Gov’t should help
To the Editor:
I spoke to the farm rally at Melita, (Man.,) on June 29 regarding financial assistance to farmers affected by excess water. It was a well attended rally. It is good to be a part of a group acting to solve its collective problem.
The excess water problem has compounded a low farm margin problem. Low farm margins are caused by low prices for commodities. Farmers need services from government to mitigate the problem of low margins. Farmers also need to be paid fairly for their products. To date federal and provincial governments have been removing farm programs from their budgets to be in line with trade deals, despite the growing need for such programs. Farmers have seen the results of 10 years of corporate trade deals done by governments. It is time for our government to protect its citizens, including farmers, from corporate/market trade deals.
Read Also
Crop insurance’s ability to help producers has its limitations
Farmers enrolled in crop insurance can do just as well financially when they have a horrible crop or no crop at all, compared to when they have a below average crop
The group attending the rally generally recognized that the most practical solution to the problem is requesting our governments to act as they should on our behalf. This should be the case in good times and in difficult times. No group other than government could provide for the needs of farmers. Indeed, society needs democratic government to provide many different services for its citizens. For government to provide services, it must tax. Taxes must be fair.
The Manitoba government announcement of farm help is a small recognition that government should provide for its citizens. I say this because until now most politicians have run government services to be agreeable with trade agreements like NAFTA, GATT or the WTO. These trade agreements are used by politicians as excuses to say that farmers should not be subsidized. By providing farm assistance the Manitoba government has pushed the line on trade agreements. The assistance is a very timid step. The federal government should reconsider its agricultural trade policy.
The federal government was noticeably absent from the rally. What hope does this give to young farmers?
– Ian L. Robson,
Deleau, Man.
Common challenges
To the Editor:
I was reading your paper and it seems to me that it’s all wrong for us out of the border to feel victimized by Canadian ranchers “dumping” beef on our markets. You guys are faced with the same problems and political animosities we are. Look at Sunkist Orange. It’s only a bunch of growers all over the world organized to sell oranges, represented by a minimal, not too overpaid bureaucracy in Ontario, California. They don’t care if the grower is from Brazil or Mozambique but they have created a kind of Orange Grower’s Nation. Why can’t cow people do that kind of thing?
– Marshall Bell,
Belfry, Montana
Justice miscarriage
To the Editor:
After reading the bookshelf page in the May 27 section of Western People it must have been a tremendous relief to David Milgaard’s family, as well as the Morin and Marshall families, that these miscarriages of justice have been put aside. Sometimes people in high offices need their chain yanked long and hard but at least we don’t have capital punishment … There have been too many innocents … wrongfully hanged in the past.
– Arthur Garland,
Cargill, Ont.
Proud of son
To the Editor:
The following is a copy of a speech that was written by nine year old Adam Luciuk of Wakaw, Sask. He presented his speech to the Senate, Members of Parliament and other invited speakers who attended a meeting held in Regina on June 5, 1999. I believe he summed up what most farmers are feeling.
“Dear Government: I have come here tonight to tell you what the farmers want. I have always liked living on a farm. I hope I can live on a farm when I grow up. The farmers are important to you. The food you eat comes from the farmer. They work for their own food and for your food. If the farmers don’t get enough money to live on a farm, they are going to move away.
“All the farmers work hard every day. They work so they can give their children food, clothing, shelter etc. The farmers shouldn’t be treated like this because they are pretty important. Last weekend I sat in the field all day, and was still having fun with my parents. Even though my mom and dad are working in the field, I was spending valuable time with my parents. I like running around on the farm. I can’t imagine living in town where I can’t run around. All we want is enough money to live on a farm. Not to be rich. Thank you.”
That boy is my son. I am very proud that he has enough courage to stand up and say what needs to be said, when most adults cannot.
– Michelle Luciuk,
Wakaw, Sask.
SWP loyalty
To the Editor:
Recent reports of the Sask. Wheat Pool’s economic travail and need to fire two top executives, prompts some of us to say, “We told them so.”
Short years ago, as the Pool headed hell-bent for the Big Market Place, the Toronto Stock Exchange, there were many producers who vehemently opposed the move. The Success, Wheat Pool Committee, of which I was a member, for instance, resigned en masse to protest the transformation of our co-operative into just another public traded company.
At the time, we cautioned against losses. We tried to argue that the top down decision to go public was not as widely supported by the vast membership of the SWP, as the President, Leroy Larsen, the Board of Directors and top staff asserted. We asked for a membership-wide vote on the matter. We didn’t get it. We didn’t/couldn’t know the true financial condition of the Pool but we suspected the arbitrary payment of $12 for our shares was much much too low if the entire holdings of the SWP was taken into account. We rightly and automatically valued the many “small” elevators – fully paid for mind you – as worth much more to us than anybody else. But more important, we did know something about other kinds of value; the value of tradition; the value of loyalty; the value of allegiance. We also knew something about the value our fathers before us had put on the idea of a co-operative, producer owned, facility.
Now, in these days, looking for and singling out scapegoats, whether it be firing top guns – that is a desperate cynical act – or condemning the President, the Board of Directors or for that matter the whole body of the Saskatchewan Legislative Assembly (who unanimously passed the enabling legislation to destroy the co-operative with hardly a murmur) does/will do little to restore loyalty.
The die has been cast. We producers now act like the non-co-operative business types Mr. Larsen, Mr. Loewen and the Board of Directors admonished us to become – we take our business to the best deal in town.
That should give further pause to the movers and shakers of the floundering Sask. Wheat Corp. With the skylines of places like Swift Current and North Battleford being pierced by many big, expensive, high-throughput, concrete temples to King Wheat, no doubt the true meaning of competition will burn its way into the fuzzy minds of those neophyte mavens.
… However, there may be a way for the SWC to avoid utter disaster. Mr. Larsen: Leave our “little” elevators open.
– Edwin Wallace,
Pennant, Sask.
Still waiting…
To the Editor:
Sit down with your AIDA (Agricultural Income Disaster Assistance) forms and your spouse, take five and a half hours in March 1999 to fill out forms.
We wait three to four weeks, a phone call comes from AIDA, and they need more information April 11. On April 15 we then received a second set of forms from AIDA, on the 19th of April we then received our third set of forms, on April 23 we then received our fourth set of forms, when we had already sent in the required information.
We phoned AIDA … and assured them that we had already sent in our forms in March of 1999.
May 10 a phone call comes from AIDA need(ing) more information. We could have sent in all the work sheets in March had they asked for them.
Phone call with AIDA June 23, would like to know what crop district we are in to verify production.
Would like to know the difference in our calf prices. Some sold from pasture and some held over.
We were then assured by AIDA that it would be another three to four weeks if there was a cheque coming at all. I suggested that they should mail the other 60 percent that was talked about coming at the end of August and save the price of a stamp.
If there was any payment coming this would have been a total of four and a half months to process.
– R. C. Francis,
Moose Jaw, Sask.
Rail review
To the Editor:
I agree full heartedly with Lynn Jacobson’s comments that the recommendations for changes to the Grain Transportation Act represents a battle as to who will control the grain transportation system of Western Canada.
If the grain companies eventually win this political thrust then their control of the system will not be for free. Management of the entire movement of western Canadian grain will be portrayed as a huge task worthy of much more staff both in numbers and seniority and thus justify additional charges of at least on par with the Canadian Wheat Board.
Also we would be fooling ourselves if we believed that removal of the rate cap and inviting competition will result in healthy on-going competition. …
Should a short-line operator become too successful, what’s to stop either CNR or CPR to buy out or merge to ensure their monopoly persists? …
Competition is an ultimate solution where true competition can exist but unfortunately this will only be the case in the trucking industry.
The railway costing review should be a complete one rather than partial. Since the end of 1997 CNR for example has bought over 100 new locomotives, 180 pieces of snow handling equipment, bought Illinois Central for $2.3 billion and recorded a profit of $360 million for the fiscal year of 1998.
The Liberal government has never had a history of creative, positive policies for western Canadian agriculture and I can’t see this grain transportation issue going through a fruitful resolve either.
Farmers across Western Canada should advise their current representatives to put this issue on hold until the next election if a clear resolution and one that is definitely favoring the producer isn’t forthcoming.
– Mike Rudakewich,
Fairview, Alta.
Migrating farmer?
To the Editor
Where has sunny Alberta gone? Must have followed a flight on birds into the sunny south and decided to stay there. Predictions of cool, cloudy and windy are the normal forecasts and for a wonder they are on target with diminishing showers scattered here and there. Few have sufficient moisture for a good crop, while others are unable to seed. Life has its abnormalities but crops require specific climatic menus to reach a goal of production. Farmers over the years have competed with the weather but with ever increasing costs are unable to do so. Since farmers feed the world, our federal government should supplement crop losses or we will have neither birds nor farmers.
– H. W. Jackson,
Falher, Alta.
Administrators key
To the Editor:
Elmer Laird’s letter in the June 24 Open Forum raises doubt as to whose side the NDP is really on, the farmer or the corporation. Interesting point.
As long as we adhere to the principle that associating ourselves with political organizations will bring us comfort, wealth and happiness, we are headed for a life of disappointment. Politicians, much like corporate executives, have certain goals to fulfill. Being part of a political party in power is but a step of the ladder to success. What better position to be in than at the helm of the nation.
As the year 2000 approaches, we still do not understand that there is a right way, and a wrong way to administer our nation. Roads have to be maintained, hospitals have to be constructed, and yes taxes have to be collected and accounted for. Instead, we continue to live in a dream where perhaps someday we will elect a messiah who will transform debt to wealth, and potholes to pavement.
We no longer need rulers as much as we need administrators who are responsible to the people, and who can be removed instantly when they fail to do their job.
– John J. Hamon,
Gravelbourg, Sask.
Lapse of judgment
To the Editor:
I was sickened to read remarks attributed to Food and Agriculture minister, Lyle Vanclief, that said, in my interpretation of them (that) Saskatchewan should not expect to receive help from the federal treasury in her time of need, because she had not volunteered to contribute to the Canadian economy in times when her economy was “buoyant.” (Whenever that was supposed to be.)
It strikes me as being an exceptionally stupid remark, even for a partisan politician that ranks with such historical ones as “I would not give a single cent to any provincial Tory government.” (Mackenzie King, 1929); “Never will I or any government of which I am a part, put a premium on idleness or put people on the dole.” (R.B. Bennett, 1931); “Let them eat cake.” (Marie Antoinette, 1789).
It is also an incorrect one. Saskatchewan has fully contributed her share to the Canadian economy and has always stood ready to offer assistance, within our means, either voluntarily or through the government, to anyone more unfortunate than us.
For their indiscretions, Marie Antoinette lost her head, Bennett lost the respect and support of a nation and King is doubtless still suffering a loss of some kind or other, wherever he may be. Other honorable people have resigned or been removed from office for lesser lapses of judgment than the minister has just committed.
If Vanclief really believes the kind of drivel he has been spouting, he should call for the banks, the railways, the grain handling companies, the machinery manufacturers, the chemical companies and other groups who have traditionally, “farmed the farmers,” to contribute to easing the farm financial crisis. It is their “buoyant” profit margins that have, to a large extent, precipitated the crisis in the first place.
– Don Robertson,
Liberty, Sask.
Cheers for Ritter
To the Editor:
It was with considerable pleasure to have read in the June 10 issue about Ken Ritter being elected as CWB chair and his honest comments about the way the Board operates on our behalf. Coming from a farmer that originally campaigned to emasculate the powers of central desk sales, it should hint to the rabble-rousers that there is a lot of good in the way we have been marketing our grain. It is hoped Mr. Ritter will not be completely shunned by those that oppose the Board and that he can portray some convincing arguments to those that view the CWB concept as the devil that strangles the prairie farmers. My congratulations to you, Mr. Ritter.
On another note, I feel for the farmers of the southeast who battled mud to try and seed something. And it is ironic to listen to the political chess that is being played ….
Some farm groups are advocating acreage payments and I’m glad the governments are avoiding that angle. …
Many farms today are virtual business enterprises and deserve not a penny more than any other business that comes upon hard times. Now is the time to look at the small family farms that are the backbone of rural communities. …
As the wheel turns slowly around and the population density of the world forces us to accept the idea that the prairies have the room and the infrastructures for relatively millions of people. Only then will we wish that we would have retained the railways, which are much less pollutant, a fact that Canada seems to little care about, given the sorry world statistics of late. …
Canada could have led the way to maintain smaller family farms like they do in Europe, but the balance of power in Ottawa mitigates against any notions of that happening anytime soon. The voting power lies elsewhere. What a sad looking sunset on a procession of disappearing small communities and exodus of farmers and encroachment of the monolithic giants into the vacuum thus created. Will our leaders never learn from the histories of past empires? I guess not.
– Harry Beskorovayny,
Gronlid, Sask.
