HOG sector SUSTAINABLE?
Re: Man. gov’t fails to recognize benefits of hog industry (WP Editorial April 18).
I disagree. When The NDP became government in 1999, the hog herd numbers were in the vicinity of three million. This expanded and ballooned to over nine million and was recognized as being No. 1 in Canada. The recognition by government is obvious, for such an increase would not be possible without the government’s support.
Which makes me ask:
Where is it written or promised that when a business venture expands to a state of collapse, taxpayers are on the hook to bail them out? Kicking in more money to help the hog producers might be the easiest solution for now, but should the public keep donating into this huge basket with a very large hole? Has the public purse now become the public trough?
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?
The question needs an answer: is this a sustainable industry?
For the past 14 or more years, amid the anger, frustrations and anxiety of rural residents, the Manitoba hog industry, with the blessings of provincial and municipal governments, has built huge hog-producing factories nearly anywhere that suited them. They were warned that this uncontrolled growth would eventually burst and the truth is that is exactly what happened. They themselves have been victimized by their gluttony.
About five years ago, the Manitoba Pork Council was busy spending producers’ money on advertising that complained about restrictions and threatening court action to sue the Manitoba government. Today it’s a much different picture.
The hog industry is important and has a future in Manitoba but to succeed, it must change its attitude. It must adhere to environmental considerations and a recognition of dealing with the realities of economics. There needs to be an acceptance of responsibility.
And most importantly, changes to the factory style of raising hogs are foremost. Even Manitoba’s agriculture minister, Ron Kostyshyn, has assured us that “morally, the province doesn’t agree with sow stalls.”
John Fefchak,
Virden, Man.
BULLYING IN PARLIAMENT
Bullying has become a very serious problem. The news media has done a credible job of bringing to our attention the seriousness of the problem. It is very disturbing to realize that recently two young people in Canada committed suicide because life became unbearable due to bullying by their peers.
Young people are not the only ones suffering due to bullying. Let us consider Michael Chong, who was Harper’s intergovernmental affairs minister in 2006 and stated, “Today in this chamber, members of Parliament cannot ask questions of the government to hold it to account.” Chong further elaborated, “We as members of Parliament no longer have that fundamental right.”
Under the present leadership, our backbenchers have very little voice or power to speak up on behalf of their constituents and their wants and needs. They often have been warned “toe the line, or else.” Attack ads have been used very extensively to ridicule and vilify their opposition. This certainly is abuse of power and a form of severe bullying by the man who was elected by the people of Canada to lead us wisely and justly.
I am of the opinion that our prime mister rightly deserves the title Supreme Bully of Canada.
TOO MUCH WHINING
I have noticed a large percentage of the letters you print express negative opinions about various factors affecting farming. These factors include high input costs, GMOs, loss of CWB grain marketing monopoly, reduced government spending on agriculture programs and large pesticide advertising budgets.
Perhaps you could lower the number of letters complaining of these topics or inform the writers that optimism decreases the negative effect of all of life’s problems. At the least, this realization will positively impact those close to them. At best, it will improve their health and bottom line.
George E. Hickie,
Waldron, Sask.
TAX EVASION
I would like to extend a bouquet to the investigative reporters at the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation for exposing the extent of tax avoidance and evasion in Canada. It is my hope that the CBC exposure will result in a public clamour that spurs the Harper government into action.
The very rich should not be allowed to have their way with politicians, and, by extension, the general public. If that lost revenue were to be recovered, it would go a long way toward paying for social services and infrastructure, and reducing or eliminating the deficit. Politicians are fond of telling us to “tighten our belts” while they allow the wealthy to use tax havens and loopholes to get away without paying their fair share.
William Dascavich,
PROPERTY RIGHTS FIRST
Re: Lack of investor information raises questions (WP April 11).
We all love beautiful natural landscapes and thriving economic development, but we should love private property rights more. Why? Because private property rights are the only way to eliminate all human conflict.
I own my body. I own my property. Keep your hands off and we can be peaceful neighbours and trading partners. Start rabble rousing to socialize away my property rights and we fight.
You are upset about the colossal mall planned south of Saskatoon that, in your opinion, is a waste of money. You love the beautiful landscape there and fear that it will be turned into a bankrupt concrete ghost town. More than this, as editor of a prominent newspaper, you are indirectly soliciting political action to block commercial developments such as this. Respectfully, I say mind your own business and stop starting fights….
The property title will specify whether mineral rights, for example, are included. It also could specify a restriction of rights, for example. “The owner of this land agrees to maintain it as a beautiful natural landscape and to not build any large commercial building without the permission of the editor of The Western Producer.”…
And, who knows, maybe if you go to some other pristine area outside Saskatoon and ask property owners to insert this restriction into their titles, they will all happily agree. Then again, they may ask you and your supporters to buy their property first and then put the title restriction on yourself. Then it would be your property and your business to restrict it however you want. No fighting required.
I also question your ability to forecast business success and your short-term outlook. How is it your business to judge whether the colossal mall will be a commercial success or not?…
You might have said no to Henry Ford and the North American auto industry. Oops. Fast forward 100 years and we now learn that a shrinking Detroit is returning much of their city back to farmland. The beautiful natural landscape doesn’t disappear forever. It can be restored — with lots of jobs for demolition, scrap dealing and remediation as a nice bonus.
I recommend we each mind our own business, take a long-term view and, most importantly, respect private property rights.
Arthur Krolman,
Calgary, Alta.
SEEING RED
The recent announcement in the Regina Leader-Post (Sask. Energy applies for modest increase), no doubt has many Saskatchewan residents seeing red (blue?). That, along with SaskPower’s four percent increase Jan. 1 and SaskTel’s rural residential increase of last year will no doubt have Saskatchewan residents infuriated. But, who should their anger really be directed at?
Brad Wall’s Sask. Party has for years robbed the crowns of up to 100 percent of their profits in order to “balance” their budget.
In order for the crowns to improve, replace and expand their aging infrastructure, they are now forced to borrow money — hence the increases.
The Sask. Party has the audacity to brag about a balanced budget, when in reality what they have done is transfer their incompetent government’s debt onto the crown corporations. Talk about a premier in Devine clothing.
Joyce Neufeld,
Waldeck, Sask.
