• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Manitoba CWB Plebiscite results

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Manitoba CWB Plebiscite results

    Hey Tom4CWB, I can cut and paste too.

    Mb farmers are highly diversified. From the RR valley, west to the Brandon, they produce crops varying from Potatoes, carrots, onions, many edible bean types, hemp, peas, sunflowers, forages, perenial and annual grass seed, export Alfalfa hay and seed, soybeans, peas, canaryseed, winter wheat, spring wheat, oats, flax, barley des barely, canola, and more. They have lots of processing capacity(i.e. Can Oats, wheat millers, Canola crushing, pulse processing, mega hog farms, beef, etc).

    If you look at the stats Can figures, they are some of the most diversified farmers in W. Canada, and most profitable.

    But why do they still support the CWB, afterall, they are experienced marketers. They market many non-board products. Why would they support the CWB, when they have the cheapest freight costs to the Minneapolis and Chicago milling markets. They produce 14.0 -16.0 protein wheat most years (with fusarium levels within US tolerance levels). They have the lowest Seaway costs to Latin America, the EU, Africa, etc.

    Why do these farmer continue to subsidize Saskatchewan and N. Alberta wheat farmers, via the CWB wheat pool returns?

    Could they know something we dont?

    ***********************************
    WINNIPEG (CP) — Manitoba farmers have voiced clear support for the Canadian Wheat Board’s monopoly on wheat and barley sales in a symbolic plebiscite dismissed by the federal agriculture minister as a waste of money.

    About 70 per cent of farmers who cast ballots in the Manitoba government’s vote said they want to keep the status quo on wheat. The support for the barley monopoly was 62 per cent.

    Provincial Agriculture Minister Rosann Wowchuk said Tuesday the results send a clear message to the federal government.

    “I would say to the government they should have their wheat and barley vote just as we did, and they have to quit being ideologically driven and acting like dictators and really listen to producers,” said Wowchuk.

    The province held its own referendum because federal Agriculture Minister Chuck Strahl said he would hold a barley plebiscite, but wouldn’t commit to having a vote on wheat.

    Strahl confirmed Tuesday he will hold a wheat plebiscite when the government is closer to allowing marketing choice for that grain. Right now, his priority is allowing an open barley market.

    Barley farmers will vote in the federal government’s plebiscite between Jan. 31 and March 6.

    “It’s a shame, really, that Manitoba proceeded with this, a waste of farmers’ and taxpayers’ money,” said Strahl.

    “We’re going to have a plebiscite, it’s going to be a fair question with as big a list of producers as we can get. That’s the vote that matters because this is federal jurisdiction.”

    Wheat board chairman Ken Ritter said he was pleased with the results.

    He noted the response rate of 65 per cent was well above the 40 to 50 per cent rate for the board’s director elections in recent years.

    “Every time you have a vote on a clear question like this one was and you get farmers in these numbers voting for a position that supports the board’s single desk. The government should take notice, and I’m quite sure they will,” said Ritter.

    However, farm groups who support the federal government’s plans urged Strahl to stay the course.

    Joe Janzen, a Manitoba farmer and vice president of the Western Canadian Wheat Growers, says farmers who want an open market shouldn’t be ignored.

    “This (Manitoba) government clings to their standard of democracy, but they can’t take away the fact that there are a significant number of farmers whose freedoms are being denied,” said Janzen, who grows wheat, canola and oats in St. Francois-Xavier, just west of Winnipeg.

    Janzen also took issue with the wording of the Manitoba question, which asked farmers if they wished to “maintain the ability” to market wheat and barley through the board’s single desk system, or if they wanted to “remove the single desk marketing system from the Canadian Wheat Board and sell all barley (and wheat) through an open market system.”

    Janzen said farmers were not told there could still be a voluntary wheat board within an open market.

    Strahl has suggested this is the option he favours, but wheat board directors, executives and other supporters say an open market would effectively kill the wheat board because it would be at a disadvantage trying to compete with multinational grain companies.

    A total of 11,371 farmers were eligible to vote in the plebiscite.

    Meanwhile, the board suffered a setback Tuesday in its bid to have a Federal Court judge fast-track its challenge of a government gag order.

    Justice Yves de Montigny refused to consider the issue urgent. His decision means the case won’t be heard before the federal barley plebiscite.

    Last October, the federal cabinet issued an order preventing the wheat board from spending money to advocate to keep its monopoly on wheat and barley sales.

    Board lawyers argued Monday that staff and elected directors can’t properly inform farmers about the plebiscite for fear of violating the order.

    But de Montigny agreed with government lawyer Steve Vincent that if the issue was really urgent, the board should not have waited until December to try to challenge the order.

    Wheat board lawyer Jim McLandress said the order is so vague that it’s unclear how to define what is just doing your job and what is advocacy.

    “You end up with a lot of misinformation coming out and it’s difficult to constantly be reactive to correcting the record all the time,” said McLandress.

    “Lots of people have an opinion and people love to throw out things as fact when often times they’re just plain wrong, so the difficulty we’re going to have is that we’re always going to have to play catch up.”

    But Strahl said employees and directors are free to voice their support for the monopoly as individuals, as long as the board doesn’t spend farmers’ money to do it or interfere in the plebiscite.
    © Canadian Press 2007

    #2
    Benny I'm confused. How are Manitoba Producers subsidizing Northern Alberta Producers. It could be argued that in years when fusarium levels are high the rest of the praires subsidize manitoba producers by giving them good grain with which to blend off their's. Other comment. It's obvious that the board lawyers confusion with what is doing their job and what is advocacy runs through the whole organization. How anyone could construe the recent reports released as anything more than advocacy is beyond me. The CWB 's job is to do a good job selling my grain. It's not telling me what a good job their doing nor telling me the economic impact that has on other people's pocket books.

    Comment


      #3
      Benny,

      Northern Alberta grain growers are MUCH closer to a 12 month port than Manitoba grain growers. Ever Heard of Prince Rupert B.C.?

      The low cost port in Canada... closest to premium markets like Japan, China, and the Asia Pacific growing & profitable markets. Since August 1st 2006, it costs less rail freight to get to Rupert than to Vancouver.

      For Decades Alberta paid and paid Manitoba farmers... when the pooling point was Thunder Bay... instead of The St Lawrence where our CWB grain is normally loaded on to the ships that can economically ship grain on the high seas.

      Working together is a great idea... and cooperation fruitfull if the partners are there of their own free will.

      Otherwise it is pure and simple slavery.

      Many commercial grain growers don't even grow barley any more... because it is normally livestock feed.

      And grain growers who feed livestock know which side their bread is buttered on Benny... the CWB side. Supply management folks, who need land to spread manure on, bale straw for the dairy cattle, who grow wheat and barley for totally different reasons than the average 3-5000ac straight grain grower.

      Would the blacks in the US ever have gotten freedom... if the vote had been used to determine if they should have economic freedom?

      Comment


        #4
        MAybe the answer is a MWB and/or SWB and free choice for Alberta and BC?

        Comment


          #5
          I met Joe Janzen at a trade show in Western Canada. He is a WCWGA board member. He is student, working part time on “daddy’s” farm. Daddy is paying for his masters degree in Ag Business from the socialist U of Manitoba. I bet that degree sure can be worth much to his peers.

          I may not agree with the WCWGA most of the time, especially from such in-experienced and naive people as Joe Janzen and Carolyn Jolly. I’d certainly give a Conrad Johnson or Dwayne Anderson much more credibility making such comments to the media.

          Comment


            #6
            So, 40% of eligible voters want status quo for barley & 45% of eligible voters want status quo for wheat.

            Comment


              #7
              Jman,

              I support anyone who makes an effort to get an education(the fact you don't makes a statement in itself), and any family who supports their children doing so, is one to be appreciated. After all, most of us work so our children can be well-fed, well-clothed and well-educated. Hats off to the Janzens.

              Young people entering farming are scarce and need to be supported and encouraged, not denigrated, Jman.

              wade, When I was growing up, Indians, according to the law, Indian Act, were not allowed to go into a beer parlor.

              I take it that your solution would be that Indians could go into the pub in Alberta, but not in Manitoba or Saskatchewan.

              My view would be that as Canadian citizens, they could enter any bar in any province.

              It's a rights and freedoms issue.

              Parsley

              Comment


                #8
                BennyHin

                thanks for helping out in the barley plebiscite by supporting the Alberta government position. Your comment about Northern Alberta will play well here.

                The question will (I suspect) be about choice - not black and white CWB/no CWB. Alberta represents 50 % of Canadian barley production. The barley discussion should be about rights and building a business case - not religious fevor.

                Comment


                  #9
                  wedino,

                  L like that you are always quick-draw-McGraw on the pencil!

                  Parsley

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Manitoba producers. Do you think the fusarium issue has impacted how producers market wheat and barley in your province. In Alberta where we have strong domestic market, other than in the Peace barley is almost always marketed locally. This is based on the premise that the grain can stand on it's own merit. When quality becomes an issue producers are more likely to market where it can be blended off.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Interesting enough, the hog industry is also mentioned. Little if no feed barley is exported out of Manitoba (longest most expensive distance to port and grain has to pass by a lot of domestic livestock operations). The export market for feed barley is likely the most relevant for Peace River farmers so they will be the most concerned here.

                      I am also interested in comments on malt barley. One maltsters in Winnipeg (Dominion). Access to the export market mostly six row with the US/Minneapolis being the target market. Fusarium obviously an issue with six row acres being pushed east into Saskatchatchewan to avoid. Anheuser Busch is the big buyer with representation in Manitoba.

                      Perhaps one of the reasons Manitoba farmers like having malt barley under the CWB is they are able to take some of the price benefit from two row malt (most grown Alberta and Saskatchewan) redistributed to six row growers through the pooling process. A mute point given neither of us see the actual prices paid for malt barley by maltsters (domestic or export).

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Re: building a business case.

                        Latest data from The Federal Grain Monitor:

                        Average system costs for CWRS: $61.81/tonne
                        Average system costs for canola: $41.51/tonne

                        I used the "Netback Calculator" (www.netback.ca) for a farm near Edmonton; the costs to move and handle CWB Feed Barley was $53.11/tonne; for someone in western Manitoba, the cost is $69.93/tonne.
                        (Don't know what the average costs would be for the prairies but likely somewhere between these two - from what I see, likely higher than wheat.)

                        Seems to me if we had a system for wheat and barley like we have for canola, we could put about $20/tonne back into farmers' hands - even more on durum (more like $30/tonne).

                        Last crop year that would've been 425 million.

                        Using real data - not some economist's model - we can see that the way the CWB does business cost you guys an extra $425 million in 04/05 - not including the impact it had on non-CWB (like canola) prices and returns.

                        The CWB must get an average premium of $22.00 per tonne JUST TO COVER THE COST OF DOING BUSINESS.

                        Note to those that voted for the status quo (and all other CWB supporters): next time farmers are looking for federal "support" that requires tax dollars, don't be surprised if we non-farmer taxpayers don't support it. I believe in religious freedom - just don't expect me to pay you for it.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Craig,

                          I don't think fusarium had any impact other than to previously create a bunch of anti-cwb grain farmers. Way back when the cwb told farmers to burn their wheat because of fusarium, turned out there was still a good market for it in ND, it was minimally discounted depending upon the percentage of "scab" in the sample.

                          What does have the biggest impact is something else that you don't have in Alberta. commie rags and commie jounalists like The MB Co-operator and John Morris and the (presumed to be heavily sponsored by the CWB) Farmers Independant Weekly. These two versions of Pravda have done more to influence farmers thoughts than anything else.

                          IMO, the opinion of the ag industry by too many MB farmers is not shaped by individual thought and analysis but by the editorial pages of these decrepit rags.

                          So that's why I think, considering that almost every MB farmer subscibes to one or the other if not both, the number who wanted to blow the cwb to kingdom come is quite encouraging.

                          So please don't forget about the sane 4000 or so. We need Alberta's help to remove the shackles.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            35% of so called voters still just don't care, this is the problem. Our M.D. had a plebiscite on a rec tax and a non vote meant you were in favour of the increase, fixed the problem of voter turn out. Since the Feds are in favour of market choice the non votes in the Federal Plebiscite should go to Market Choice, fixes the problem.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Ok simple question. Do you all feel the national plebiscite is a plebiscite for the government to determine the majority and govern based on the herd, or to use the information and govern to allow the freedoms of the minority - regardless of the outcome of the results?

                              Comment

                              • Reply to this Thread
                              • Return to Topic List
                              Working...