Fully paid?
As a result of the severe drought of 2002, our farm qualified for a payment from Canadian Farm Income Program. We never received full payment, an explanation or any apology.
I contacted the MLA at the time. He informed me that the federal portion has been paid out in full, but the provincial part of the program had run out of funds. I pressed him as to when they would pay the ones they missed. He told me “politics is simple, we grease the hands that grease us.”
Read Also
Crop insurance’s ability to help producers has its limitations
Farmers enrolled in crop insurance can do just as well financially when they have a horrible crop or no crop at all, compared to when they have a below average crop
I have since contacted Len Taylor and have tried Mark Wartman’s office. They advised me that they paid in full application up to a certain date. Beyond that the fund has run out of money. Wow, wish I could tell my creditor that.
As a society if we don’t pay our bills we are penalized with bad credit and high interest rates. How can we allow our government to get away with this? Honourable people keep their commitments.
We need a cheque and an apology. If you are in the same situation, please contact me.
– George Cote,
Delmas, Sask.
No status quo
In response to Ken Ritter’s letter of Nov. 8, he states that farmers need to make a choice on whether or not they want to retain the single desk. Mr. Ritter also stated that farmers elected a majority of single desk supporting farmers to the board of directors.ÂÂ
What Mr. Ritter did not say is that the first time the director of District 8, Rod Flaman, was elected he ran on the platform of marketing choice, only to change his mind after he was elected. The CWB directors are split on the question of marketing choice.ÂÂ
Had Mr. Flaman not betrayed the farmers in his district, the decision by the federal court to overturn the government’s attempt to give farmers a choice on how they market their barley may not have happened. Farmers in Western Canada could have been getting $6 a bushel for their barley instead of what the CWB is offering….
Mr. Ritter and the elected board of directors need to understand how important it is for some of us to be able to market our grain to the buyer of our choice.ÂÂ
It is about personal freedom. The federal government wants to give farmers a choice, the newly elected Saskatchewan provincial government believes in choice, the Alberta government supports their farmers who want marketing choice, and the appointed CWB directors understand this. …
Mr. Ritter stated that most U.S. farmers sold the bulk of their wheat and durum before the recent price surge. I am not sure how he got this information, but some of the farmers in North Dakota I know personally have marketed their durum for $18 a bushel, farmgate price. They have also marketed their barley for $6 a bushel. Ontario farmers have recently received over $8 a bushel for their spring wheat.
Mr. Ritter and some of the elected directors are not representing the majority of western Canadian farmers who want change. We deserve better.
– David Schnell,
Kenosee Lake, Sask.
Archaic CWB
Last Saturday in Regina there was a meeting on how Canadians can support and save the Canadian Wheat Board. Attending were the National Farmers Union, labour union representatives, L’Union des Producteurs Agricoles, Liberal and New Democrat members of Parliament.
It seems like the support and drive to keep the CWB alive is much stronger outside of Western Canada. Why?
An archaic regime still forces today’s progressive grain producer to accept as gospel the right of the CWB to deem what is best for them for their milling wheat, durum, malt barley, export feed wheat and feed barley.
The honest truth is that western Canadian farmers are tired of a monopoly that controls the price for these crops.
These same farmers grow quality crops like canola, pulses, oats and flax that Canada has become renowned for. With these crops, farmers can make their own marketing choice; choices that provide their business sound net returns. These producers choose when they want to sell, for what price and to various buyers they can access. …
Being known as the breadbasket to the world, our cereal and oilseed crop production in Western Canada has always been driven by exports. Although our wheat and malt barley meet the top demands of our customers worldwide, acreage has been steadily declining in these crops as producers are growing other commodities where they have control over their marketing and profitability.
No substantial growth will happen in Western Canada with wheat, durum and barley until this oppressive regulatory environment is removed.
I personally can’t see how some Canadians want to hold back Canada’s potential. My roots in farming go back to great grandparents who were original homesteaders in 1893.
I am proud to be a grain and oilseed producer, one that sees innovation, growth, potential new markets and strong rural communities. It is time for a new beginning!
– Jeff Nielsen,
President
Western Barley Growers Association,
Olds, Alta.
Gov’t listens
Re: “Prudence lacking” by MP Wayne Easter, published Nov. 8.
As Mr. Easter points out in his Nov. 8 letter, the facts should speak for themselves when it comes to marketing choice.
Mr. Easter refuses to recognize that 62 percent of farmers want the freedom to market their barley. This fact was made clear not only by the CWB’s own polling but dramatically in the government’s plebiscite last spring.
If Mr. Easter doesn’t trust the democratic process, he should take a look at third-party analyses that show he’s wrong again. …
Ultimately the only economic analysis that counts is the one done by farmers who’ve earned the right to have market choice. To think otherwise assumes, as Mr. Easter has implied, that farmers aren’t smart enough to deal with selling their products on the open market.
But farmers make complex calculations about machinery, fuel and fertilizer costs every day. And they make equally complicated calculations when they sell canola crops, lentils and chickpeas on the open market.
Instead of telling farmers what to do, which is Mr. Easter’s approach, this government listens to what farmers want and acts in their interests. That’s why the bedrock principle of my administration as minister of agriculture is farmers first.
Farmers take the risks and do the work, so they deserve to put more money in their pockets. But they need the freedom to take advantage of spikes in crop prices.
The bottom line is that farmers want the freedom to run their business as they see fit, and this government respects their judgment. These facts speak very loudly for themselves.
– Gerry Ritz,
Minister of Agriculture and Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board,
Ottawa, Ont.
Blatant hypocrisy
The blatant hypocrisy of prime minister (Stephen) Harper’s ideological vendetta to destroy the collective bargaining power that farmers democratically exercise through the Canadian Wheat Board is quite amazing.
In order to curry political favour with farmers in Quebec and Ontario, he states that he supports the supply management system for poultry and dairy producers. Supply management not only has single desk selling but also controls production. This is far greater marketing and production discipline than is exercised by the CWB, which only has the single desk marketing authority and has no control over what farmers decide to produce.
In addition, the CWB has introduced marketing options that provide farmers with multiple cash flow and pricing options.
In pursuing their anti-CWB campaign, Harper and cohorts obviously believe that the end justifies the means and have used tactics that are unethical and undemocratic….
While using these disreputable tactics in an attempt to destroy a democratic, farmer controlled marketing agency that works in the interests of farmers, Harper gives more power and wealth to the private monopolies of CN and CP Rail.
He gives them control of the government grain hopper cars and slams the door on the Farmer Rail Car Coalition’s program to buy the cars and save farmers money on the maintenance and on the replacement of the cars.
In spite of poor service provided by the railways, the Conservatives have not provided relief to shippers and all initiatives towards open running rights on the rails have been rejected. Harper believes that farmers should compete against each other while the government protects private monopolies from competition. …
Acting as the single seller on behalf of producers of wheat and barley, the CWB is able to negotiate for a better price and level of service for farmers.
Harper and his new government are intent on destroying effective collective bargaining for grain farmers while enhancing the power and wealth of private monopolies.
If Harper gets a majority in the next election I suspect that supply management producers will find that they have been seduced by skillful and soothing words and were taken for a walk down the garden path.
– Art Macklin,
DeBolt, Alta.
More on metric
In his letter of Oct. 11, Avery Sahl of Mossbank makes a suggestion that I visit with young children so that I learn the metric system. He further insults me by writing that I “seem to know everything.” I have never made such a claim.
I grew up on a farm in Southern Saskatchewan in the 1950s and ’60s. Like most young people afflicted with Trudeaumania, I supported the Liberals. I can still recall the political meetings in the small musty public halls where men like Otto Lang and Ralph Goodale would travel to places like Lafleche, Gravelbourg and Mossbank, filling our heads with promises of wealth and prosperity.
If anyone asked a question that was going against the Liberal machine, such as, “why is the wheat board giving us a dollar for our wheat when the Americans in Glasgow, Montana, are getting two,” we were soon discredited as hecklers, or we were handed a sarcastic answer ….
There was one Gravelbourg gentleman who could really throw a wrench into their gearbox. I recall one question he had thrown at a Liberal speaker concerning the metric system. He asked, “Mr. speaker, I would ask that you grab a pencil and paper, and draw a diagram as to how you propose to divide the land up within a township, making sure that everyone ends up with the exact same amount of property after the division.” Keep in mind that the goal of the metric system was to keep figures even and divisible by 10 instead of 12.
There was a long pause, but no answer. Thirty years later, the problem has not yet been solved. I don’t know if Mr. Sahl was there that night, but perhaps he knows the solution. If he does, I would appreciate that he share it with us.
– John Hamon,
Gravelbourg, Sask.
