KINDERSLEY, Sask. (Staff) – Last week’s meeting of the grain marketing review panel brought back some bad memories for Kent Charteris.
In 1992, the Kerrobert, Sask., farmer attended one meeting in a similar series called Transportation Talks.
What’s happened in grain transportation policy since then bears little resemblance to what farmers said at those meetings, and Charteris fears the same thing could happen again.
“I hope the government listens to what farmers think and then responds,” he said in an interview, adding he came to the meeting because he wants to support single- desk selling through a strong Canadian Wheat Board.
Read Also
Agriculture ministers agree to AgriStability changes
federal government proposed several months ago to increase the compensation rate from 80 to 90 per cent and double the maximum payment from $3 million to $6 million
But based on his experience with the transportation meetings, he suspects the government has its own agenda.
“When it comes down to the government making a decision they’re going to be looking at financing available and budgets,” said Charteris. “I just hope they see the wheat board as something that shores up the economy, which in fact helps them in the end.”
Other farmers at the grain marketing meeting here expressed similar doubts about their influence on federal government policy.
“I have very skeptical views about the process,” said Ken Ritter, who farms at Major, Sask., adding he’s unhappy that the panel’s two weeks of formal hearings in March will be held in Winnipeg. He’s worried that means the major institutional and corporate players in the grain industry will have more say than farmers.
Sam Magnus, a farmer from Luseland, Sask., described the review panel as “politically motivated” and likened it to the public hearings on gun control legislation, which he says ignored the views of those most directly affected.
“I’m not sure what we’re doing today is of any value because (agriculture minister Ralph) Goodale has set up this panel and maybe they’re already made up their mind what they’re going to do.”
Magnus said he supports the wheat board as a single-desk seller, but only if the structure is changed to make it more accountable to farmers. Government-appointed commissioners should be replaced by a farmer-elected board of directors, which would hire a chief executive officer to run the agency.
He doubts the board would survive in a dual market, but added if those changes aren’t made it doesn’t really matter: “If the structure stays the same, then I’m done with the Canadian Wheat Board.”
Charteris said he wasn’t surprised the meeting overwhelmingly supported the board as a single- desk seller. The agency went to bat for farmers during the tough times of the trade war, he said, and has made a series of changes in recent years to serve farmers better.
He said the board’s initial payment provides stability and security and has been a crucial tool in managing his farm.
“It’s the only thing I can really budget on,” said Charteris. “When I’m sitting down to decide on inputs or what to grow, I can take that number and know what the bottom is.”
