Letters to the editor

Water consult

I am one of the farmers whom the Saskatchewan Irrigation Projects Association claims will benefit from its proposed mega irrigation and damming projects.

However, I share concerns expressed by speakers at the public consultation meeting on water conservation in Saskatoon Feb. 7, as to the expensive futility of these projects and the harm they will likely cause the environment and communities.

A Dec. 16, 2004, Western Producer article says Clay Serby spoke at the Saskatchewan Irrigation Projects Association annual conference in support of SIPA’s proposed expansion of provincial irrigation projects. He assured SIPA members that the work of the Action Committee on the Rural Economy, a 50-year water plan for extensive irrigation development and water storage reservoirs, will not sit on the shelf.

Read Also

Producers face the reality of shifting grain price expectations

Significant price shifts have occurred in various grains as compared to what was expected at the beginning of the calendar year. Crop insurance prices can be used as a base for the changes.

Although two government MLAs, Mr. Prebble and Mr. Forbes, attended the Saskatoon water consultation meeting, there was no opportunity to ask questions, so I pose one now. Do Mr. Serby’s statements reflect the NDP government’s position?

The stated focus of this public consultation is water conservation, not water usage, thereby narrowly framing the discussion and limiting input on broader, perhaps awkward questions.

This dialogue steering, combined with Mr. Serby’s public statements, lead me to think our NDP government has already decided to support mega irrigation projects envisioned by the Saskatchewan Irrigation Projects Association and throws in to question the very sincerity of its public consultation.

Ñ Doug Bone,

Elrose, Sask.

Foreign interests

Recently, David Emerson, who is Canada’s minister of industry, was quoted in The Globe and Mail regarding foreign ownership. This is what he said:

“Then you have to start asking questions about at what point does that kind of dominant control of a particular sector become a matter of national interest?”

Presently 50 percent of Canada’s petroleum and over 50 percent of all its manufacturing is foreign owned and controlled. Should this not be a “matter of national interest” to Canadians?

Canada’s Foreign Investment Review Agency was abolished by the Mulroney government on June 30, 1985.

Since the above date, there have been 11,000 takeover applications of Canadian businesses. Not one single application has been rejected.

Between June 30, 1985 and November 2004, Canada Investment Review figures show over $532.2 billion in new foreign investment, and 96.8 percent of that amount was targeted for takeovers of Canadian businesses. The remaining 3.2 percent includes new business investment.

But here’s the rub that really hurts. A very large percentage of the funds that foreign corporations used to take over Canadian businesses was supplied by our own Canadian financial institutions, mainly our five big banks.

Now, let us make some connections: the Bush administration claims it has no offensive plans in other countries, except to protect their own business interests. So, does that mean that we Canadians should buckle under and join the U.S. in their ballistics missile program to protect American interests outside their country?

This may well be the underlying cause for most of the so-called terrorist acts and armed struggle taking place today, particularly the horrific event of 9/11.

Ñ Leo Kurtenbach,

Cudworth, Sask.

Guns and killers

The gun registration program is like a smoldering ember burning out of sight ready to burst into a destructive forest fire. History is full of examples of people who have been victimized and killed because they could not defend themselves.

Owning a firearm will not turn a person into a psychotic killer. This firearm owner may be able to stop a psychotic killer before he kills too many people.

As terrible and publicized as these psychotic killers are, the damage is nothing in comparison to what happens when these killers get into government and military power and are able to kill hundreds of millions of people.

These psychotic killers think differently than you and I, and just because we are peaceful and unarmed does not take away the gratification they get by being mass murderers.

Today, the solution is quite elusive. Several small steps would be for each provincial government to use the notwithstanding clause and boot the federal program out of the country. Provincial police forces with allegiance to the laws of the province and civilian posse comitatus are also needed.

This is only a partial solution. Around the world, there are small pockets of independent-thinking people who are claiming their right of self-determination and who are giving resistance to the new world order.

Unbelievable advancements in military technology and brutality make these pockets of resistance as hopeless as was the situation with David against Goliath.

Ñ Laverne Isaac,

Medstead, Sask.

Artificial props

Being covetous of someone else’s market and being envious of their subsidies is not the answer in trade. Trying to artificially prop up prices while selling to the rich is equally ridiculous and unethical.

The simple fact is that there should be a more equitable distribution of high quality food, which would lead to a more equitable return to farmers.

The financial system mandates bankruptcy, constriction or subsidy in agriculture because of the monopoly of the Bank of Canada. If the government does not subsidize the farmer, the farmer must subsidize his own operation.

With a capitalization rate of 68 to one, the banking industry makes the money, not the farming industry, an obviously wicked juxtapositional situation.

There are many nations, especially in Africa, that have immense mineral wealth but little food. These nations also have a harsh climate with sporadic rainfall and they suffer just like all primary producers everywhere in the world.

They must work harder and harder for less and less and therefore when war does break out, peace seldom returns to them.

It is therefore true what the populist manifest says, that capitalism degenerates into crisis and Marxism.

If we were to trade strategically and equitably with these nations with the goals of getting rid of the bankers there, we could supply them what they need, when they need it, at a reasonable gain.

It is therefore that I faithfully remain debt free.

Ñ Ralph Dawson,

Elmworth, Alta.

Dynamic CWB

I’d like to respond to Art Hazelhoff’s letter in the Feb. 3 issue entitled, “CWB Outdated”.

First, a few facts that Mr. Hazelhoff appears unaware of …

The CWB is a dynamic business, having made many changes in the last 10 years in the way they conduct that business, from contracting of grain to the many different pricing and pooling options that meet the grain farmers’ needs.

Secondly, study after study has proven that the CWB has consistently put more money in the pockets of the grain farmers because of their monopoly position. Our daughter’s university economics professor legitimized a monopoly position as an enviable one for the seller. There’s a surprise.

As for the CWB being afraid of a little competition, Mr. Hazelhoff should know that Cargill, ADM and other international grain traders do not operate under a free market system.

Rather, they operate as setters of grain prices, squeezing as much out of the primary producer as possible, enabling them to further expand their multinational empires.

By contrast, the CWB operates as a not-for-profit corporation, returning all profits back to the producers.

Fortunately, as evidenced by the recent CWB director elections, the majority of western grain farmers are smart enough to understand the reality of the grain marketing sector and have demanded that the CWB remain our grain marketers.

Sadly, people like Mr. Hazelhoff, along with our provincial government, have been misled into thinking that dismantling the CWB would be a good move.

Mr. Hazelhoff should thank his lucky stars that the CWB is there to market his grain, getting him the best available price.

Ñ Neil T. Gorda,

Willingdon, Alta.

Whine worries

I cannot help but find Noel McNaughton’s article in the Feb. 10 edition of the Western Producer very offensive when he refers to “the farmers’ whine,” meaning they complain in a peevish childish way.

I have many farming friends and sure they complain at times when thing don’t go right. I don’t think that there are many people who think that their problems are a big joke. Farmers have plenty to worry about.

Take for example the implications of the many variable farm deficits as told by Norman Storch from Hanna, Alta., in Barry Wilson’s column Feb. 3.

Not all farmers are fortunate enough to have their own psychologist as has Mr. McNaughton, or to have a steady income. As a professional speaker, coach and writer Ñ pretty cushy Ñ I doubt that he ever worries whether or not he can pay his monthly bills, or if his kids or grandkids will be able to afford to play hockey at the local rink each winter, let alone the expense of post secondary education.

In Mr. McNaughton’s Feb. 3 column, he gave advice to Shirley, whose husband wouldn’t talk about things going wrong. Maybe he thinks like Mr. McNaughton, that she will think that he’s just a whiner. So what do guys like him do, bottle it all up inside, till the cork flies off or they just simply implode?

Thank God that there are some people in this world like Tom Bidart and Rob Little (WP, Special Report Feb. 10) who do not lack sensitivity, who are more understanding and open to listening to all farmers concerns.

Ñ Aggie Malm,

Lillooet, B.C.

Grassroots lost

It seems somewhat ironic that just as livestock producers are attempting to regain some control over their own destiny, Saskatchewan Wheat Pool members and delegates are being told they must go the opposite direction.

During the Pool’s financial crisis in 2003, management and the board needed the support of farmer members and delegates. A public discussion was held. Members gave their support.

This time Class A shareholders are being shut out of the discussion about their co-operative. It would seem that management wants to restrict the decision to delegates only. Delegates must act on behalf of Class A shareholders, not in place of them.

The farm leadership council and the four farmer directors on the board will be directly or indirectly selected by management and approved by the board. It does not sound very much like a grassroots democratic idea.

Pool policy has avoided contentious issues and stayed more middle of the road during the last five years. Delegates and some members of the board have been instrumental on speaking for farmers on safety net issues.

However, management and the board’s decision to be part of a group proposing to buy the rail cars is a dangerous change in policy direction. Farmers will not be well served with foreign grain companies having any added control over our grain transportation. This is just one example where the proposed council will lack any credibility.

The Grain Services Union and delegates may be under the impression that approval of the restructuring proposal would safeguard the retention of head office in Regina. I believe the opposite to be true.

Winnipeg, Chicago or Minneapolis may be possible destinations. Roy Atkinson and the friends of the Pool wanted to just say no to the Pool going public. There have been other opportunities when farmer members and delegates could have said no. Those chances are in the past….

Ñ Tom Cameron,

Carievale, Sask.

For farmer

I’m sure the Western Producer, more than any other news medium, truly supports the Canadian farmer.

However, at times that support may seem a bit feeble. A recent example is the article by Wendy Holm that was published in the Feb. 11 edition.

Her article describes with perfect accuracy the plight of today’s farmers and the total lack of response from governments. The note at the end of Wendy’s article describes her as an agrologist, resource economist and author. It should have added, a clear thinker.

The note also states, “The opinions expressed in this column are not necessarily those of the Western Producer.”

I realize that is a standard declaration when articles are written by non staff members. However, in this case, if the Western Producer is truly for the farmer, the declaration should have read as follows: The opinions expressed in this column are endorsed 100 percent by the Western Producer.

Ñ Gerry Laughren,

Krydor, Sask.

Hurray for tariffs

Paul Martin is about to raise tariffs on American imports to the point the prices will double.

I say “hurray!” It is about time we stood up to the American bullies cheating on the North American Free Trade Agreement again and again.

I want to say a resounding no to the Iraq war, and especially the killing, rape, torture and maiming of Iraqi children. I am boycotting all American goods and wish everyone would do likewise. Twenty percent of Canadians and Europeans are already boycotting.

The tariffs will create many new jobs in Canada.

Ñ Roedy Green,

Victoria, B.C.

Income worse

In reply to Sue Michalsky’s article Nov. 18, 2004, “Routes available to save the farm,” she says 1930s farm income was twice what the wage earner earned. In the 1970s the farmer earned half what the wage earner earned.

That is one quarter what the income was in the 1930s during a deep depression. Since the 1970s it has become much worse. Why on earth would anyone today want to farm and earn much less than one quarter of the depression era income? It shows some of the determination and tenacity of today’s farmers.

Sue says the consumer holds the balance of power and we must cater to them. We must compete and even further reduce our income or they’ll import more food so we can further liquefy the family farm; the raw material producer that produces 70 percent of all new wealth in a nation.

We are barking up the wrong tree and choosing the wrong rabbit. The culprit is the fact that farmers do not get a proper price for their raw materials.

The farmer still grows the food for the consumer and it still is in the consumer’s best interest to make sure the farmer gets parity price because the consumer’s wages will eventually have to fall to the farmer’s rate of wages for the economy to balance….

Either bring the farmer up to your level or face the possibility of eventual collapse and face a depression like the 1930s. It’s the consumers’ choice now.

As you well know, in a roomful of farmers there can’t be more than two that can agree on anything to help themselves even though in reality they have the real power. They grow our food that we “have” to eat … The consumer must realize that if they import because it is cheaper, their high quality food source that is grown locally will no longer be available, and their own jobs will disappear as well. …

Please do your own investigations to find the truth, as you would at least think in a raw material producing country our education system would mention raw materials economics. …

Sue is right. There is a disconnect with consumers as to where their new wealth comes from and what is the hand that feeds them.

Ñ R. E. Kennedy

Simpson, Sask.

Goodbye ducks

Amidst all the bad news stories related to agriculture was an article that made a big smile break out on my face. “Ducks less common on Prairies: DU” (WP, Feb. 3.)

It seems the number of ducks on the Canadian Prairies has dropped 50 percent since 1970. Let’s see, that’s 50 percent less ducks to eat and defecate on my barley and pea crops every fall. Why is this a problem?

Of course, Ducks Unlimited is terribly concerned about this, but then I’ve always thought that having an organization like Ducks Unlimited made about as much sense as Gophers Unlimited or Grasshoppers Unlimited.

It means less ducks for the Yankee duck hunters to shoot, and naturally, I’m heartbroken about this. The land of Western Canada is to benefit the people of Western Canada, so go ahead and drain that slough and seed it to canola.

Ñ Keith Yoder,

Tofield, Alta.

Step up

I have just read an article (WP, Jan. 27) by Jean Yves Lord, executive director of the Canadian Co-operative Association, formerly the Co-operative Union of Canada, of which I was a board member while I was vice-president of Saskatchewan Wheat Pool before they got into their present situation.

I agree with the points he makes regarding giving control to non-farmer shareholders and bond holders, and possible foreign ownership. If you look back at the history and development of co-operatives in this province, you will find it was the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool, its directors, delegates and field staff that were responsible for starting and building almost all of the co-operatives we now have in Saskatchewan, be it credit unions, Federated Co-op, Co-op Life and Co-op Trust. They were driven and used by the people that belonged to the Pool.

Unfortunately, bad management decisions were made, which I need not repeat, and we are faced with the current situation.

It seems to me that it would be only appropriate that all the other co-operatives whose existence has been the past effort and support of the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool to jointly step up to the plate and assure its future stays in the hands of farmers and Canadians.

Ñ Avery Sahl,

Mossbank, Sask.

Send the Nobel

This is an application for a Nobel prize for a significant advance in understanding BSE.

Note that an American got a Nobel prize years ago for the theory of infectious prions.

That hasn’t proved out because it is impossible for prions to reproduce themselves.

The Nobel prize-winning theory goes thus:

Deformed prions are just old and aged prions that should have been reclaimed by the body, but were not.

This leads to a huge surplus, most of which are deteriorated and old.

They show up as prion clumps that lead to the brain damage.

This theory is more plausible than any current ones. It explains why older animals are more affected and it indicates that prion diseases are not transmissible, which explains why cohorts of BSE animals are not affected.

Brighter minds can now track down the root cause of prion diseases, be it chemical, radiation or just mis-chance in normal aging. It may well be readily curable.

Please forward my prize.

Ñ Ed Shook,

Vavenby, B.C.

Small but mighty

Once upon a time in the land of Saskatchewan, there was an association called the Saskatchewan Beekeepers Association. It was a thriving association with almost 1,500 active beekeepers.

But things began to change; different members on the board, different ideas, membership fee increases and not soliciting late membership fees, to name a few.

One day someone on the board got a brain wave that they could generate more revenue by placing a commission, levy or checkoff on all the beekeepers in the province.

Then doubt set in. Should it be everyone irregardless of size, should it be 50 hives, or should it be 100 hives or more? The consensus was unclear.

Then came the fee or levy. Should it be 50 cents a hive or $1 a hive? More unclearness.

Then in the spring of 2004 treasurer Wink Howland sent out a survey or a feeler on what the beekeepers thought of the idea. Out of 116 responses he received three no’s (he claims a colony count of 75) of which one was mine (60 hives) and one was David Sawkiw’s (100 hives). The third we don’t know.

On Nov. 18, 2004, there was another meeting at Melfort, Sask., to discuss this proposal. … We asked what kind of research and promotion were going to be done. The answer was unclear and the debate was cut short by president Tim Wendell and put to a vote with the result being 28 in favour and nine against; a 300 percent increase from the spring.

Then I read in the Jan. 20 Western Producer, articles by Yves Garez and Wink Howland blasting Mr. David Sawkiw and the Western Producer’s editor for the report, saying both were creating a controversy. My comment is, boys since when are we living in a communist state? I thought we had freedom of speech and of the press, but I guess not when it comes to the SBA….Wink, don’t underestimate the power of one small voice in a large community. …

Ñ Wayne Mastrachuk,

V&W Honey Processors

Preeceville, Sask.

Experiment over

It would appear that the farmers’ experiment with the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool is over.

A co-operative cannot exist as a co-operative if it retains outside capital investment. One does not even have to follow the events that SWP has recently gone through but rather the debate, which occurred during the share conversion debate. This was only confirmed and accelerated when outside advisers and independent directors were implemented.

Thinking back, one can easily blame the executive team of the day. But the blame must be by a wider group, the board of directors, delegates, committee members, farmers and the security commission, who were warned of the outcome and the inconsistencies in the share conversion, and finally the Saskatchewan government of the day, which approved of the legislative changes against numerous warnings by presenters at the legislative hearings.

Opponents outnumbered the proponents three to one. Unfortunately, other than farmers, all of these groups appear to have slunk away and are hiding…

There still may be opportunities for the SWP. They just will not involve the same level of benefits flowing back to Saskatchewan farmers and their communities.

Although Saskatchewan farmers received their equity out of the Pool in the original conversion, they did not receive any residual value the company created by using farmer’s funds over the Pool’s 80 year history.

It would appear the note holders and bond holders will ultimately receive this accumulated value. But that appears to be the Saskatchewan way Ñ start a company, only to have outsiders eventually take it over. Will we ever learn?

Ñ Mervin Ermel,

Bethune, Sask.

SWP structure

I really must commend delegate Janie Dick for circulating a petition urging Saskatchewan Wheat Pool delegates to defeat the restructuring and return control of the Pool to Class A shareholders.

President (Terry) Baker claims the Pool will maintain its co-op culture and traditions through the new farm leadership co-op. The new structure of the board will be four producers, six others and the CEO. Hello? Wouldn’t it be better to have a board made up of six producers, four others and a CEO? Then there would be no need for a farm leadership co-op.

I can only echo the comments of Paul Harmon: has the CEO been as good for SWP as SWP has been for the CEO?

Ñ Audrey Walker,

Rosetown, Sask.

Debt threat

If anyone is wondering why the Saskatchewan government has had to cancel programs, make cuts and bring down a stringent budget, they need only to look back to the Devine government years of 1982 to 1991.

The Devine government left this province with a debt of $13.3 billion. This province was literally bankrupt and today Saskatchewan is still paying on that debt.

Since taking over, the current government has decreased that debt by $1.5 billion by means of strong financial management. Just think of how many positive things could be done if the province did not have this debt. The yearly interest payments are huge as well.

Remember that the Saskatchewan Party is a recycled Conservative party. If the Saskatchewan Party with the economic plans or rather their lack of economic plans, becomes the government, we face the threat of even more debt, from which our beloved province may never recover.

Ñ Evelyn Johnson,

Estevan, Sask.