MELITA, Man. – Ian Robson wants the Canadian Wheat Board’s export monopoly kept intact. Bill Bell thinks it’s time the monopoly was thrown out.
Both farmers were at an Oct. 27 meeting to hear from the five candidates wanting to become CWB director for district nine.
Robson, who runs a mixed cattle farm near Deleau, Man., believes single-desk selling remains the best tool for marketing grains.
“It’s the strongest pool imaginable and it should be maintained,” said Robson, who stood twice during the all-candidates meeting to make that view known.
Read Also
Russian wheat exports start to pick up the pace
Russia has had a slow start for its 2025-26 wheat export program, but the pace is starting to pick up and that is a bearish factor for prices.
Bill Bell is adamant the wheat board’s export monopoly should end. He owns a mixed farm near Deloraine, Man., where he grows wheat, canola, flax, sunflowers, barley and peas. He wants farmers to have more say about where and how they sell their grain.
Bell believes he can get better prices by selling his durum into the United States. But he said that effort is hampered by the “buy-back” program, which allows farmers to buy their grain back from the CWB and then sell it across the border.
The prices in that program should either be set lower or scrapped altogether, Bell said.
“Several people in this room are quite capable of finding their own market,” he said during the meeting attended by about 50 farmers. “Please give me that privilege.”
Candidate Reg Hertz, of Hudson Bay, Sask., said he believes the buy-back program should be less cumbersome. And prices in the program need to better reflect the pool return outlook.
Hertz said he supports a referendum on whether the wheat board monopoly should continue. There are advantages to selling through the wheat board, he said, but farmers should also have the option of selling crops through other avenues. He wouldn’t object to more crops being marketed by the board, as long as farmer participation is voluntary.
“It has to be by choice, not by force,” he said. “I think it’s good for guys to find their own markets and to do their own thing.”
Bill Nicholson wants the buy-back program kept as it is. Removal would open the doors to a dual marketing system, said the candidate from Shoal Lake, Man.
Nicholson is a supporter of the wheat board monopoly. He described it as the only avenue left that gives farmers some power in “a world full of giants.” He worries the wheat board will be dismantled “piece by piece” unless there is greater recognition of the strength it gives producers.
Garth Short, also from Shoal Lake, spoke of the need for greater accountability and “market flexibility” from the board. “A Canadian Wheat Board more in touch with producers is a must,” he said. Short would support a referendum giving farmers a vote on dual marketing. He’s in favor of the wheat board, he said, but is confident it can survive without the export monopoly. He doesn’t want more crops added to that monopoly.
Bert Sefton described himself as a strong believer in the three main principles of the wheat board – central-desk selling of wheat and barley, pooling of returns and government guarantees of initial grain prices. The candidate from Broadview, Sask., said farmers will have greater control of the board’s activities following the election, when 10 of the 15 directors will be farmers.
“As producers, we can organize a very, very strong marketing corporation for ourselves.”
Sefton wouldn’t object to having other grains marketed through the wheat board, if international trade rules would allow. However, he said producers should be included in deciding that issue.
The buy-back program does warrant a review, said Sefton. That issue can be given a “serious look” once the board of directors is formed.
Alan Ransom of Boissevain, Man., also supports a review of the buy-back program. The wheat board needs to be more clear about how prices are set through that program, he said.
Ransom believes the board has a role in supporting value-added opportunities in the grain industry. He favors continuing the wheat board’s export monopoly as long as it remains a “necessary part” of delivering premiums for grain producers.
