BANFF, Alta. — The Canadian Wheat Board says its demise is a threat to all farm organizations.
Board chair Allen Oberg told the Canadian Federation of Agriculture’s summer meeting in Banff July 27 that the decision to end the single desk is based on Conservativeparty politics rather than an analysis of how wheat
and barley should be marketed.
“The government has done absolutely zero analysis of what the implications of these changes might mean in spite of the fact that the idea of marketing choice or freedom has been part of their platform policy at least since 2006,” said Oberg.
Read Also
Agritechnica Day 2: The future of tractor power, building quicker crop apps and large farms and tech
Agritechnica Day 2: The future of tractor power, building quicker crop apps with Syngenta and large farms and tech
Bob Friesen of Manitoba said farm groups need to unite on this issue to protect their right to have an organization of their choice.
“This is an issue of farmers choosing. Every organization here that currently operates under a legislated or regulatory authority to collect a levy has an interest in this debate,” he said. “This is not a partisan policy issue. It is any government that could make a decision for farmers that have decided they are going to form an organization.”
Lynn Jacobson of Enchant, Alta., said the federal government is imposing its political will on farmers.
He proposed a resolution, which was passed, calling for the CFA to support producers’ rights to have their own marketing structures and asking the federal government to respect the results of the plebiscite that the board is now organizing about the future of single desk marketing.
Oberg agreed.
“We have decided whatever the results are (of the board’s plebiscite) that we are going to act accordingly and respect those results. It is only fair and fitting that we ask the minister to do the exactly the same,” he said. “The minister will have to decide whether he will abide by their wishes or support Conservative party policy.”
Oberg said the board cannot survive in an open market nor does it have the time to make all the required changes when it winds down in August 2012.
He also said the board shouldn’t have to be the author of its own demise. The government should make all the necessary changes because they will be required by a government initiative, he added.
Oberg defended past board practices of marketing grain and its ability to earn better returns.
He said individual farmers who attempt to sell and move grain may need to find new partners as they enter the global trade. They could ultimately lose without the strength and expertise of the board.
“I think we are going to see greater consolidation in the grain industry than we have ever seen in the past.”
He also warned of trade implications if more Canadians seeking higher spot prices ship to the United States.
“There are some concerns over how welcome that Canadian grain will be in the U.S. There could be a trade backlash and possibly even a closure of the border,” he warned.
The board has been involved in 14 trade cases, which are expensive to litigate. The last case cost $12 million.
“There are some things where farm groups, as important as they are, do not have the resources or expertise to tackle a project like that,” he said.
