SASKATOON – Canada has a lot to lose and not much to gain from the report of the joint commission on grains, says a Canadian Wheat Board official.
Harvey Brooks, the CWB’s director of corporate policy, said it appears the commission wants the board to look and act more like a U.S. grain company.
“The problem is, the more we look like a U.S. grain trading firm, the less of a benefit we are able to provide to western Canadian producers,” he said.
Read Also
Farming Smarter receives financial boost from Alberta government for potato research
Farming Smarter near Lethbridge got a boost to its research equipment, thanks to the Alberta government’s increase in funding for research associations.
While the board’s mandate is to get the most money it can for prairie farmers, a grain company’s goal is simply to sell grain for more than it pays for it. The price to farmers is incidental.
Canadian commission member Milt Fair said the Export Enhancement Program has hurt Canada so badly that making board operations more transparent, while maintaining its basic structure, in return for an end to the U.S. subsidies would be a good trade-off.
But Brooks questioned why Canada should have to give up anything in return for an end to the EEP.
CWB not similar
“They have to significantly reduce EEP because of GATT anyway, so what exactly did Canada get out of the report?” he said, adding it’s “absolutely incredible” that the panel equated single-desk selling with taxpayer-funded subsidies under EEP.
The report said if the U.S. gets rid of EEP, and if the other exporters stop subsidizing, the board should be placed “at risk of profit or loss in the marketplace” or act accordingly.
Exactly what that means wasn’t spelled out. The report said ideas to be considered could include voluntary pooling, dual marketing, ending initial payment guarantees by the federal government, having the CWB make its selling prices public or combining private pricing with confidential audits.
Brooks said the board has no problem with public pricing in commercial markets or confidential audits. As for other recommendations, he likes the idea of an industry committee to monitor cross-border trade, and cautioned against any action that would reduce Canada’s quality control system, which he called a vital marketing tool for Canadian wheat.
Here’s what some farm groups and politicians had to say about the report:
- Prairie Pools Inc. said the board serves farmers well and Canada shouldn’t change it simply to satisfy U.S. concerns. The pools doubt the U.S. will agree to end EEP or cut domestic supports and said Canada should not move unilaterally.
- The Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association said the report is on the right track in advocating the end of discretionary pricing by both countries and was pleased it raised the prospect of voluntary pooling and dual marketing.
- Alberta agriculture minister Walter Paszkowski said the report mirrors his government’s goal of boosting cross-border trade with minimal government involvement. He wants quick action to end the wheat export cap and bring in a continental market.
- The U.S. National Association of Wheat Growers said the report failed to address the wheat board’s unfair trading practices, adding “it’s time for a showdown.”
Both NAWG and U.S. Wheat Asso-ciates called for an extension of the wheat import cap, which expires Sept. 12.
