Letters to the editor

Who speaks?

Alberta farmers have a hodgepodge of organizations all competing with each other and presenting different views. We are a mess. No one would take us seriously. We get what we deserve: nothing.

The situation is not much better in other provinces. In March when Ontario farmers went to Ottawa, did any other province or organization support them?

I phoned the National Farmers Union office in Saskatoon and was told “no, we aren’t sending anybody, it’s no use, they aren’t going to get anywhere.” Just what kind of thinking is this? I see it as a Canadian problem not just an Ontario problem.

Read Also

Trump’s trade policies take their toll on Canadian producers

U.S. trade policy as dictated by president Donald Trump is hurting Canadian farmers in a multitude of ways.

Ñ O. Yanishewski,

Spirit River, Alta.

Survey skew

Last week I received a phone call asking me to take part in a survey. I never bother with these but when the researcher told me it was about marketing grain, I was intrigued. We started the survey. It quickly became obvious that two things were happening. One, the results were very likely to favour our present marketing system. The questions often gave no option to the 50 percent of farmers who favour a voluntary grain marketing system. Being asked if it would be better to have barley in a voluntary market than wheat does not give the option most farmers prefer, which is freedom for both. Examples like this were numerous. Another stands out. The initial question was whether I would favour Canadian Wheat Board marketing, a voluntary dual market or a fully open marketing system. Several questions later the question was reworded: would I favour the present system or a completely open market?

Anyone who has the most minor involvement in western Canadian agriculture knows that virtually no one is calling for a completely open system, so asking that question guarantees an answer that supports the present system. This type of questioning allows the purchaser of the survey to use the most favourable result obtained. We are all familiar with push polls, which are surveys designed to create opinion, not reflect it. Secondly, someone may have been creating some dangerous expectations. Many of the questions were about the CWB operating outside of its mandate. …

Someone is spending a lot of money to get those results. How much did the survey cost and who is paying for it? From the apparent survey size, it has to be costing tens and perhaps hundreds of thousands of dollars. If it is a private company doing this polling, I guess they have the right to spend their money as they chose.

However, if it is being conducted by a farm organization or the CWB, prairie farmers should be informed as to what is going on. I hope I am not paying for something that will later be used to empty my wallet and restrict my freedom.

Ñ David L. Anderson,

MP, Cypress Hills-Grasslands,

Ottawa, Ont.

Guns and RCMP

The responsibility for the four slain RCMP officers in Alberta should rest squarely on the shoulders of every Canadian citizen. Canadians seem to pride themselves on being capable of viewing any national problem with a stunned indifference. No, you say? When was the last time you wrote to your member of Parliament and voiced your opinion on something that you felt should be changed?

Most Canadians seem more interested in the NHL strike or what phony Martha Stewart is doing today.

Our government spends over $1 billion on the ineffectual gun registration system. Is it working? Obviously not, in light of the tragic death of our four young officers. We were told by (former federal justice minister) Allan Rock that the registry would cost several million dollars. How did it ever get to $1 billion? Was Rock fired for his incompetence?

We were also told it would cure the very tragedy that has just rocked our nation to the core.

If the registry is working, how would Jim Roszko ever possess a firearm, let alone an assault type weapon? Go one step further. Why would a mentally ill and obviously dangerous person like Roszko even be walking our streets?

Every city and town in Canada has dangerous and or mentally ill individuals that our court system refuses to deal with.

Only law-abiding citizens register their firearms. The criminals and thugs won’t. The entire registration program is a sneaky plan to disarm everyone in Canada … Canada is a wonderful country run by second-rate politicians and populated by 30 million apathetic citizens with their heads buried in the sand. You can’t blame the politicians, as they have their own thoughts and agendas, but they are only 300 elected officials out of 30 million. Politicians are supposed to be an extension and a voice of the people but if the masses don’t give them guidance, they will follow their own narrow-minded, self-serving agendas.

We are $500 billion in debt. Don’t try to figure out how much money that is because you can’t. What have we to show for it? Nothing. …

Mad cow disease came out 20 years ago and Canada did nothing. Now our $7.7 billion cattle industry has been strangled. The Liberals are trying to get out of health care. If you don’t believe me try for an elective operation …

Please don’t let the deaths of our four national officers slip by in vain. It is the civic duty of every one of us in this beautiful country to voice their opinion to their member of Parliament. Placing an X on a ballot once every four years is not enough. Ñ Brian Mitchell,

Cranbrook, B.C.

Lost legacy

The prairie pool grain handling and marketing systems established by our grandfathers and great grandfathers in the 1920s were a legacy that sustained western farmers and rural communities for decades. Their very presence, whether farmers delivered to them or not, safeguarded every producer by obstructing the runaway greed that had characterized the activities of the private grain companies prior to the pools establishment. Indeed, newspaper clippings from as far back as 1880 reveal the predatory grading and pricing, which certainly created the unrest leading to the birth of the pools.

As everyone knows, pool patronage dividends (were) built into equity payable upon the individual producer’s retirement and were counted upon for old age security. Given the size of some of the operations in Saskatchewan, I shudder to think what fortunes were lost when Sask Pool management went on their building / rationalization / modernization rampage and, with apparent director and delegate approval, wrecked a powerful and prosperous company….

Western farmers are now facing a situation similar to that which confronted their forefathers when they first identified the need for the pools Ñ only now is, if anything, worse, exacerbated by an unprecedented, monopolized and concentrated global marketplace expert at working farmers against each other.

The result of the loss of the prairie pool system will continue to reverberate across the West as more wealth and human energy are sucked out of the small communities, and as small communities which lost their biggest business dwindle away, watch their tax base shrink, and see their farmers struggle against increased hauling time and freight costs. …

There was a time, not that long ago, when a roar from mighty Sask Pool reverberated all the way to Ottawa. The company was, in its heyday, a bona fide voice for the best interests of western rural people. …

It is an everlasting shame that just because a few transnationals couldn’t put up with having to compete with a company owned by farmers, it was lost….

Ñ Beverly Stow,

Carman, Man.

CAIS ideas

I would like to express my opinion about CAIS (Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization program) as an individual farmer. I am one of those who feel no farm group entirely represents my interests.

First the deposit: I have not felt it is as big a problem as some suggest. If you do not have the cash you can borrow the money and in the end all it will cost you is interest. I believe more didn’t participate because they had low margins. I believe the deposit could be eliminated because I feel it is really only a deductible. On that thought, I would suggest that the deductible could be changed as follows: first $100,000 margin, no deductible; next $100,000 margin, 10 percent; next $100,000 margin, 20 percent and so on in $100,000 increments until the margin reached is $1 million and anything over that is not covered. I believe the lower margin cap would be more acceptable to keep taxpayers’ future support.

If a deposit is necessary for trade agreements I’m sure something could be designed for that purpose. Some method of yearly participation should be in place to help with administration costs. By that I think you apply every year to keep all records up to date in order to receive a payment. Only first year farmers should be exempt from this.

When payments are calculated I think crop insurance receipts should be pro-rated or adjusted because right now there is no advantage to carrying crop insurance if it’s the year you will receive a CAIS payment.

For instance, $100,000 in crop insurance could be only $50,000 in calculating the payment. This would encourage more to participate in crop insurance. …

I like the fact that CAIS rewards a farm that is trying to improve its margin. It is not a guaranteed income program. We all have to adjust because of weather, income, management decisions, on our individual farms. Yes, it is tough when margins fall because of weather, pricing, etc., but when that happens, I have to adjust my farm and expectations, the same as anyone else….

I believe that most farm programs should be targeted and capped to help keep the maximum number of farmers in the community. Let’s try to keep those existing farms and their families who wish to stay in business before replacing them with someone else, whether resident or immigrant. I would like to see programs fixed in place for a minimum of five years to create some stability, with minor changes and ongoing reviews….

Ñ Donald J. Koenig,

Beatty, Sask.

Farmer trust

A recent survey shows that farmers remain as one of the most trusted professionals in Canada, beating out police officers, bankers and car salespeople, among others. Trust is difficult to win and even easier to lose, so farmers can be proud that 91 percent of people believe in them and their chosen profession.

In the last three years that this survey has been conducted, the trust level hasn’t varied. Despite BSE and the other challenges in the industry, the Canadian public remains strong in their confidence in farmers, and we thank them for that.

However, there is a gap between support and understanding, our ultimate goal. It continues to be up to farmers themselves to build the bridge. We’re only about three percent of the population, so while we can work together to build a united front for agriculture and make progress that way, we must also engage the other 97 percent of public opinion. We have to find ways to encourage Canadians to go one step further, and understand what we do so that they can put their support behind initiatives that will allow farmers to thrive in an international marketplace.

Canadian consumers trust us, but we want them to know why a healthy agricultural economy is important. Are they aware that one out of every 11 jobs in Manitoba depend on agriculture, or that $6 is created in the provincial economy from $1 received by the farmer?

Farmers help to drive the provincial economy and create wealth across Manitoba, in rural and urban areas. As farmers, we can be proud of the trust that Canadians have in us, but I’d also challenge farmers and consumers to do more. If you’re a farmer, speak up and explain all of the important contributions you make. If you’re a consumer, choose to ask a farmer a question about agriculture. With the answer, I think you’ll find that you’ve put your trust in the right place.

Ñ David Rolfe,

Farmer & President of Keystone Agricultural Producers,

Elgin, Man.

Farmer day

To those it may concern in this great country called Canada where over 30 million people live their lives, I recently travelled to England where the majority of my near family lives.

It becomes more obvious every year that mankind takes so much for granted, the availability of his three or more square meals a day, barely understanding its original in the raw state or even worried so long as it is available as cheap as possible.

The supermarket chains see to this as they do back home here in Canada.

Few people today toil on the land as farmers or horticulturists compared to days long past when a large percentage did within the last 100 years.

We are now well mechanized but a great deal of time and effort by a handful compared to years past still enrich the lives of so many by producing our No. 1 necessity, food.

Many businesses would collapse tomorrow without farmers, ranchers, dairymen and horticulturists’ continued efforts. Millions of people who rely on food plentifulness, and this goes without saying, would go hungry as did happen in the two great wars of the 20th century.

I am a staunch believer in the recognition of family farms, here at home and overseas whether they be grain, cattle, hogs, sheep, poultry, fruit and horticulture or any other producers of man’s eating necessities.

These people, farmers and stewards of our land, are mostly unrecognized by urban dwellers and others who do not care, regardless their importance in our daily lives.

I sincerely suggest and recommend that one day a year, for example Oct. 1, be set aside as Farmers and Agricultural Appreciation Day throughout this nation.

It’s not for work to stop, but for a connection to be made between all walks of life as to the importance of our nourishing daily food.