FERTILIZER CONTROL
To the Editor:
In response to the article posted May 16 (WP online) titled Agrium sees smooth sailing for Viterra takeover.
Glencore International’s proposed acquisition is likely to provide more competition in most parts of the Prairies due to the divestiture of some grain handling facilities to Richardson. On the other hand, the sale of retail outlets and the 34 percent share of Canadian Fertilizer Ltd. to Agrium could have a significant impact on farmers’ profit margins.
The Informa Economics report recently released by the government of Saskatchewan reveals the potential for fertilizer prices to be of concern in the longer term. If the deal is approved as scheduled, Agrium will control over half of the fertilizer market in Western Canada (42 percent retail, 53 percent ammonia wholesale and 49 percent urea wholesale). The Competition Bureau has an obligation to scrutinize once market share has exceeded 35 percent and a firm has the ability to increase prices.
Read Also
Agriculture needs to prepare for government spending cuts
As government makes necessary cuts to spending, what can be reduced or restructured in the budgets for agriculture?
The long-term impact on western Canadian farmers needs to be considered by the Competition Bureau. Crop protection products, seed and fertilizer make up almost half of the variable production costs per acre for farmers each year. Fertilizer is the largest single cash expense for canola producers. Farmers have no control over these prices, and it is important to ensure that there is adequate competition of retail suppliers and wholesalers. In a controlled market such as the Canadian fertilizer market, there is unlikely to be sufficient competition and therefore the government has an obligation to step in.
SaskCanola has requested that, through Investment Canada and the Competition Bureau, the federal government ensures market share is brought to a reasonable level, as it has done in the past with consolidation of companies in the grain industry.
Brett Halstead, SaskCanola chair,
Nokomis, Sask.
END OF AN ERA
To the Editor:
In my mailbox this morning I found a letter reminding me that my subscription will soon expire. As a long-time subscriber it is with a great deal of regret I have decided not to renew.
You see, I sold my farm last year because after 101 years of being farmed by my family, there was not another descendant of my grandparents who was interested in carrying on. It was a very sad day for my wife and I, our children and my siblings, when we drove out of our yard for the last time.
This spring was very different for me as I was the sole operator of this farm for 43 years. I found a real sense of relief with the realization that I was no longer responsible for the decisions that had to be made.
I learned at my grandfather’s and my father’s knees how fortunate we were to have the CWB working to market our wheat and barley. This knowledge was reinforced when I began to grow pulse crops. I’m sure I don’t need to go through the list of problems involved that can be encountered when contracting lentils, peas and chickpeas.
I will forever be amazed how a handful of misinformed people and a political party whose ideology is so strong that they will not be swayed by facts, plunges forward with willful disregard for the democratic rights of the majority of grain producers, all the while claiming that this is freedom for farmers.
(Agriculture minister) Mr. (Gerry) Ritz joyfully states that he is giving clarity to grain marketing. I have never yet dealt with a grain broker who will tell you everything he knows about the futures market, although some claim to be surprised when markets change.
Yes, Mr. Ritz, you have given freedom to farmers — freedom to be taken advantage of with no one to stand up for them. At the age of 70, after a lifetime of lessons at the school of hard knocks, I guess I have to say I am relieved to no longer be farming. I will enjoy my retirement as long as health will allow.
Good luck to you, my farming friends. As Mr. Spock is wont to say, “live long and prosper.”
Larry Oakman,
GM NOT A SAVIOUR
To the Editor:
I read with interest the May 17 Western Producer story by Barry Wilson about the advocate who claims GM crops are needed to feed the growing global population and calling for a science-based debate.
I couldn’t help but note the advocate’s repeat of tired propaganda and promises that continue to be trotted out by GM proponents, yet are wholesomely rejected by anyone that has done their homework.
For instance, after 15 years GM crops can lay claim to two traits: the herbicide tolerant gene, as in Roundup Ready, and the Bt pesticide gene (Bacillus thuringiensis), which makes the entire plant a pesticide factory.
All the inherent qualities of the seed that contribute to yield and nutritional enhancements are achieved by conventional breeding methods and cannot be credited to genetic engineering — a fact which is rarely mentioned by industry types and its promoters.
According to the scientific report of the International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development, genetically modified crops will not address the challenges of climate change, biodiversity loss, hunger or poverty.
Instead, it called on the world’s governments to redirect funding and efforts away from the destructive chemical dependent one-size-fits-all model of agriculture and toward a system which embraces small-scale farmers and agro-ecological methods.
It is striking that after playing a key role in the selection of the 400 leading agriculture scientists from 60 countries who conducted this four year peer-reviewed analysis of evidence provided by both sides, Canada was one of only three countries to refuse to sign off on the report.
It is not chemophobia, as the advocate suggests, that turns most people off of GM crops. Increasingly, people are moving to support a food system that is more just and that everyone can participate in without fear. It can hardly be a good business model for farmers to keep producing crops that eaters in such great numbers are avoiding like the plague.
Alex Atamanenko, MP
Ottawa, Ont.
PAID BY THE WEST
To the Editor:
Quebec students have for over 100 years witnessed excellent instructions on negotiating financial terms and conditions that exceed those received by any other province.
They have watched the Quebec governments using the “special status” and idle threats of separation in negotiations with Ottawa achieve benefits that far exceed that of any other province.
These extra benefits are paid for by western Canadians without any strong objections by the premiers or even the citizens of those provinces.
Do you feel this is fair? Then let your member of Parliament and prime minister know how you feel.
Ken Kellington,
Devon, Alta.
FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS
To the Editor:
The financial situation in all of Europe and North America is becoming dire. All the measures that these countries, and the governments they elect, have enforced that have succeeded in the past are not working.
Still the situation is getting worse but they have cut most of the social programs and removed so many of the people who produce the goods and services the world requires without avail. This is increasing the danger of social unrest if more is cut — as is happening now in Greece. The one percent who profit from it all are deathly afraid that the austerity is going to finally affect them, and they are worried.
The proper action would be to increase government spending and replace the infrastructure that is so desperately needed. Building more affordable housing would help, too.
This would put money back into circulation and reduce unemployment, which would reduce public unrest as well.
Another action would be to get out of the internal affairs of other countries that require such an expenditure on armaments. There would be far more peace in the world.
Jean H. Sloan,
Lloydminster, Sask.
