Ignatieff continues to make overtures to farmers, west

[Progressive Tory]

Was he writing these on the blackboard? He's such an academic it's funny.

The comment about young Canadians staying on farms to become agricultural leaders might have had all farmers rolling their eyes at the same time. That's impressive.

Not necessarily. New farming techniques require more technology. It's no longer about 20 hour days and shovelling poo. It's becoming a big business that requires a wide range of skills. One of my husband's graduates just landed a job on a 'farm' in Sask., maintaining equipment. He's well paid with full benefits and they even fly his girlfriend out once a month, until she finishes school and can join him. He calls it a 'dream job'.

Despite the fact that I oppose ethanol production, it's here and will require a huge workforce to grow the amount of corn required to produce. There is a lot of potential in the agricultural industry, and many would be wise to try to get in on the ground floor.

It is said that Canada may avoid some of the chaos of global warming and our water could make us a leading producer of food for a global market. We can't just dismiss this.

I am picturing him with his pointer and blackboard though. Fortunately, he spent years talking to peasants in wartorn countries, so appreciates both sides. Do they still use blackboards in Universities? Mr. Chips meets Mr. Green Jeans. Hee haw!

[Progressive Tory]

You gotta listen to this guy Ignatieff. You learn something every time he speaks.

I agree.

[Progressive Tory]

Since when did farmers have duties-other than an obligation to keep their own body and soul together?

Like employees and business owners, farmers have a duty to grow food if they want to sell it. Otherwise, why farm? We are all obligated to do something if we want to survive.

Edited February 26, 2009 by Progressive Tory

[Progressive Tory]

"What tools they need to compete" ---- That does not found very earthy on the part of Ignateiff...agriculture was never meant to be a competative profit making venture...

Perhaps not, but it now has to be. Small farms cannot produce enough to supply a growing market. Farming has had to become industrialized, or stay small and sell at open air markets or roadside stands. Many of those 'farmers' now have fulltime jobs and simply 'hobby farm'.

[Progressive Tory]

You know, the water he doesn't want to die in.

Glub, glub. I guess we're all just stewards of land, water and sky, because we can't take them with us either ... except for a few shovels of dirt.

[Progressive Tory]

I can tell you no matter what he says alberta farmers won't listen, the liberals party is dead in the west.

Doesn't matter. Naturally, he would prefer your vote, but for now just wants to reach out. The Liberals are not your enemies. At a time of crisis we all have to work together. It's the Canadian way.

[Progressive Tory]

I doubt it, unless he is going to remove the wheat board, and does more in opposition then just promise it.

Why do Westerners hate the Wheat Board? I thought it was a good thing. Tom Lukiwski's former boss is now the head of it.

[Progressive Tory]

Alberta’s economy remains tied to an elastic commodity. When times are good, Alberta thinks it can rule the world. When times are bad, they blame Quebec.

I couldn't have said it better myself. 'Western alientation' was a term coined by National Citizens Coalition founder Colin Brown. He brought it out when it suited him, and buried when it was not approriate. It's a myth.

The East has come to the aid of the West many times, and vice versa. I'm sorry if I don't hate you because you weren't born in NB or Ontario. I don't hate you because you're Canadian and we're all in this together.

[Progressive Tory]

delete duplicate

If you mean the double statements, you can simply hit edit at the end of your post and delete what you don't need. Then re-submit modified post.

[Progressive Tory]

That's fine as long as he is learning something also!

Given his career, I don't think he intends to stop learning.

[Smallc]

The East has come to the aid of the West many times, and vice versa. I'm sorry if I don't hate you because you weren't born in NB or Ontario. I don't hate you because you're Canadian and we're all in this together.

I may not always agree with everything you say, but thank you. I think people far too often forget what you have just said here.

[bill_barilko]

Like employees and business owners, farmers have a duty to grow food if they want to sell it. Otherwise, why farm?

My guess is that you have little contact with different sectors of society-there are many people who produce enough to live and the rest of the world can go hang.

That is not agi-business-that is subsistence living and is as popular as ever.

[blueblood]

Why do Westerners hate the Wheat Board? I thought it was a good thing. Tom Lukiwski's former boss is now the head of it.

The going to jail if you don't want to participate in it for starters...

It's not all it's cracked up to be yet it's not as evil as it's cracked up to be.

Option 2 on the plebiscite...

[Progressive Tory]

The going to jail if you don't want to participate in it for starters...

It's not all it's cracked up to be yet it's not as evil as it's cracked up to be.

Option 2 on the plebiscite...

Do most farmers on the prairies want it gone? I do believe they should be able to opt if they want, but not allowed back in without a penalty. Would that be a reasonable compromise?

Seems to me the ones who would benifit the most if it was dismantled, are the corporate farms. Smaller farms may need the protection and guaranteed income.

[blueblood]

Do most farmers on the prairies want it gone? I do believe they should be able to opt if they want, but not allowed back in without a penalty. Would that be a reasonable compromise?

Seems to me the ones who would benifit the most if it was dismantled, are the corporate farms. Smaller farms may need the protection and guaranteed income.

Some do, some don't. A better solution would be pick one that gives the best returns and no penalty.

Not all of the prairies grows board grains. There are a lot of non-board grains as well that smaller farms grow.

You would have to define what is small.

The CWB doesn't give guaranteed income, they are subject to market forces like anything else.

[guyser]

Not all of the prairies grows board grains. There are a lot of non-board grains as well that smaller farms grow.

Could you explain what that means please? "non board and board grains" ?

[blueblood]

Could you explain what that means please? "non board and board grains" ?

Board grains = wheat for export/human consumption, malt barley, durum

non board= everything else.

[jdobbin]

A better solution would be pick one that gives the best returns and no penalty.

As we have discussed before, a monopoly state trading enterprise ends the moment the monopoly ends.

Pick one and there is a penalty.

Edited February 27, 2009 by jdobbin

[blueblood]

As we have discussed before, a monopoly state trading enterprise ends the moment the monopoly ends.

Pick one and there is a penalty.

what penalty would that be?

And don't try that WTO spin, the CWB rep explicitly told me that is a non issue.

[jdobbin]

what penalty would that be?

The end of the Wheat Board.

And don't try that WTO spin, the CWB rep explicitly told me that is a non issue.

That the Wheat Board could allow dual marketing and not face WTO retaliation? Who exactly told you that?

I have told you repeatedly that once the monoply ended, the Wheat Board would cease to have price pooling and a single desk and would have to become a pure grain company. Since it has no assets to speak of, it would likely cease to exist the day it lost the monopoly.

Edited February 27, 2009 by jdobbin

[blueblood]

The end of the Wheat Board.

That the Wheat Board could allow dual marketing and not face WTO retaliation? Who exactly told you that?

I have told you repeatedly that once the monoply ended, the Wheat Board would cease to have price pooling and a single desk and would have to become a pure grain company. Since it has no assets to speak of, it would likely cease to exist the day it lost the monopoly.

I don't buy that for one second. Handling charges exist board or non board grains. The CWB costs are comparable to what it costs for the elevator companies to market the grain.

The CWB rep said so at a Q&A and I explicitly asked him that question of your scenario. You are flat out wrong in that regard. I'll take the words of a CWB employee over yours on that matter.

The prairies are not wall to wall board grains so I'm having difficulty buying your CWB is dying if it lost the monopoly. It does not market canola, soybeans, corn, etc. The CWB still pays handling charges that the elevators and railways charge. They still react to markets just like anybody else.

Dual marketing exists, board and non board grains. If the WTO were to have a beef about a state trading enterprise and free trade in the same deal, they would have had it by now. Canada is exporting grains with both a state trading enterprise and with the free market.

[Visionseeker]

If you mean the double statements, you can simply hit edit at the end of your post and delete what you don't need. Then re-submit modified post.

Indeed. Problem was I deleted the wrong post. Too quick with the hot keys was I.

[jdobbin]

I don't buy that for one second. Handling charges exist board or non board grains. The CWB costs are comparable to what it costs for the elevator companies to market the grain.

The Wheat Board has no assets to act like a grain company.

The CWB rep said so at a Q&A and I explicitly asked him that question of your scenario. You are flat out wrong in that regard. I'll take the words of a CWB employee over yours on that matter.

Which employee? Do tell?

The prairies are not wall to wall board grains so I'm having difficulty buying your CWB is dying if it lost the monopoly. It does not market canola, soybeans, corn, etc. The CWB still pays handling charges that the elevators and railways charge. They still react to markets just like anybody else.

I'll repeat. Once the Board loses its monopoly, it has to become a pure grain company.

Even the Canadian government site says that.

http://dsp-psd.tpsgc.gc.ca/Collection-R/Lo...grain/wto-e.htm

Single desk and price pooling remain pillars of the CWB; however, should the board of directors ever receive the mandate to change the CWB from a marketing agency to a grain company, they could do so under the current legislation.

The problem for the Wheat Board is that it has no assets and without assets, it has no advantage over grain companies already in existence.

Dual marketing exists, board and non board grains. If the WTO were to have a beef about a state trading enterprise and free trade in the same deal, they would have had it by now. Canada is exporting grains with both a state trading enterprise and with the free market.

We have had this discussion before. Provincial marketing boards are allowed under the WTO. Federal ones are not.

The Wheat Board former president Measner said that if the monopoly on something like barley ended, the Wheat Board would simply not trade in it at all since it would invite tariffs.

[blueblood]

The Wheat Board has no assets to act like a grain company.

It's a marketer, they take their cut just like the marketers for a grain company. Both cuts are similar for board and non board grains.

Which employee? Do tell?

That would be Blair McCann from the Saskatoon office. He said the fact that there are both board and non board grains makes the WTO issue pointless.

I'll repeat. Once the Board loses its monopoly, it has to become a pure grain company.

And I'll repeat this again, there are board and non board grains exported. It is not wall to wall wheat grown in the prairies. The CWB has to compete to get acres just like the private companies. Whats another hit? I'm pretty sure the CWB wasn't too impressed when Canola was developed and marketed as a nonboard grain. same goes for peas, corn. soybeams etc.

The problem for the Wheat Board is that it has no assets and without assets, it has no advantage over grain companies already in existence.

Seems to be doing well enough without its monopoly on all grains grown.

We have had this discussion before. Provincial marketing boards are allowed under the WTO. Federal ones are not.

We're talking about board and non board grains. The CWB and private companies trade in countries that impose tariffs on Canadian agricultural products. Even then it's a double standard if eastern grain gets to be exported whereas western grain doesn't, Canada should be facing trade penalties under that system then.

[jdobbin]

It's a marketer, they take their cut just like the marketers for a grain company. Both cuts are similar for board and non board grains.

The difference is that Wheat Board is a single desk buyer. If they lose the single desk, they have no assets to help market grain in terms of storage and transportation.

This has been gone over many times.

I think some farmers are seriously going to be surprised if they think they can have the Wheat Board and other options for selling. The Wheat Board would be dismantled the day the monopoly was gone.

That would be Blair McCann from the Saskatoon office. He said the fact that there are both board and non board grains makes the WTO issue pointless.

And he believes that that Wheat Board can sell things like wheat and now face tariffs from other nations once they lose the monopoly? Is this the question you posed?

And I'll repeat this again, there are board and non board grains exported. It is not wall to wall wheat grown in the prairies. The CWB has to compete to get acres just like the private companies. Whats another hit? I'm pretty sure the CWB wasn't too impressed when Canola was developed and marketed as a nonboard grain. same goes for peas, corn. soybeams etc.

The Wheat Board is a monopoly trader for the products it markets. Once it loses that monopoly, it ceases to have a role. As you point out, canola doesn't need the Wheat Board. It also can't have the Wheat Board. If the Wheat Board tries to market other products, it will face WTO tariffs.

Seems to be doing well enough without its monopoly on all grains grown.

Because it has sought to market those other grains.

We're talking about board and non board grains. The CWB and private companies trade in countries that impose tariffs on Canadian agricultural products. Even then it's a double standard if eastern grain gets to be exported whereas western grain doesn't, Canada should be facing trade penalties under that system then.

Eastern grain does not have a federal state trading enterprise marketing it.

By all means, ask for a dual marketing but don't be surprised if the Wheat Board end on that day. Wheat Board officials themselves have said they would not market barley of they lost the monopoly. Do you think they would?