NFU MAINSTREAM POLICIES
Re: NFU reports on land ownership worth a read, March 19
In his column in The Western Producer, Kevin Hursch complements the National Farmers Union on its report on farmland ownership. I want to thank him for helping to express the concerns and research found in “Losing Our Grip: 2015 Update.”
He cannot, however, bring himself to do this without making some disparaging remarks about what he perceives to be areas of “socialist dogma” and “far left-wing bias.” This is not the first time he has referred to that organization in this manner.
Read Also
Agriculture needs to prepare for government spending cuts
As government makes necessary cuts to spending, what can be reduced or restructured in the budgets for agriculture?
Perhaps he should report on some of the policies of this so called “left wing organization” that are now mainstream agriculture. A May 28, 1981 insert in the Western Producer stated: “The farm union advocated for the cash advance system for wheat long before it was popular and took effect; it advocated trade with China before other groups did.”
The NFU is the strongest promoter of women’s involvement in Ag Policy. The NFU was the first to ever suggest unemployment insurance for farm workers. And for years it has been expressing concerns around the encroaching crisis of climate change while other farm groups put their heads in the sand. So are these ideas now leftist; centrist; or right leaning?
In 2011, while the CWB dismantlement was on the table, the NFU predicted the logistics crisis, transportation problems, quality control issues, lack of dual market that unfortunately have became reality. It’s amazing how those “left-wing socialist” people can figure out the future.
Where is all the “right wing, conservative, neo-liberal” people that talked about the flour mills that would spring up in the wake of the wheat board’s demise? Perhaps their brain was covered with so much “capitalist” dogma they couldn’t figure it out.
To be fair, every time another farm organization puts out a research document, please give a caveat about which side of the political spectrum they might lean on or which “mainstream” company funds them. That knowledge is invaluable with all the misinformation out there.
Wilfred (Butch) Harder,
HUGE LOSSES
Canadian Wheat Board supporters suspected a hidden agenda when grain companies wished to do away with the board. Grain companies supported the Western Canadian Wheat Growers because that organization was critical of the CWB. Agriculture minister Gerry Ritz happily went along, stating big farmers who grew most of the wheat wanted change.
One criticism was the transparency of pricing. There are enough numbers available to determine what is happening. During board times one could take the export price, subtract rail costs and elevator charges to come up with a farmgate price.
Today, when working down to the farmgate price, there is an additional $60 per tonne, which the grain companies add to the costs. A Super B load of wheat is about 40 tonnes. When multiplying by $60, and comparing to wheat board times, farmers lose about $2,500 per load. That number could be well over $3,000 per load if considering efficiencies the wheat board used to move grain.
Why is Ritz allowing farmers to be shafted so badly? If farmers had realized how huge their financial loss would be in selling their wheat, they would never have voted for change.
Lorne Jackson,
Moose Jaw, Sask.
FUNDING CLARIFICATION
Re: Water Management Funding
A story on page 14 of the March 26 issue of The Western Producer reports that Wayne Dybvig, president of the Saskatchewan Water Security Agency, said the province has invested more than $70 million in water management in the past four years.
This information was from a presentation at the annual conference of the Saskatchewan Conservation and Development Association. However, it was mistakenly suggested in this article that this funding was for Conservation and Development Area Authorities. This funding is actually in relation to the Emergency Flood Damage Reduction Program.
The Water Control Program provides about $1.2 million annually to municipalities; watershed associations and conservation area authorities for channel clearing and maintenance. This was increased from $960,000 in 2011-12.
Since 2011, the government of Saskatchewan has invested nearly $80 million into EFDRP for temporary and permanent works along with engineering and technical support for flood prevention.
The program reimburses individuals and businesses for 85 percent of the cost of approved permanent flood protection works that are built to provide protection from imminent flooding. Communities are eligible to recover 75 percent of the cost of approved permanent flood protection works. Permanent flood protection works include projects like berms and culverts.
It has been a very successful program as an independent analysis showed that for every dollar invested in this program has saved the province $20 in damages.
Over the last few years, our province has experienced record precipitation events in some areas. This has increased the demand for more local water management projects and the creation of Conservation Area Authorities.
We, as an organization, look forward to working on the 25 Year Saskatchewan Water Security Plan and will need strong local partners like those at the Saskatchewan Conservation and Development Association to carry out this plan.
Wayne Dybvig,
President, Saskatchewan Water Security Agency,
Moose Jaw, Sask.
