Re Western Grain Transition Payments Program: According to my information, so far it is subject to change, same as our weather. It hinges on the whims of bureaucracy.
And of course they have to have a close deadline, about two and one-half weeks. First of all, they scared us into growing hay. Now, there is no payment on hay land, saving the government a pile of loonies.
According to my way of thinking, they should have made a straight acreage payment on cultivated acreage. And not have the farmers fighting over the Crow feathers!
Read Also
Late season rainfall creates concern about Prairie crop quality
Praying for rain is being replaced with the hope that rain can stop for harvest. Rainfall in July and early August has been much greater than normal.
Now, with a world shortage of grain, do we revert back to growing grain? I read in our papers that Russia’s bread basket has shrunk. Of course they have no money or trade goods to buy our grain. And they are busy fighting their wars. Perhaps we can send them our rabbit guns, after they are registered.
– Paul Kuric,
Vega, Alta.
Rent rebate?
To the Editor:
On Aug. 18, a letter was sent to me as well as all other farmers that rent land from the Saskatchewan government. The writer goes on to make the statement: “Saskatchewan agriculture and food moved quickly to ensure that lessees of the Province’s cultivated crown land received a reduction in lease rates resulting from elimination of the Crow rate.” After reading that I thought all right, rural Saskatchewan and agriculture were going to get a break.
After reading the rest of the letter the truth was established. It was more of the same political gamesmanship.
The agriculture producer was going to be robbed again.
The 14-percent average reduction was being packaged in a way that would make it look like the provincial government was actually doing something good. This is not completely true.
Yes, we are going to get a reduction in our rent. But it has nothing to do with the Crow payout.
We are getting the reduction because the formula the government uses to set the rent includes the cost of freight. You see if there was absolutely no cash payout we would still get the 14-percent average reduction in our rents because it is already a factor in setting the rent. If you do not believe me, check out your rent carefully. Some producers’ rents have actually increased over last year.
The reason for this happening is the price of grains is also included in setting our rents. With the price of grains increasing, so will our rents.
This brings us back to the Crow payout. What happened to the money, where is it? I believe it will end up in the government revenues, and we as producers will not receive one cent.
I do not know how the rest of you feel but I am tired of playing this government’s cruel and sadistic game.
It seems everytime the government needs money, rural Saskatchewan and/or agriculture or the ordinary working person have to come up with the money.
Well, we are now in a position to receive some money which is rightfully the agriculture producers’, and the government is using trickery to keep the money for itself.
I write this letter to all you other lessees to let you know there is more here than the eye can see. I urge you to phone in to the government and get all the information, not just what the letter says.
Remember there are always two sides to everything. I close by simply saying I am completely disappointed by this game the government chooses to try and play on us. Let’s not let them get away with it.
– Morris Elfenbaum,
Lipton, Sask.
Return land?
To the Editor:
Call them aboriginals, Indians or whoever, they are a troubled people! They are demanding an incredible amount of land, much of which they allege to be sacred Indian ground.
In a sense land is sacred. My 640-acre farm is precious to me in spite of the fact that Ducks Unlimited settled next to one of my quarters where they work to frustrate and impoverish me. If such were not their intent, they would pay stress allowance and full-damage crop compensation.
It appears the Canadian government has botched the deal with the Indians. On the other hand it may have been a plan to humiliate and ostracize a people.
Before the turn of the century arrangements were made for Canada to admit the Doukhobors. Three huge tracts of land in Saskatchewan were designated as Doukhobor reserves. In return the Doukhobors were expected to provide a specific amount of labor for railway construction. The Doukhobors complied. In addition the Doukhobors in short order put land into production, built brick factories, flour mills, saw mills etc.
In 1907 a serious snag developed from which the Doukhobors couldn’t recover. Changes had taken place in government. The new Minister of the Interior, not having any sympathy toward pacifists, demanded the Doukhobors abandon their anti-war beliefs or lose their reserve land rights. The Doukhobors licked their wounds as they worked to make the best of what they could salvage.
Some frustrated women staged nude parades in attempts to demonstrate to the government that the Canadian government stripped the Doukhobors bare.
In time the Doukhobors blended into conventional society, something the Indians couldn’t or wouldn’t do.
If the government expropriates land to settle alleged Indian land claims, then it is only fair the government take the same actions to return the land confiscated from the Doukhobors.
– Stuart Makaroff,
Saskatoon, Sask.
Buy Churchill
To the Editor:
It is to be hoped that the farmers will rally behind the idea of purchasing the Churchill rail line and facilities. They have proven over the years that they are very capable of doing the job that is required of them.
I speak of the days before the co-operative grain handling became available. The farmers began to realize that they were being taken to the cleaners, so set out to do something about it. With little practical experience in the grain-handling business, they canvassed to obtain supporters, and organized the pools.
They built handling facilities in every practical village (something that no other company ever did).
Even to this day they offer their services in more places than do any other company.
They were able to bring about many benefits to the grain producer, among them the reduction of elevator charges, the spread between track, and street prices which was several cents per bushel.
For instance in 1938 the price spread was 14.5 cents; I have producer certificates for No. 2 durum. Carload price was 66 cents per bushel and less than a carload was 51.5 cents, a 28-percent difference.
The pools eliminated that spread completely to zero, thus giving several cents per bushel to all producers and farmland owners regardless of where they sold their grain.
The Canadian Wheat Board is another accomplishment of farmers and co-operation, a very great advantage over the old system, and in principle a co-op operation. All this was not accomplished without very strong opposition from the line elevator companies. You may be assured the same tactics are being applied today to try to kill the pools and the wheat board. Cargill and others were brought into Canada for no other reason, I believe. Beware.
We were out to Churchill in 1993 and toured the terminal and area. It was an eye-opener to us and I believe there are several other possibilities for Churchill, other than just grain handling.
It has one of, if not the most, up-to-date terminals in Canada, on a natural sea port with no dredging required. One spot, full load and much easier to get the grain to the port, all level or downhill haul. …
There is a challenge there. The farmers have proven they can do it. Go for it, there’s money to be saved and made.
– Joseph Hagyard,
Glenboro, Man.
Crumbling dogma
To the Editor:
The concerted and vicious attack on my letter of July 6 by Messrs. Lindenback, Weser and Wosniak is most understandable and I admire their tenacity in attempting to put on a brave front as socialism crumbles to dust around them.
Contrary to what Mr. Weser writes, I do see great light at the end of the tunnel now that socialistic dogma and ideologies are fading into the past. To Mr. Wosniak: I am not a rich capitalist but a capitalist never the less. I believe one usually obtains sustenance, wealth and possessions by working for them. Work is not a four-letter word to be avoided nor should unwillingness to work be rewarded.
Capitalism is the engine of our economy and socialism is the left-wing force that would like to derail that engine, loot the train, live high on the hog for a bit then starve forever more. Mr. Lindenback speaks of 40 years of NDP rule out of 55 and how Saskatchewanians have endured adversity, etc. It seems he does not see obvious cause and effect.
Apparently, Saskatchewan’s NDP hospital closures are called “conversions” to a more functional form. Other provinces, however, who carry out the same procedures “close hospitals.”
– R. H. Eldridge,
Victoria, B.C.
Save Churchill
To the Editor:
Last year at the Norquay elevators, producers paid only $12.25 a tonne for grain transportation to Thunder Bay, with Seaway costs being pooled. This year $36.99 is being deducted from the elevator cheque …
Regulations do not allow individual producers to pay the Churchill rate of only $23.44 a tonne for grain. They must pay $36.99 at the elevator. Powerful forces, lobbyists for grain, elevators, rail, shipping, companies and bureaucrats and politicians, persistently and forcefully are working to eliminate the Hudson Bay trade route and to restore the monopoly of the Great Lakes, Seaway and Quebec ports. Watch the costs from Thunder Bay to Quebec soar if they succeed! When grain started to move from Churchill in 1932, Lake freight charges on grain dropped 50 percent.
Producers and others must rally to ensure that competition continues to be offered through the Prairie’s ocean port, Churchill.
Individual and organizations must fight back now, or face the loss of the Bay rail line and Port, thus paying tribute to the Lakes, Seaway and Quebec ports forever. They must certainly do better than the effort made by producers who failed to attend the meeting of the Gateway North Marketing Agency in Yorkton Aug. 23. Fewer than 100 people turned up, in striking contrast to the 1,200 who turned out in Preeceville earlier this year to protest the gun law.
Producers might do well to take a serious look at the suggestion made by Hugh Campbell of Terremax, a farmer and exporter of pulse crops, like peas, and Arnold Grambo of the Hudson Bay Route Association that they consider turning over some of the monies to be received in compensation for the loss of the “Crow” and form a company to own and operate the facilities of the Hudson Bay export and import route.
– Willis Richford,
Norquay, Sask.
Manitoba funds
To the Editor:
I am writing to clarify some statements attributed to me in the article, “Manitoba crushing plants, irrigation to get funds”, in the Aug. 10 edition of the Western Producer.
The article was sourced from Reuter from the Annual Conference of Federal-Provincial Ministers of Agriculture in St. John’s, Nfld., on Aug. 2 and 3.
I would like to make it perfectly clear that it is not the intent of the Manitoba government to utilize Manitoba’s share of federal funding for agricultural infrastructure under the $300 million Western Grain Transportation Act Adjustment Fund for crushing plants and irrigation.
We would expect that the majority of these funds would be used to upgrade roads damaged due to increased trucking of grain.
My discussion of initiatives for public infrastructure in value-added processing and irrigation dealt with soliciting support through the Agriculture Value-Added Fund under the federal government’s Western Diversification Agri-Food and Biotech Strategic Initiative and through Manitoba’s portion of the federal Adaptation and Rural Development Initiative.
The confusion apparently resulted from our free-ranging discussion when I talked about Manitoba’s need to adapt to the new economic environment resulting from grain transportation reforms. Manitoba grain producers are going from having the lowest freight costs on Canadian Wheat Board grains to having the highest costs. This will mean that our producers and industry face substantial adjustments in order to survive and prosper in coming years.
We see further value-added processing, increased production of special crops and increased livestock production as being critical to this adjustment process. Public infrastructure development in these key areas plays an important role in the ability of the industry to realize on these opportunities.
The Manitoba government has established a $10 million Agricultural Diversification Program with loan guarantees to stimulate diversification and value-added operations.
The federal initiative through the Western Diversification Administration will also assist in this diversification process.
Again, I reiterate Manitoba’s share of infrastructure funding through the WGTA Adjustment Fund is not to be used for “new canola crushing plans, ethanol plants and potato production.” They are to be used to mitigate infrastructure impacts resulting from the grain transportation reforms.
I trust this clarifies Manitoba’s position on this important issue for Manitoba grain producers.
– Harry J. Enns,
Minister of Agriculture,
Winnipeg, Man.
Foreign MPs?
To the Editor:
Our Prime Minister is strangely silent and uninterested as one of our provinces is strutting towards independence.
He can’t even tell us that MPs elected in Quebec can no longer sit in our parliament if the referendum turns into a “yes” for Quebec. Obviously he has a problem since most of the important cabinet ministers, including himself, were elected in Quebec. … They seem to leave Quebecers under the assumption that nothing will change for MPs from Quebec or for their people sitting in the Canadian Senate.
This would be preposterous or outrageous!
Can it really be that Canada would pay MPs who were elected in a foreign land?
If not, then why does our Prime Minister or parliament not set our minds at ease on this score?
– Ernest J. Weser,
Laird, Sask.
Correction
A letter to the editor in the Aug. 31 issue incorrectly stated that status Indians are exempt from provincial sales tax, personal income taxes, customs duties, and taxes on gasoline, alcohol and tobacco.
Checks with federal and provincial taxation officials, however, confirm the following:
- While status Indians do not pay provincial sales tax, or the provincial tax on tobacco, they do pay the provincial excise tax on gasoline and alcohol.
- As well, they pay the federal excise tax on tobacco and alcohol both on and off reserves.
- Status Indians are exempt from paying the GST only if the purchase is made on a reserve.
- Status Indians may also pay personal income taxes, depending on numerous factors, such as whether the employment duties are carried out on a reserve, whether the employer or employee live on a reserve and if the employer is a band council.
- Concerning customs duties, status Indians are subject to the same laws as other Canadian citizens when crossing the border and get no special exemptions.
