this industry to move forward and move forward with the support and enthusiasm of those who are actually participating and contributing. i.e. a result that means something.
The census shows us what we have already known for some time, that 16% of the farmers produce 75% of the grain.
This has to be considered.
They way it stands today, 75% of the production is being forced into what we consider a useless and pointless debate. That being a Dual Market, we just want the damn thing gone.
We've been in the process of destroying an industry for going on twenty years now by worrying and focusing on 25% of the production.
Is it any wonder the entire grain industry is dysfunctional?
So place the bar high enough to mean something, and my suggestion would be in order for the cwb to continue to keep its monopoly it must have 85% approval for the single desk. And close it down entirely if it can't achieve 50% approval or more.
The other thing is don't ask the question in general terms as Chaffmeister suggested.
Ask the question in the personal.
For example How do YOU want to market YOUR Wheat
A - Through the CWB or,
B - on the Open Market
and ask the same question for Barley.
Don't ask farmers to consider all the potential implications of the different policies just ask them what they would like for their own farm.
Only those two choices because you can't sell a bushel of wheat twice and because the cwb et. al will make anything other than those two choices being asked a nightmare.
Ask every seller of wheat and barley that question.
Then count the ballots.
Also make sure everyone knows the criteria before voting, this is really important, because you don't want to give the opposition anything to latch onto to discredit the process.
But the key her are the rules which establish threshold of support for various policies and systems.
My suggestion would be
85% and over for the CWB, keep the single desk.
50% to 84% for the CWB, dual market.
0% to 49% for the CWB, shut the place down.
THAT'S HOW YOU RUN A PLEBISCITE THAT MEANS SOMETHING.
Anything else is just the same old argument and dysfunction.
don't look at the plebiscite in the context of who can we prevent from trying to jump over the low bar, but in the context of how high do we place the bar in order for the whole exercise to be meaningful.
Instead of telling a whole bunch of old farts and non-commercial farmers they can't enter the high jump,
tell everyone that they are welcome to enter the high jump, but if you want to move on to the next level you have to clear at minimum of 6 feet.
This is how the real world operates. You establish a criteria based on what you are intending on achieving.
What is it we are intending on achieving?
We are trying to determine what is needed for this industry to move forward and move forward with the support and enthusiasm of those who are actually participating and contributing. i.e. a result that means something.
The census shows us what we have already known for some time, that 16% of the farmers produce 75% of the grain.
This has to be considered.
They way it stands today, 75% of the production is being forced into what we consider a useless and pointless debate. That being a Dual Market, we just want the damn thing gone.
We've been in the process of destroying an industry for going on twenty years now by worrying and focusing on 25% of the production.
Is it any wonder the entire grain industry is dysfunctional?
So place the bar high enough to mean something, and my suggestion would be in order for the cwb to continue to keep its monopoly it must have 85% approval for the single desk. And close it down entirely if it can't achieve 50% approval or more.
The other thing is don't ask the question in general terms as Chaffmeister suggested.
Ask the question in the personal.
For example How do YOU want to market YOUR Wheat
A - Through the CWB or,
B - on the Open Market
and ask the same question for Barley.
Don't ask farmers to consider all the potential implications of the different policies just ask them what they would like for their own farm.
Only those two choices because you can't sell a bushel of wheat twice and because the cwb et. al will make anything other than those two choices being asked a nightmare.
Ask every seller of wheat and barley that question.
Then count the ballots.
Also make sure everyone knows the criteria before voting, this is really important, because you don't want to give the opposition anything to latch onto to discredit the process.
But the key her are the rules which establish threshold of support for various policies and systems.
My suggestion would be
85% and over for the CWB, keep the single desk.
50% to 84% for the CWB, dual market.
0% to 49% for the CWB, shut the place down.
THAT'S HOW YOU RUN A PLEBISCITE THAT MEANS SOMETHING.
Anything else is just the same old argument and dysfunction.
Comment