Survey suggestion; Found money; What’s democratic?; Energy options; Horse medicines; Seeds of the future
Survey suggestion
In the (…) Canadian Wheat Board survey that was conducted I was one of the farmers surveyed. The survey took 20 minutes and most of the questions asked were loaded questions. It didn’t matter how you answered you favoured the wheat board. My first reaction, when the caller identified herself, was who was paying for this survey? This individual was not doing this on a voluntary basis on a Saturday afternoon. Her paycheck was coming directly out of my board pool account and for what purpose? This survey would have absolutely no benefit to any farmer except the supporters of the wheat board and merely be another cost to me as a farmer. The suggestion that farmers were picked at random is not true. My suggestion to the board is to publish questions in the newspapers and let all farmers answer them.
Read Also
Worrisome drop in grain prices
Prices had been softening for most of the previous month, but heading into the Labour Day long weekend, the price drops were startling.
– Vern Schaab,
Red Deer, Alta.
Found money
It would be great if we could have a society that provides for a high standard of well being for its citizens. A secure and peaceful society with the facilities to provide well-maintained urban and rural infrastructures, environmentally friendly energy sources, the highest levels of education for those who qualify and want it, decent health care for every person, dignity and comfort for senior citizens, security and caring treatment of the physically and mentally challenged, well- equipped and staffed day-care centres for pre-school children, adequately funded cultural and sport activities, as well as other conditions for the enrichment of human life.
Over the past several decades our politicians have been telling us that there was not enough money to fund many of these facilities, or that such facilities were unsustainable. But the money has been there all along. When it comes to waging wars of aggression or bailing out greedy profiteers, fraudsters, and speculators, billions of dollars are suddenly made available at taxpayers’ expense. No questions asked.
Our politicians have either allowed themselves to be duped into believing that the money was not there or have been deliberately, in the words of the then British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, “committing terminological inexactitudes.”
– William Dascavich,
Edmonton, Alta.
What’s democratic?
The ongoing debate on the future of the CWB (Canadian Wheat Board) always refers to democracy by both sides. Now I ask you what is more democratic? The concocted voting and eligibility procedures for electing producer representatives to the CWB board as put in by the Liberal administration in its amendments to the CWB Act in 1998 or the results of the federal elections since 1998 in rural ridings in areas governed by the CWB Act?
The fact the producer representation was and is concocted questions its democracy in itself. As for the election results in all the federal elections since 1998 (and possibly a few prior) that the number of Liberals elected totally can be counted on one hand – and it is quite possibly zero on checking. Even candidates that were elected to the CWB board who have run federally for the Liberals were defeated.
Now I ask you again what is more democratic? Is Canada a democracy? No. What has been done by federal governments to address the concerns of western Canadians as voiced in those election returns? Nothing. Democratic governments should address voting returns. Even opposition parties should be addressing those concerns. Yet nothing has happened or is happening? Why?
Could it be supply management of which the CWB Act is part of? In other words, governments and politicians of whatever party place government priorities over those of the people they represent? It is a sad commentary on a democratic Canada and the politicians elected. No wonder voting turnout is declining – it is obvious what people vote for is not in reality what they are getting. Our governments are out of control over the people they supposedly represent. Democracy be damned.
– George Powell,
Port Coquitlam, B.C.
Energy options
Last fall the Uranium Development Panel (UDP) released a report that recommends Saskatchewan build a nuclear reactor with a capacity of 3,000 MW (megawatts). The cost of building a reactor was suggested to be around $8 to $10 billion. Some say it does not matter what the construction costs of a nuclear reactor are because it will not be built with Saskatchewan taxpayer’s dollars. However, you cannot get financing to build a reactor until you have a guaranteed sale of the electricity. That’s where SaskPower comes in. SaskPower would guarantee to buy the electricity from a new Bruce Power reactor and then sell it back to you and me. It’s a pretty sure bet that the price we pay for electricity will be enough to cover the construction costs of the reactor. And that’s why the price of building a new reactor matters, you and I will pay for it on our electrical bill.
Ontario just received a tender from AECL (Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd.) to build a 2,400 MW reactor. The bid price was $26 billion. Ontario was originally told a reactor would cost around $8 billion. Now that we have a realistic price tag for a reactor, it raises questions about whether nuclear power can be competitive with the renewable energy options.
I have a real hard time seeing households, business and the farming community going along with a plan to triple their electricity costs. The provincial government should take the next logical and prudent step and establish an expert renewable energy task force to carefully examine these growing energy sources. Then we would have the information required to look critically at both nuclear and renewable energy and choose the future energy supply that makes the most sense for Saskatchewan.
It’s you and I that will pay for this so pick up the phone, contact your MLA and demand we see an expert assessment of renewable energy before any decisions are made on a nuclear reactor.
– Jim Zimmerman,
Meota, Sask.
Horse medicines
I read your article (“Horse slaughter traceability rules worry food exporters” WP July 23, 2009) with interest about the E.U. wanting more detailed health info on horses processed for meat. If you do your research you will find that most horse meat shipped out of Canada originates in the U.S., brought into Canada by what we call “kill buyers.” These people buy horses at auctions all over the U.S. They take race horses, show horses – you name it they buy it – to fill the slaughter plant order. There are no laws in the U.S. about what drugs the horses are given because we do not eat our horses. Horses are not a food animal here.
A lot of the drugs that are given to U.S. horses are very carcinogenic. One drug we call Bute is used on U.S. horses on a daily basis. Many of the slaughter bound animals come off race tracks where Bute is used for injuries to the animals legs. As far as I know no horse that is given Bute should be eaten. And there is no known safe quarantine for this drug. If you want a list of the drugs the U.S. horses are given please take a look at www.vetsforequine welfare.org/medications.php. This site, run by veterinarians will explain everything you need to know about the drugs U.S. horses are given. If these drugs were given to beef cattle they would have to be destroyed as toxic waste.
– Barbara Griffith,
Auburn, Washington
Seeds of the future
The article on deregulation of the seed industry (“Variety registration rules loosened,” WP July 23, 2009) reminded me of when I started farming some 40 years ago. At that time I watched many men of my father’s generation die of cancer. When I went to university I learned there was strong evidence those cancers were precipitated by exposure to certain agricultural chemicals. The scientific research indicated those chemicals and many others should have been highly controlled or banned. Unfortunately, the (Ronald) Reagan administration came to power in the U.S. and that research was set aside. To make matters worse, the (Brian) Mulroney administration in Canada soon followed the Yanks and removed the control of scientific research funding from the academic community, effectively giving it to industry. In consequence, the research on pesticides largely dwindled to industry funded and directed studies on their application. Occupational and public health and safety issues disappeared from view.
Today, I am again watching many men of my generation falling victim to the same types of cancers that affected farmers 40 years ago. Not a surprise given that many of the same chemicals are still used – after all they are cheap and effective. Independent research in the European Union has shown a disturbing tendency of these chemicals and many others to also be “gender benders” causing sexual aberrations in wildlife. In fact, some of the first studies on these effects were conducted by the Canadian Wildlife Service before the Mulroney Conservatives discontinued their funding.
Now that the (Stephen) Harper Conservatives have chosen to hand the regulation of seed genetics entirely over to their patrons in industry, I wonder how many years it will be before we start to see the negative effects of industry promotion of their private profits at the expense of the public good?
– Ken Larsen,
Benalto, Alta.
