FFJ are few
To the Editor:
As a full-time farmer from Alberta, I thought your readers might be interested to know that not very many of us support the law-breaking of “Farmers For Justice.” This very noisy group seems to think there is no one else in the world but them!
Most of us understand that there are no rights without responsibilities and no freedoms without obligations to our neighbors and society.
It is a criminal act to transport grain across the U.S. border, and for good reason: this is not a victimless crime.
Read Also
Late season rainfall creates concern about Prairie crop quality
Praying for rain is being replaced with the hope that rain can stop for harvest. Rainfall in July and early August has been much greater than normal.
Every bushel of Canadian grain that is smuggled across the border ends up competing with Canadian grain marketed internationally.
The courts in Manitoba have already awarded $55,000 in damages against a smuggler because of this. Such smuggling takes money out of the pockets of the 99 percent of farmers who use the CWB.
There are at least 130,000 grain producers in western Canada. Only a tiny fraction of us can economically grab the occasional high U.S. spot price. If all of us tried, how long would that spot price remain high? How long would the U.S. allow us to send our huge grain production south? …
Most Canadian grain still goes to the overseas market and that’s not likely to change anytime soon. The CWB is still the best way to get it there; or would Mr. Spencer care to phone Saddam Hussein to see if he wants a truckload of grain?
Rights and freedoms only come with responsibility to the community. Merely because a few fanatics claim their version of freedom allows them to break the law at the expense of the rest of us, doesn’t give them the right to do so.
In several years of agitation, Farmers for Justice has managed to get criminal charges laid against only 160 people. Even assuming that all of those are farmers, that’s barely one percent of all grain producers.
The fact is that they have failed to make their case in several democratic forums and are now resorting to law-breaking, threats of violence and name-calling to get their way.
Shame on them.
– Ken Larsen,
Benalto, Alta.
CWB strength
To the Editor:
Over the last number of years I have watched with interest how a small group of farmers have been able to persuade many people that the CWB is not the right or best institution for marketing western Canadian farmers grain into the domestic and international markets. They have also done much lobbying in the U.S.A. to mobilize that country’s farmers and legislators to aim their guns at the CWB.
For those who don’t like single desk, I would ask how come farm chemical companies, farm machinery companies and grain companies, to name just three, are very busy amalgamating or joining forces to lessen competition and thereby have more control over sales and prices.
My thinking is they see the strength in the CWB marketing and they would dearly love to have something as close as possible in their way of doing business.
1. If we go the open market way, who would continue the market development that currently goes on?
2. Who would be willing to sell their grain to a new customer somewhere in the third world on credit?
3. Who would get a financial statement as to what the costs of marketing grain were?
4. Can we imagine the difference in value of a tonne of grain to the farmer due to rising world prices had it been through the open-market system vs. the CWB?
The grain industry was born with a team attitude, it has served us well, and it will continue to serve us well.
Changes have been made and must continue to be made, to make sure the prairie farmer can produce and market into the global market.
I believe the single desk is a very valuable asset we have. Let’s not lose it by default.
– George Siemens,
Fiske, Sask.
CWB helps
To the Editor:
It is very evident that a lot of the comments you are publishing in the Producer about the Canadian Wheat Board are originating in the minds of people who haven’t the faintest idea of the facts they are talking about.
The Canadian Wheat Board system evolved from marketing problems during the First World War, when the government of the day during wartime established the Canadian Grains Commission in 1917.
The idea was to control the price of wheat from going too high and so making the food problem more difficult in wartime. The price was set at $2.17 per bushel, and the speculative market was closed.
The farmers had gained a degree of price stability that had never been experienced before and they liked it.
After the war, the Grain Commission was continued for one year and then abandoned because the government took the stand that they could not be involved in competition with business in peacetime. This led to the attempt by farmers to gain some degree of stability in grain prices through the organization of the Wheat Pools.
There was continual agitation for government intervention. I was buying grain at Glaslyn, Sask. on Dec. 16, 1932, and bought two Northern Wheat for 18 cents a bushel and one CW oats for seven cents a bushel. There was no Wheat Board, no interim payment, and no final payment.
That same wheat rose in price until on July 31, 1933, it was quoted at 70 cents per bushel. With this type of speculation and manipulation going on, agitation for government intervention continued to increase until in 1935 the Canadian Wheat Board was established. …
We have always had a group of farmers who have been opposed to, and as a matter of principle, against the “system.”
No man living can foretell what the final payment may be for this year. In the meantime, some farmers consider their judgment to be superior to that of the Canadian Wheat Board officials. I believe that the Wheat Board know as much about American wheat prices as anyone can, and are taking full advantage of their knowledge on a day-to-day basis.
This is the only way that all Canadian farmers can share in this huge bulge in the American price system.
I firmly believe that the Wheat Board system is the best device that has been developed to this time for the marketing of western grain, and heartily support Ralph Goodale, and wish him well in all his efforts on behalf of western farmers.
– Clarence McKee,
Assiniboia, Sask.
Goodale support
To the Editor:
Your editorial page by Fairbairn and Barry Wilson on June 6 gave me the courage and sufficient prod to pick up the pen once more.
Of course, your reference to the Alberta vote myth (describes it well) caught my eye. Alberta also hired Mr. Carter to write an anti-wheat board analysis of the Wheat Board operations to counter the results of the study done by Darryl Kraft and two other economists.
I think the Alberta studies author (Carter) felt he had enjoyed his tenure in Winnipeg at the U of M and the commodity exchange and to write otherwise was unexpected.
We all remember his preamble which led to the ill-fated continental barley fiasco which was challenged in court by the three prairie pools. Our friend the Hon. Ralph Goodale, M.P., let it die through lack of appeal.
Since then, the Pools have remained silent and left Mr. Goodale unaided and at the mercy of a vocal minority led by greed and aided and urged on by a silent sinister force, based in Winnipeg, determined to scuttle the Canadian Wheat Board.
Only recently have we heard the Floor Traders Association speaking out, urging their overall “godfather” to be prepared and ready to pounce on the grain trade, as it appears to them that their battle to scuttle and destroy the Wheat Board is almost over.
Yes, Mr. Editor, Mr. Goodale needs help from the “silent” majority that continue to take for granted that there will always be a strong Canadian Wheat Board. Mr. Goodale’s reactions in times of crisis have maintained a status quo, otherwise the Liberals have fumbled the ball. Too much precious time and borrowed money has been wasted on gun-control rhetoric, sending troops abroad etc. …
There is not much (if any) support for the CWB among the more popular candidates likely to represent western Canada in the next elected parliament.
Yes, Mr. Goodale needs more support now, and for us, the future is more uncertain than I would like it to be.
– Lorne Radcliffe,
Cardale, Man.
Witch hunt?
To the Editor:
Repeatedly, farmers are urged not to break the law but rather to use legal channels in their CWB monopoly challenge. Let’s look back in history and see what it took for unjust discriminatory laws to be abolished.
In 1257 a court was appointed by the church (church and state were one and the same), called the Inquisition, which by historians’ estimates was responsible for the brutal death of close to nine million “witches,” 80 percent being women and children.
Their crime? Upon close examination we find many of them were practicing nothing more than folk medicine. The Inquisition was officially abolished in 1816 because the people began revolting. In other words, they broke the law.
The Women’s Suffrage Movement began in the early 1800s. In 1872 a group of women entered a building in Rochester, N.Y., which promptly led to the arrest of their leader, Susan Anthony, who was jailed and fined. Their crime? They dared to cast their ballot in the presidential election.
Today all women have the right to vote because a few dared to break the law.
In 1955 Rosa Lee Parks boarded a public bus and occupied a front seat. She was arrested, jailed and lost her job. Her crime? She disobeyed the bus driver’s order to move to the rear of the bus so a white person could sit down.
Because she dared to break the law, all African Americans have the right to occupy the front seat of a bus.
Not many people today believe Rosa Lee Parks, Susan Anthony and the millions of “witches” were guilty of criminal activity. Most will admit these laws were unjust and had no place in a democratic society. So too it is with the CWB.
History shows us unjust laws must first be broken in order to draw attention to the plight of the victims these laws were designed to control.
As long as the CWB has the power to suppress vital information, farmers are unable to make an informed decision as to which system would best meet their needs. The pro group base their decision entirely on propaganda and are perfectly happy with the status quo, just as the majority of people were in the Inquisition days.
They too were led to believe all the “witches” burned at the stake were heinous criminals.
The anti group on the other hand is demanding the truth.
Why is the CWB protected from the Freedom of Information Act; why is it protected from the eyes of the Auditor General? What is it that they don’t want us to see?
If there is really and truly nothing to hide, why then does it take the CWB lawyers more than three years to prepare for a court challenge?
Why is this the most secretive government agency in Canada?
We’re talking wheat and barley here, not plutonium!
It has been said, “there is nothing more damaging to an old concept than the truth.”
Farmers will continue to break this unjust discriminatory law because if they don’t, the truth will never be known.
– B. Leppky,
Tourond, Man.
Anti-CWB emotion
To the Editor:
In the June 6 issue of the Producer there appears an emotion-packed letter by Mr. Colhoun.
In it he states that the border grain runner represents a majority of farmers who are out to achieve an end to the Canadian Wheat Board.
What utter nonsense! He must have a very short memory if he can’t recall last year’s advisory board elections, where the only dual-marketing candidate elected was from Alberta. Anyone surprised?
The silent pro-board majority don’t have to blow off steam at every opportunity, burn permit books, go on a day hunger strike, threaten to lay down in front of a truck, or any other radical tricks to gain publicity.
For Mr. Colhoun’s information, breaking the law is a crime. Whether it be smuggling booze, cigarettes, grain or chemicals, all are punishable in a court of law!
Furthermore, we don’t care how much you get for your contraband grain.
Our concern is not to return to the days of shameful exploitation by the line grain companies and the Grain Exchange barons in Winnipeg.
The above are the reasons that the Wheat Pools and the CWB came into being.
In the past we got low prices by the exploiters in the fall, when the farmer was forced to sell to meet expenses and in spring the price spiraled three to four times that amount.
Can you call that freedom, and who do you think pocketed the difference?
We’re very much satisfied to see every farmer get the same price for his grain, regardless of what time of the year he sells.
How long do you think you’ll be border running once the States has a grain surplus or the Wheat Board is weakened?
Wake up, fellas, before it’s too late!
By the way, after the final payment is in for last year’s crop, you guys haven’t gained that much, but have caused a lot of bitterness, divisions and anxiety.
This group of agitators are challenging the law authorities of both Canada and the U.S. …
The surprising element in this crusade is the support they get from the UGG, Esquirol, Maguire, Paszkowski and the government of Alberta.
Hats off to Ralph Goodale for plugging a supposed loophole, so that nobody can squeeze through and get off on a technicality. As for the seizure of trucks, these boys know that they are intentionally breaking the law and must be prepared to suffer the consequences.
Yours for the silent majority on orderly marketing.
– Mike Brischuk,
Swan River, Man.
Quebec CWB?
To the Editor:
Well, Garry Fairbairn is really scraping the bottom of the barrel in his search for support for the (Western) Canadian Wheat Board. Now he has to enlist the aid of an MP whose party is dedicated to the breakup of Canada.
I am referring to Jean Landry of the Bloc QuŽbecois who expressed his support for the WCWB in a debate in parliament sponsored by the Reform Party. It is curious that Mr. Landry’s support for the Board did not include a request that its authority be extended to encompass all of Eastern Canada, particularly Quebec.
One would think that the Quebec MPs who have been so zealous in the past in making sure that they obtain every advantage for Quebec would jump at the chance to ensure that Quebec grain farmers have the same opportunities as their western counterparts.
Why are the Quebec farmers not up in arms over this discrimination against them?
Since Mr. Fairbairn is so obviously underemployed, I suggest that he undertake a campaign along with his friends in the Bloc QuŽbecois to bring Quebec under the wing of the WCWB. Once Quebec has come on board the other provinces are sure to follow. Then it can be said that the Board is truly the Canadian Wheat Board.
– Rick Strankman,
Altario, Alta.
CCAFT coverage
To the Editor:
Barry Wilson (“Goodale finds few allies in defending wheat board,” Western Producer, June 6) wonders where the defenders of the wheat board have gone.
Perhaps it is worth asking what public outlets there are to defend the board.
In January 1995, I and two other leading members of Citizens Concerned About Free Trade (CCAFT) were arrested after a public debate in Saskatoon on the future of the Canadian Wheat Board and the Canada-U.S. wheat dispute.
Your newspaper reported the story, headlined “Anti-free traders charged following disruption at crop show” (Western Producer Jan. 19, 1995), without mentioning that our “disruption” consisted of me, during the question period, having asked a question that challenged anti-board spokesmen.
Of our two-day trial in July, you carried no report.
After our acquittal on all charges in November, the Western Producer did an interview with myself but buried the report on page 52 and, again, printed not a word about the Canadian Wheat Board.
Similarly at CCAFT’s press conference in Ottawa to announce my refusal to accept the Crow buyout payment for my farm, the Western Producer sent a photographer … and, again, no word appeared in print, although urban newspapers across the country carried the story. How does The Western Producer justify printing a story of CCAFT arrests without telling its readers what I said in defence of the board? And how does it justify adding insult to injury by printing a senior reporter’s column decrying lack of support for the board?
Thanks to the CWB the Canadian grain trade is still 70 percent Canadian-controlled.
Without the board, Canada’s grain trade would soon be about as “Canadian” as our energy, auto or movie industries. On what basis are defenders of the board – in our case a national organization headquartered in Saskatoon, with a proven track record on free trade/wheat board issues – denied meaningful coverage while the antics of a few board opponents receive regular front-page treatment?
– David Orchard, Chairman, Citizens Concerned About Free Trade, Saskatoon, Sask.
CWB works
To the Editor:
In his letter printed in your June 27 issue, Mr. Lickiss of Taber should not be so quick to use the word “rhetoric.” His spiel reeks of it.
How or why the Canadian Wheat Board was established is irrelevant; what matters is present and future operations.
Mr. Lickiss says that the CWB is controlled from the top down rather than from the grassroots. Good.
Grassroots control of such a marketing agency reminds me of the recent cartoon in which a farmer trying to sell wheat picks up the phone and asks for “someone in China.”
It is abundantly clear that a monopoly seller is the simplest and most logical way to export product. On the first day of the first class in economics you learn that he who has all the marbles “tells you,” does not “ask you,” the price of those marbles.
I have faith in the present board, but I take no offence if anyone questions their efficiency. Be as suspicious as you like, but any attempt to dismantle the structure of the Board will be met with my vigorous opposition.
– Glenn Tait,
Meota, Sask.
Child’s play
To the Editor:
“Western farmers are children” – That’s what the headline over the excerpt of Ralph Goodale’s speech should have read in the July 4 issue. “This business (grain marketing) is no child’s play. It is big business. It is deadly serious.”
What Goodale is saying, by implication, is that only the CWB can market western grain because western farmers are like children, naive and unsophisticated. That may have been true in the 1920s, which is where Goodale and the members of the No Future Union (NFU) are still living, but it is demonstrably false in 1996.
Every year western farmers negotiate hundreds of millions of dollars worth of loans to carry on their operations. They deal with accountants and lawyers. They shop around for the best prices on fertilizer, seed, chemicals and other inputs.
Farmers, on their own, purchase machines worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. And, they even market their own off-board crops! For individual farmers these are deadly serious matters. One wrong move can be the difference between success or bankruptcy.
Despite the risks inherent in these decisions, on the expenditure side, the federal government never steps in to prevent a farmer from doing something foolish or ill-advised.
Could it be that the government and their friends who support the CWB monopoly (like the SWP) see no opportunity to skim off some cream?
Western Canadian farmers have access to information through phones, faxes, computers, newsletters and satellites.
They are continually educating themselves, taking courses to keep up with changing technology. For those willing to learn, the marketing of one’s own property can be a very rewarding experience.
For those unwilling or unable to learn, the CWB will always be there to provide an alternative.
– Shane Hertz,
Oyen, Alta.
CWB expertise
To the Editor:
Why do away with the CWB? How are we going to market our grain? The Board has the advantage of selling our grains at premium prices as they are our sole export agency for our grain.
These farmers that want to do away with the CWB are either young farmers or older farmers that are either deep into debt or own townships and don’t care whether the smaller farmers are able to market their grain.
How many farmers can go to all these community meetings to see where our grains are selling the best? If the price of our grain is down that particular week and a few weeks down the road the price has skyrocketed, who’s going to get that differential payment for the farmers?
I think all you farmers that want to do away with the CWB better take another look.
If the CWB goes, so will most of you farmers, as we need our marketing board to sell our product because they have the ins and know-how to get us a better price and our payments.
Do you really think the elevators will do all this for you? . . .
– Elaine Cozart,
Brownlee, Sask.
