Agricore United isn’t going to campaign for an end to the Canadian Wheat Board’s export monopoly.
But that doesn’t mean Canada’s newest and biggest grain company is in favour of single desk selling.
Instead, it plans to stay on the sidelines, at least for the time being, on that most contentious of grain policy issues.
“We have members on both sides of the issue and we think the best thing is to be silent,” said company president Ted Allen.
Delegates attending Agricore United’s inaugural annual meeting soundly defeated a resolution calling on the company to lobby for farmers to have “freedom to market their own grain.”
Read Also
Claims filed in Alberta hailstorm aftermath
The numbers are still coming in for the cost of the damage caused by a huge hail storm that hit various areas of Alberta Aug. 20.
Alex Campbell of Cardston, Alta., who introduced the resolution, said farmers who don’t like the monopoly want the company’s help in getting rid of it.
“We’d like Agricore United to represent us for freedom of choice,” he said.
But during the ensuing debate, Michael Bury of Mannville, Alta., said delegates had to distinguish between their own opinions and what’s in the best interests of Agricore United.
“Whether we stand for or against the wheat board is an individual thing,” he told the meeting. “But as Agricore United we need all the business and all the members we can get. We should just stay out of this debate.”
In an interview later, Bury said farmers can express their views on the board’s monopoly during CWB director elections or by joining farm lobby groups.
But Agricore United is first and foremost a commercial organization, and the last thing it needs to do is alienate potential customers.
“We don’t want to get everybody all riled up,” he said.
Agricore United’s founding partners adopted different stances on the CWB during the last few years.
Agricore, formed by the merger of the Alberta and Manitoba pools, stayed silent on the issue, reflecting the wide divergence of views among its members.
United Grain Growers, with Allen as president, was a strong critic of the CWB and called for an end to the board’s monopoly and introduction of a voluntary wheat board.
Allen said it’s not yet clear exactly what position, if any, the new company will take in the grain marketing debate. He noted that even though the resolution favouring a dual market lost, no delegates spoke in favour of the CWB monopoly.
“The argument was almost solely around the fact that we are a commercial enterprise and we have customers on both sides of the issue,” he said. “The resolution, by my estimation, was defeated on the basis that it wasn’t appropriate to take a position on it.”
While the delegates may have wanted to stay out of the grain marketing debate, they did make it clear they don’t want the board to be involved in the grain transportation system.
They passed resolutions calling on Ottawa to move toward a “fully commercial and competitive” grain transportation system and urged implementation of recommendations of the Estey report, which proposed ending the CWB’s role in grain transportation.
The meeting dealt with a number of CWB-related resolutions, calling on the board to stop lobbying and stick to selling grain, and asking for no-cost buy-backs on uncalled delivery contracts. During the debate on those resolutions, there were virtually no public expressions of support for the board by delegates.
One delegate from Manitoba, a self-described supporter of single desk selling who asked not to be identified, said pro-board delegates purposely adopted a low profile.
“We’ve got to play politics in there,” he said, adding it was important to get the support of hard-line anti-CWB delegates in order to pass other resolutions.
