"CWB and the COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION"

[TOM4CWB]

To:
The Prime Minister of Canada; and
The Minister Responsible for the CWB; and
The CWB Directors, both appointed and elected; and
The Prime Minister of Canada; and
All other concerned parties in the CWB Monopoly debate.

Is the CWB exclusive jurisdiction of the Canadian Federal Government?

A wise man once said;

The negotiation between the Alberta and the Canadian governments, over CWB monopoly marketing, is a negotiation between two sovereign states.

The recent rumours about Alberta creating a “CWB Offset Program” as this week’s Prairie Centre “CWB Offset Program - Commentary - April 2, 2001” calls it, leaves no doubt that the above statement is true.

If Alberta does not have any authority over Agriculture, or International and Intergovernmental Relations, then why do we have Alberta Cabinet Ministerial Posts to look after these areas of our economy?

In the last fiscal year Alberta spent well over $600 million on supports to the Agriculture sector inside Alberta.

Less than 30% of Alberta farm support came from Ottawa.

Yet by far the majority of Alberta agricultural products are exported.

The Canadian government gave special aid payments to Manitoba and Saskatchewan farmers last year, and left out Alberta.

Big, Bad, Mistake.

I would insist that this has started a revolution inside Alberta, which will end in only one outcome, a marketing choice option for Alberta Agribusiness and grain producers.

There is an old saying, “He who pays the piper calls the tune.”

Alberta today is paying the price of federal government mishandling of its grain sector.

Alberta has every right to insist on Marketing Choice for its grain producers in whatever form the Alberta Government chooses.

That this will revolutionize, and change the CWB, is a given.

Can the Canadian Government claim it is solely responsible for CWB Grain Marketing policies when the Provincial Governments have to pay when the CWB does a belly flop?

[chas]

Tom4cwb: Do you know if the Alberta Government is considering this move to offset the buy back or not. I think you know who I'm so contact me personally if you want to this is interesting. Chas

[TOM4CWB]

Chas,

I don't really know if the Alberta Government is going to do this or not.

At the Western Canadian Wheat Growers in Kananaskis in January, they voted to implement this buy-back offset program.

I presented strong opposition to this idea, as the problems for Sask and Manitoba that this will create are enormous.

I strongly believe that consultation and negotiation with the CWB Directors would be by far the best opportunity to resolve this marketing choice issue.

If this fails, I believe that government to government negotiations are the next best option.

As a absolute last resort the buy-back offset may bring about a resolution of one of the two negotiation methods.

I really really hope Alberta is not forced into doing this offset.

Does this help, I am being candid and open and these are my personal opinions obviously.

Preimer Klein will ultimately be the person who is responsible for this process, but just as electricity and natural gas deregulation occured, I strongly believe marketing choice in selling wheat and barley is as important to the Alberta economy.

Does this help Chas?

[chas]

Tom4cwb: Thanks tom that helps alot. I quess its a wait and see what happens. Chas

[rockpile]

Deregulation?
Tom4CWB, you are a little mislead here on some things, regarding deregulation of power and gas. First of all, with power, check your latest bill and you will find, if you are a farmer, that your cost went from 2.8 cents/kw/hr to 11.1 cents per kw/hr. You were shielded by Provincial rebates from having your power bill increased 4 times - not what the marketplace demanded. Second, gas prices are not a function of deregulation, for if you look into it, you will find that rural users are not open to competitive gas contracts until July 2003. What you are seeing is the North American market price hitting your back door, vis-a-vie, open market pricing. Your gas bill is being subsidized by all taxpayers to the tune of about 60%, to bring your home and farm heating costs in line with last years bills. Not a market function, I am sure you will agree. So, as far as your notion of an Alberta wheat price - can you quantify the rebate there. After all, I am looking at world markets and plan to seed Hard Red Spring Wheat only, and if you 'all' leave me alone and let me pay the CWB to sell my crop, world wide, I expect to do pretty good. If not, can you quantify my Alberta Wheat rebate amount, so I can inform my banker? Also, will it come on my gas rebate check or my power reduction bill? Or, to Alberta 'pretend' free enterprizers, will we coin a new name?
Rockpile

[chas]

Rockpile: I do believe that Tom4cwb is miles ahead of the rest of us farmers in his positive approach to marketing. He doesn't want to take the CWB marketing away from the producer in Alberta but he wants to create the possiblity for individual producers to market their product without having to go throught the buy back process to obtain a export license or to supply a domestic value adding industry. The CWB policies favour exporting commodities and jobs out of the country. We need a check to make our CWB more competitive. Did you ever wonder why we have very little value added on the prairies in wheat products. Its because industry does not want to pay for unused freight and handling on a commodity to satisfy some pooling type of marketing. We must move to a no cost export license and a open domestic market to create a competitive pricing mechanism in both wheat and barley.
This will create better prices and more value added industry when government isn't left with the monoploy to screw it up and then move at a snails pace to fix it.
Tom$cwb theory will not remove that much production from going to the CWB. The maxinium removed from the CWB would not likely be over 2.5 million tonnes but the rewards for producers could be substantial.
Just my .02 worth. Chas

[TOM4CWB]

Rockpile,

I will be the first to admit that the electricity and natural gas deregulation attempts in Alberta have been less than perfect to say the least.

Hopefully we can learn from our mistakes, and get them right.

As for the CWB, well the directors themselves could fix the problem at the next CWB Board meeting, and no-cost export licenses would be being issued as the CWB Act intended originally.

I hope the Alberta government is not forced into distorting things worse, because the CWB directors refused to do their job and end this problem!

Does this help, or should my farm continue sending your farm a check?

Then when would you let me bring my truck to your farm and pick up a load of CWRS, if you like us cross subsidising each other?

[parsley]

I've thought about what thalpenny says on the Dual Marketing thread:

QUOTE:

"thalpenny
posted Mar 8, 2001 7:54

Tom4cwb - don't confuse price pooling with single desk selling. Price pooling can exist in an open market, however single desk selling cannot. This is the crux of the issue.

"End of Quote


What thalpenny is apparently unable to recognize, is that we don't have single desk selling in Canada.....we have "SELECTED-SINGLE DESK SELLING"........ Just coined a new name Rockpile!

Those forced into the CWB scheme of selected-single desk and selected price pooling in Canada are average Mr. Farmer in the Designated Area. They were selected by the Federal Government to supply grain to the Selected-Single Desk. Not surprisingly, Ontario and Quebec were bypassed.

Even within the Designated Area, there are "De-Selectees". They are groups that have the option to bypass the Board if they want: they are simply ordained with a CWB no-cost interprovincial-export license! Several CWB Directors could be automatically granted no-cost export licenses by the CWB if , as seed growers, they request them. Feed Mills are afforded the same opportunity : they bypass the single-desk: they don't pool. They enjoy these "Bankable Assets".

"Lynn Flewitt, Assistant Commissioner of the Canadian Grains Commision grew the unregistered US wheat variety Grandin in 1992 and sold it as seed during its one-year interim registration", says the June 2/94 Western Producer. Would it have been exported with a no-cost CWB export license? Was he a de-selecteee? What about the rest of the grandin growers in Manitoba at that time? Selected-Single Deskers?

Selected -Single Desk has bullied its' way through since 1947. We all know as the Export Manufactured Feed Agreements were secretly handed out in the backrooms , without telling farmers about it; feed mills too, became De-selectees .

One of the eager answers that CWB Directors and Staff often give for not granting no-cost liceses is that "it would set a precedent"." Do the CWB Directors and Staff argue that renewing EMFA licensing agreements "sets a precedent" or harm single-desk? They continue to renew the no-cost licenses and they don't require pooling. so the answer is no.

CWB Directors and staff continue to preach one thing and do another. As Tom 4CWB states:

"As for the CWB, well the directors themselves could fix the problem at the next CWB Board meeting, and no-cost export licenses would be being issued as the CWB Act intended originally."


There is only Selected-Single-Desk Selling in Canada, thalpenny.

Parsley

PS

Rockpile, do you remember when Goodale told you about Humpty-Dumpty? (Kind of like the Nafta line of lies) . How you could ever put humpin-dumpty together again? Well, the EMFA is a good example of millions of bushels bypassing the pools. Why isn't the CWB marketing the grain directly to the mills and POOLING it? (When was pooling discarded? ) Did everything get 'broke'?

Nice to have you back Rockpile,maybe we can have a few exchanges.

[AdamSmith]

Of course Rockpile we'll let you pay the CWB to market your grain for you, and thanks for asking anyway. By the way since you were considerate enough to ask I'll do the same but I want to use the open market to price my grain. You wouldn't have any problem with me doing that, would you, Rockpile?

See how easy that is Rockpile!

[parsley]

Rockpile. There is an issue that I have been wanting to discuss with you for quite some time. You insist on a wheat and barley monopoly . You think you have a "right" to your monopoly and that your right....Rockpile's right...and the right of all the other monopolists.....should take precedence over all the other producers who do not want the monopoly. Lets look at what you are asking for, Rockpile What is it you really want here?

Question ...What do you think you get from the monopoly? Why do you want it so badaly? What's in it for you?

Answer .... Over and over, monopolists claim they get more money for single desk (that's onlyyour opinion....but we'll leave that for now). So I presume that the main goal for the majority of monopolists is MORE CASH in the pocket.

Q How do monopolists accomplish this goal?

A By force. The CWB is legislation that requires all producers in the Prairie Provinces apply for an export license in order to sell-export what they grow. The Monopolist welcomes jailing, fines, coercion, or manipulation to accomplish his goal...more cash in the pocket.


Q Morally, is the monopolist position defensible?

A No. To advocate fines and jailing and coercion so that you can get more cash in your pocket is not morally acceptable.

Q What other means can farmers use to get more money for their products?

A Look around you. Why has wing nite become so popular? 20 years ago, chicken wings were almost considered scraps. Look at the organic industry....they get premiums directly from the consumer....no promotions at all. They built an industry without force, or loans or fines or jailing.

Q So we have an ethical issue on who's rights are more important ? Can you morally defend your position, Rockpile?

Parsley

[wedino]

Mornin Rockpile, You state <Your gas bill is being subsidized by all taxpayers to the tune of about 60%, to bring your home and farm heating costs in line with last years bills. Not a market function, >

I'll argue that Alberta residents are not being subsidized by all taxpayers as you state, but are being compensated for their share of the royality that Alberta is receiving from the NG produced in Alta. After all doesn't this NG belong to all citizens of Alberta.

Later........Cam

[wedino]

Rockpile, You state>Your gas bill is being subsidized by all taxpayers to the tune of about 60%, to bring your home and farm heating costs in line with last years bills. Not a market function, <

This got omitted from my previous message,

Sorry.........Cam

[wedino]

Going back to parsleys' comments directed at me -

I would say that parsley still reinforces my argument, that there IS a single desk agency for selling western Canadain wehat and barley.

Don't get aroused by the personal attacks and shreds that get thrown out on this website under the cover of anonymity - a dual market is an open market and single desk selling with the advantage to capture different values from different markets is lost under that scenario. Period.

The guidelines are there in the legislation to change the grains included in the CWB Act. Farmers will decide how they wish to use this legislation they have, or if they want to discard it. Elected Directors will ultimatley determine that. And the CWB will continue to modify in ways that add value and meet farmers' business needs.

parsley, re: the EMFA - do I hear you calling for the CWB to regain single desk status over feed grains in western Canada? I don't think your wheat and barley growing colleagues would agree with that policy. (you do grow wheat and barley don't you??)

Tom

[TOM4CWB]

Tom,

I think you missed the whole point!

THe CWB exempts Seed wheat with out a vote.

The CWB exempts Export feed with out a vote.

The CWB exempted Creston farmers so they could haul their grain to the US and get more money!

There is no legislated monopoly, come on admit it!

No vote is needed to exempt organic wheat and barley, admit it!

Please stop confusing the issues with procedures that are not backed up by either practical experience of history!

Farmers are the ones who pay for the CWB to be in existance, not the Federal governement.

Please listen, and help us all change, wouldn't that be a positive development?

[parsley]

Your comment Thalpenny,

"parsley, re: the EMFA - do I hear you calling for the CWB to regain single desk status over feed grains in western Canada? I don't think your wheat and barley growing colleagues would agree with that policy "


..... I thought everyone on this site knows that I would not want feed grains under single desk. I wish I could write more clearly, Thalpenny.


In fact I would advocate that feed grains not come under compulsory single desk selling. Or any other grains. I think it detrimental to our economy. I concur that a very large majority of farmers would support feed mills getting no-cost licenses. I would also hazard a guess that a large majority of producers would , at the same time, want the CWB issuing no-cost licenses to farmers. Could you agree that not many farmers would approve of granting this privilege to corporations without retaining the same privilege for themselves, even if they didn't envoke it? It's not unreasonable.

When you say,Thalpenny,

"And the CWB will continue to modify in ways that ........ meet farmers' business needs.",

I'm hopeful that you are beginning to acknowledge and appreciate the needs of farmers and farm families. We do have acute business needs, and the one of the most urgent ones at the present time is no-cost interprovincial and export licenses, thalpenny, and with your skills you could help to make that a reality.

Parsley