Mainil agreement
Art Mainil’s letter (Open Forum, Feb. 4) was right on.
Canadian Wheat Board chair Larry Hill and the board’s scare tactics don’t work anymore. They don’t frighten the younger generation farmer. Facts and performance are what make the bottom line for today’s young, positive, progressive-thinking farmers.
The CWB monopoly performance in cancelling 26 percent of the CWB monopoly contracts for durum is nothing short of criminal. To cancel 26 percent of the durum contract at the end of the crop year, July 31, 2009, and then have the price of durum drop by $4 per bushel in the first three months of the new crop year, shows the complete incompetence of the CWB monopoly.
Read Also
Stock dogs show off herding skills at Ag in Motion
Stock dogs draw a crowd at Ag in Motion. Border collies and other herding breeds are well known for the work they do on the farm.
Hill says the wheat policy should be developed in Canada, not at the World Trade Organization. Hill doesn’t seem to realize the CWB speaks for less than 20 percent of farmers in Western Canada.
The CWB director elections have a 40 percent voter turnout and sometimes less. With that turnout, 50 percent supports the CWB. Fifty percent of 40 percent is 20 percent support for the CWB.
Twenty percent support is not a mandate to do anything, especially by a monopoly.
Phil Babiarz,
Weyburn, Sask.
Rural social organism
Re: “Farm teaches life lessons” (WP, Jan. 28.)
Being a post-secondary student learning about rural sociology, a large portion of what we are taught relays back to the farm crisis. Globalization, agro-industrialization, debt creation and the succession of farmers are at the root of a lot of class discussions.
With these sometimes bleak issues at hand, it is refreshing to read about a farming family near Ethleton whose children are successfully experiencing first-hand indispensable life lessons, such as working hard for what you get.
I strongly believe that rural places are the primary social organism, after the family, that serves as an arena of cultural learning. Children that are an integral element of farm life are learning the basic skills of life more than a growing number of urban children.
The benefits of being outside and working hard are deemed less important today. A sense of identity and involvement are lost in a growing number of children as a result of urbanization.
I am not saying that urban children are being raised inappropriately. In a society in which commodities and perhaps a false romantic sense of rural life are common, it is easier to rely on a more materialistic path to personal development.
The decreasing succession of young farmers assuming agrarian careers is a mounting problem for the aging farming population. It is stories such as the Groat family’s that help inspire a change in the way of thinking, while emphasizing the importance of being actively involved with younger generations who will be the backbone of our agricultural industry.
Kayla Balderson,
Edmonton, Alta.
Rewriting history?
In Ed White’s article, “Farmer raises ire…”, (WP, Feb. 18), Larry Weber says that “he has offered to bring the farm community together, from left to right, but his offer hasn’t been embraced.”
I hope Larry was not referring to a public meeting that he and I attended in Moose Jaw in the summer of 2008.
At that meeting Larry went to great lengths to cover up the destructive role played by the Western Canadian Wheat Growers (Association) when all other major organizations had a unified position on western transportation post 1998.
When I, as president of the National Farmers Union, questioned Larry on his rewriting of history, Larry made a spectacle of getting my phone number so he could set up a meeting between the NFU and the wheat growers.
Apparently Larry did not know that the NFU had previously worked in coalitions with the wheat growers on other issues, like farm property taxes, but I gave my number to Larry anyway.
In fact, it would be very hard to find an organization that had built and worked in more coalitions over the past 20 years than the National Farmers Union.
However, that grandstanding was the last that I heard from Larry. No follow-up from his offer, no further mention of it until Ed White’s article.
All of this reminded me of the announcement that Larry made during a CBC radio interview a few years ago when he said that Saskatchewan Wheat Pool shares were rising in value because the Canadian Wheat Board was buying them up. …
No evidence was ever provided to back up his allegation.
And just lately, Larry has been not just rewriting history, but inventing history with fairy tales about government offers when the government killed the Crow Rate.
Mr. Weber can sometimes be quick to question the credibility of others while feeling free to make groundless editorial comments himself.
Neither farm policy solutions nor farm organization coalitions are advanced this way.
Stewart Wells,
Swift Current, Sask.
Promises, promises
On Feb. 18, the Saskatchewan agriculture minister, Bob Bjornerud, wrote a letter to this paper (“NDP has short memory”) accusing the NDP of ignoring the facts.
We are certainly not ignoring the facts. Brad Wall and his party came to power by making promises to families in rural Saskatchewan and the facts clearly show that, two years later, all we have is a list of broken promises.
The Wall government broke their promise to improve health care in rural Saskatchewan. They broke their promise to address the rural doctor shortage.
They broke their promise to reduce wait lists for surgeries. They broke their promise to include spot loss hail coverage in crop insurance, despite the fact that their own government-commissioned review recommended it. They broke their promise to fund municipalities a full percentage point of the PST, short-changing towns and villages by millions of dollars.
While income for farming families fell by $94 million in 2009 alone, the Wall government has increased the costs of their expenses such as natural gas, power, transportation and auto insurance.
For example, SaskPower rates for farming families in rural Saskatchewan increased by 11 percent in 2009 and are set to increase 8.8 percent in 2010. So in less than 14 months, farming families in rural Saskatchewan will see their power utility bills increase by nearly 20 percent.
The Wall government delivers one blow after another to the pocketbook of Saskatchewan families. The fact is, rural Saskatchewan can’t take this much longer.
Dwain Lingenfelter,
Leader of the Official Opposition,
NDP Agriculture Critic,
Regina, Sask.
Big Sky money
The Big Sky Pork debt settlement is a slap on the face to farmers who show loyalty to value-added business by selling them supplies.
The government of Saskatchewan could have made things right by making up the difference between the cash in the settlement of the debt and the full amount owed farmers by giving up some of its shares in the company to those farmer creditors.
In addition, to show good faith, it could guarantee the face value of these shares by guaranteeing a value equal to the debt if farmers used these shares as equity to secure 2010 farm operating loans.
But heck, what do I know? I’m just a doofus farmer from Beaubier, Sask.
Morris Johnson,
Beaubier, Sask.
Gov’t control of CWB
In response to Ken Larsen’s letter (Open Forum, Jan. 29), Mr. Larsen states: “The Canadian Wheat Board was in fact founded by farmers to address this defective marketplace,” (“this marketplace” referring to the open market.) That is categorically false.
The CWB was certainly not founded by farmers and was not created to address any defects in the market. The CWB was created in 1935 by the federal government to prevent the collapse of the farmer-owned pool grain companies after years of losses from the 1929 crash and subsequent depression coupled with years of drought.
The feds created a federal agency that took over the grain pools from the Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba pools, and that agency eventually became the CWB. It operated as a dual market, offering government guarantees for initial payments. Participation was voluntary.
It was the farmer-owned grain companies that were created to give farmers control in the grain market in the early 1920s and as early as 1901 with the United Grain Growers.
It was these farmer-owned grain companies that addressed a defective marketplace.
The monopoly was created during the Second World War to allow the government to secure grain supply for their commitments to Britain, without the inconvenience and added expense of having to buy wheat from western farmers in a rising market.
The government closed the Winnipeg Grain Exchange in September 1943 and bought all existing open contracts and then set the price for wheat. All wheat from that day on would be bought exclusively by the CWB with the price set by the federal cabinet.
The CWB is a federally legislated entity, created by government, for government control of the wheat industry – producers, elevators and railways. It was a temporary measure to save the government from using taxpayer money to subsidize wheat purchases to Britain.
This control served the successive governments well throughout the post-war and cold war period. There is no benefit to the government for control to continue now.
The socialist supporters of the CWB monopoly hold onto the myth that the CWB creation was by farmers for farmers, as a justification for the continued confiscation of fundamental individual rights and freedoms. Farmers, at best, manage the operations of the CWB. The federal government is and always has been in control of the CWB.
This is a rights issue. I can manage my own operation, thank you very much, and without government control. Anyone that wants the CWB to manage their farm’s marketing and the government to control their farm should be free to do so as well.
Douglas McBain,
Cremona, Alta.
A welcome ruling
The arguments by Canadian Wheat Board chair Larry Hill (WP, Feb. 11) regarding democracy would have a great deal more legitimacy if participation in the CWB was voluntary.
It also doesn’t help his case that the 2007 barley plebiscite and the CWB’s own surveys demonstrate that most farmers either want the board to be voluntary or done away with completely.
By refusing to hear the CWB’s appeal of a lower court ruling, the Supreme Court has upheld the federal government’s right to order the CWB to not spend farmers’ money promoting its monopoly.
This was a most welcome ruling. I’m sure most farmers and most Canadians would agree that in a democracy, citizens should not be compelled to financially support political causes against their will.
Prairie grain farmers are among the few Canadians who are not free to sell their property, their grain, to whomever they please.
The Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association believes the CWB should be made voluntary, so that each and every farmer is free to choose whether to sell their grain on their own or on a collective basis. Anything less is undemocratic.
Kevin Bender,
President, Western Canadian Wheat Growers,
Bentley, Alta.
Septic system rules
We’d like to add our concerns to those already expressed about the new law that will require thousands of rural Manitoba homeowners like ourselves to spend tens of thousands of dollars when we sell our properties. That law will force us to replace our septic tank ejection systems with underground leech fields.
We have now heard estimates from two sources that each project could cost about $25,000. This would be a staggering financial blow to seniors on fixed incomes and other families of limited means who need or want to move for health or other reasons.
It has left many of us wondering what the scientific basis is for this new regulation. Are leech fields known to better protect water supplies than ejection systems?
We have heard the argument that above-ground ejectors at least expose the septic discharge to the cleansing properties of the sun. Underground systems do not. As well, do the underground systems not eventually leak into ground water anyway?
Surely such a significant new law would not be passed without substantive, scientific evidence of the environmental advantages it would have over these present systems. Where is that evidence? …
We believe the province either needs to rescind this ill-conceived law or provide significant funding relief to offset or eliminate the financial blow it will inflict on thousands of Manitoba citizens. We are urgently appealing to anyone else with similar concerns to take action. …
Rowena and Larry Powell,
Roblin, Man.
Fix the formula
Congratulations to the Producer Car Shippers Organization for exposing the revenue cap formula as nothing more than a money grab from farmers to subsidize the concrete elevators that have been built during the last decade.
Ten years ago, the grain companies argued that they needed a kick-start subsidy to ensure the success of their elevator building program. Whether you agree or disagree with a kick-start subsidy, I think everyone can agree that a 10- year subsidy is long enough.
If they still need this subsidy continued in order for their new elevators to be viable, then there is something wrong with their business plan.
This subsidy problem can be solved by fixing the revenue cap formula and it is long overdue. The solution is very simple. Do not allow the railways to use multicar incentives as a deductible expense under the revenue cap.
I wonder whether our federal government will listen to farmers or railways on this issue. Subsidies have historically been viewed by the federal Conservatives as bad policy so maybe there is hope that farmers can get this subsidy problem resolved.
George E. Hickie,
Waldron, Sask.
Grain control
Here’s a quick question for farmers. Should the grain you grow be controlled:
a) by the federal government;
b) by all farmers together through a compulsory CWB, or;
c) by the person who grew it?
The recent court rulings have determined that (Ralph) Goodale’s 1998 Canadian Wheat Board Act amendments changed nothing in regard to ultimate control. …
Did you really think the Liberals would actually give up control over the West? So, a) the federal government still has an iron grip over b) the CWB, which still has an iron grip over c) you.
I’ll bet most farmers are not comfortable with a situation, a system, that leaves our farm business under the control of Ottawa through the CWB’s buying monopoly.
(Federal agriculture minister) Gerry Ritz needs to do something while he is the minister. His authority has now been reaffirmed but he won’t be there forever. His authority ought to be used to protect people from the monopoly power, particularly when it is unjust or obstructs progress.
Sometime soon the federal Parliament, the CWB and our farms will once again be under the control of a government with no prairie MPs. The wheat and barley industry will continue its decline indefinitely.
Mr. Ritz should get started by releasing the iron grip of the CWB over farmer-owned and domestic processing. He should give every farmer an exemption from CWB control of a few hundred tonnes to add value to their own grain by being involved with malting, milling, pasta and niche markets.
A small exemption would be very popular. It would empower people. It is a logical first step and an important one for community economic development, investment and reducing our freight costs.
The CWB itself already concedes it is an obstruction by exempting a meager 500 tonnes per mill. But Mr. Ritz must use the power he has to order the CWB to start releasing some grain for all….
Jim Pallister,
Portage la Prairie, Man.
Need golden eggs
Re: “Feds offer carrot to young farmers”, WP, Feb. 25.)
Forget the carrots, minister Blackburn. Our youth of today need golden eggs.
I am so very disappointed with (junior minister of agriculture Jean-Pierre Blackburn) implying our youth of today having negative attitudes. The only one displaying ignorance is our junior minister of agriculture.
Agriculture has been on this declining path, unchecked, for the past 20 years. The lack of interest by our powers-that-be has brought about the present state of our agriculture industry. To blame our youths for the loss of our next generation of farmers is not acceptable to me. Put the blame where it really should be.
We have raised four children on the farm. They are very intelligent, educated and not of negative attitudes. They all have good jobs.
The truth is, you cannot start any form of a viable farm with $500,000 and all the carrots you offer. I suggest “junior” go back to school and take an economics class or two.
To be remotely viable, they need $2 million and a means of repayment for that investment, leaving a modest living as well.
Our youth of today are well educated, especially in economics. Mr. Blackburn, to suggest we need to change our youths’ mentality, as you put it, really twisted me off.
Mr. Blackburn, get to work. Put into place a strong viable agricultural sector that will provide economic viability, and I promise our youth will flock to the challenge of agriculture.
Our agriculture policies of the past 20 years, or lack thereof, are bearing fruit. We have lost our next generation of farmers.
I have witnessed this at our local level, watching them being forced away from the farm because of lack of viability. We have failed the young people.
Do not ever imply they have negative attitudes or ignorance of programs or need a change of mentality.
Mr. Blackburn, you have really shown your department’s lack of knowledge. Lord help us if we ever see a senior in front of your label.
Mr. Blackburn, the answers lie with economic viabilities, not carrots or golden eggs.
Our youth of today are well educated smart people who are not willing to try to run a broken industry.
H. Wayne Alde,
Beaverlodge, Alta.
Bananas & ballots
Re: CWB chair Larry Hill (Open Forum, Feb. 11): Is Larry on some kind of medication? To suggest a monopoly is in any way shape or form democratic begs the question.
When you promote a monopoly, you don’t believe in freedom, democracy or competition ….
When less than 20 percent of the grain growing farmers in Western Canada support the CWB monopoly and the third world banana republic voting process for directors, it’s time to make the CWB monopoly competitive and voluntary. It’s your move Mr. Prime Minister.
If in the next federal election the ballots were mailed out from Liberal headquarters in Ottawa, you voted and mailed them back to Liberal headquarters in Ottawa, the ballots were stored who knows where for a month before they were counted and the scrutineers were Ignatieff and Goodale, who do you think would win the election?
Darroll Wallin,
Margo, Sask.
Horse industry harmed
For the last two years I have watched as the horse industry has declined since the United States passed the law to stop killing horses for human consumption.
That is fine for them, but all of the horses in the U.S. destined for slaughter have been coming to Canada. Now the U.S. does not want the horses shipped to Canada for slaughter either, but it is not being stopped.
The horses are coming up here by the truckload and not making it past the slaughterhouse in Fort Macleod, Alta.
What this has done to our industry is devastating. There is nowhere for our horses to go because the plant is already full of U.S. horses. The meat buyers here in Alberta are paying nothing for meat horses because they get the ones out of the U.S. cheaper.
We need to stop the U.S. horses from coming into Canada and taking our industry.
The U.S. made the problem. They need to deal with the overrun of loose horses that their decisions have created. If the situations were reversed and Canada had been the one to shut down the plants, you can guarantee that the U.S. would not allow our kill horses down there.
Horse meat in Canada may not be our main choice of meat, but there are many countries around the world that choose to eat horse meat.
I do not like shipping horses for slaughter but there is a need for it. The price that the meat buyers give us for meat horses is what sets the price for the industry….
If someone looking to buy a good horse can go the auction market and pay almost nothing for a broke horse, how can those of us in the industry of raising and training horses expect to get our money’s worth out of selling horses? A good, well-broke horse should be worth the training and feed that is put into it….
I would like to take action to get the movement of U.S. horses coming into Canada stopped.
Rita Artemenko,
Westlock, Alta.
Livestock programs
In the Conservative government’s new action plan spending spree, they boast about providing farmers with assistance for various programs, and the city folk buy it.
However, upon closer inspection, the government grants and low-interest loans are only for the elite few, namely large, intensive feedlots. Meanwhile, real farmers with small farms are stuck scraping to get by and struggling to cope with the changes in regulations.
A perfect example is the new Radio Frequency Identification program. The government claims there are grants available to purchase the electronic readers and necessary software, but after doing countless hours of research and numerous phone calls to various agricultural offices, I discovered that the grants are only available to large feedlots feeding over 1,000 head of cattle. …
Anybody that has half a brain would know that these last few years have been extremely challenging for producers, in particular, smaller family-run farms. Thus, the majority of producers have downsized their herds.
Everyone is just scrambling to get by and most don’t have an extra few thousand dollars to throw around on technology that is still being developed.
Our government demands that we comply with the new regulations by registering and keeping record of our livestock with these electronic tags. However, they do not make it easy for smaller farmers to access and acquire the necessary technology.
If they want farmers to embrace their new program, perhaps it’s time they get with the program. Start making technology, advancements in agriculture and assistance available to the every day, hard working small farmers and ranchers. After all, they are the ones that feed this nation.
K. Thygesen,
Camrose, Alta.
Ready for milking
Lest our legislators are misled by the lobbying efforts of the pharmaceutical and health insurance industries, they should be aware of a study by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development entitled Health at a Glance.
The study reveals that in 2007, life expectancy in the United States was 78 years and infant mortality was 6.4 per 1,000 births. The figures for Canada were 80.3 and 4.6 respectively.
Statistics provided by the OECD report indicate that the U.S., with its private health-care system, spent 16 percent of its gross domestic product on health, while Canada, with a publicly funded system, spent only 10.1 percent. Despite this disparity in spending, Canadians lived longer and more of our infants survived.
In a private health-care system a sizable proportion of health care funding is directed toward providing profits for corporate shareholders. These international corporations spare no effort in lobbying for the privatization of health care in Canada.
I’ve no doubt they view Canada as a nice fat cash cow, ready to be milked.
William Dascavich,
Edmonton, Alta.
