Representatives of Prairie Pools Inc. traveled to Parliament Hill last week to argue the inadequacies of government attempts to reform the Canadian Wheat Board.
As the first public session to hear prairie opinion on the bill, last week’s criticism likely was a preview of what MPs will be hearing this week as they tour the Prairies from Winnipeg to Grande Prairie, Alta.
Liberal MPs last week said they knew the legislation will have to be changed if it is to win acceptance. They promised amendments at the end of public hearings next month.
Read Also
Government, industry seek canola tariff resolution
Governments and industry continue to discuss how best to deal with Chinese tariffs on Canadian agricultural products, particularly canola.
The pool leaders started the process by suggesting that for the new board to be credible to prairie farmers, it will have to be more accountable to them than the government has proposed.
They urged the Liberals to drop one of the key proposed new powers for the revised wheat board – the ability to pay cash for wheat outside the quota system.
Demise of price pooling
“We believe giving the Canadian Wheat Board the power to make cash purchases of wheat will ultimately result in the demise of single-desk selling and price pooling principles of CWB marketing,” Saskatchewan Wheat Pool vice-president Ray Howe told MPs.
It could lead farmers looking for a higher price to withhold wheat from the pool, hoping the board will have to offer higher prices to fill contracts.
They said cash purchases of barley would be all right because the board sells a relatively small portion of the prairie barley crop. Most is sold domestically as feed.
Pool leaders also urged MPs to try to change the government’s mind on how much control Ottawa should have over the wheat board.
Charlie Swanson, president of Manitoba Pool Elevators, said the pools accept that Ottawa should have some say over the board, including the right to approve the annual business plan, since the government will guarantee board initial prices and borrowings.
He said, however, the board should have the right to name its chair, not the government as agriculture minister Ralph Goodale has proposed.
The government-appointed president also should be accountable to the board of directors and should be subject to their power of dismissal.
And the legislation should require that two-thirds of the board of directors be elected by farmers. It says only that some board positions can be elected and the most Goodale has been willing to promise is that a majority will be elected.
The pool representatives made other specific suggestions.
The government should continue to guarantee the initial prices, whether adjusted or not. Goodale is proposing to guarantee just the first initial price and any mid-year adjustments would not be covered by the government.
The pools also objected to the proposal that farmers contribute to a contingency fund that would back up initial price adjustments.
“Given that producers are already overburdened with checkoffs and user fees and given that there is little need for the fund, we are suggesting the (proposal) for a contingency fund be removed from the bill,” said Swanson.
