[Robair]

commanderkai commanderkai:

Robair Robair:

Subsidy going to the port of churchhill. This is to compensate for the loss of the CWB.

Gerry Ritz's action comittee to figure out shipping (something you'd think they would look into BEFORE passing this bill) is paid for by your taxes as well.

Won't this be compensated by increased tax revenues that these grain firms would need to pay due to higher profits? Canada still has a corporate tax, no?

The action committee really isn't surprising. This is government, after all. They're supposed to waste tax dollars on paperwork.

Is that supposed to be a joke??

commanderkai commanderkai:

Edit: How are farmers affected? Won't the corporations make money by SELLING the grain purchased from farmers? I don't think farmers are having their grain stolen or something.

Yes the corporations will make money selling farmer's grain. That is money that used to be returned to farmers by their wheat board.

[Yogi]

Robair Robair:

commanderkai commanderkai:

Robair Robair:

Subsidy going to the port of churchhill. This is to compensate for the loss of the CWB.

Gerry Ritz's action comittee to figure out shipping (something you'd think they would look into BEFORE passing this bill) is paid for by your taxes as well.

Won't this be compensated by increased tax revenues that these grain firms would need to pay due to higher profits? Canada still has a corporate tax, no?

The action committee really isn't surprising. This is government, after all. They're supposed to waste tax dollars on paperwork.

Is that supposed to be a joke??

commanderkai commanderkai:

Edit: How are farmers affected? Won't the corporations make money by SELLING the grain purchased from farmers? I don't think farmers are having their grain stolen or something.

Yes the corporations will make money selling farmer's grain. That is money that used to be returned to farmers by their wheat board.

Seems that you are against 'choice.' Rob!


IF farmers feel that they are going to 'get screwed' by Viterra et al, then they still have the option of using CWB. Rather than the producers being forced to deal with a monopoly, or being thrown into jail for not they now have a 'choice\. The strongest/best marketing method will survive.


.Wheat board changes kick in, directors out
Government-appointed directors discontinue court injunction, former directors press on
CBC News Posted: Dec 16, 2011 10:13 AM CST Last Updated: Dec 16, 2011 9:10 PM
Wheat board monopoly ends2:09Five government-appointed directors now in charge of the Canadian Wheat Board decided Friday morning in Winnipeg to drop the board's bid to block legislation ending its marketing monopoly for Prairie wheat and barley.

Legislation to end the wheat board's single-desk became law Thursday night, when Gov. Gen. David Johnston gave royal assent to Bill C-18.

With its passage, the eight farmer-elected directors of the board are gone.Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz, in grey suit, was all smiles as he greeted supporters in Balgonie, Sask., on Friday. (Jordan Jackle/CBC)
Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz was jubilant Friday morning, telling farmers gathered in Balgonie, Sask., that it's a great day.

"This feels damn good. It's been a long time coming," Ritz said. "Finally you have marketing freedom."

Farmers in the room with Ritz cheered.

A Dec. 7 Federal Court ruling found the government violated the Canadian Wheat Board Act by not consulting farmers about the changes in a plebiscite. On Wednesday, Allen Oberg, the now-former chair of the board, announced an application for a court injunction to stop the government's actions, based on that decision.

The eight former directors were listed as individuals on the application for the injunction. Lawyers representing the plaintiffs were in court Friday in Winnipeg.

They have vowed to press on with the court action against the government despite the appointed board's decision to drop the case, according to Kyle Korneychuk, a former director who spoke to CBC News Friday.

Immediate injunction denied
Later on Friday, a judge overseeing the case denied a request to grant an immediate injunction to stop the government from proceeding with its changes to the board.

However, the issue will be back before the judge on Jan. 17 and a lawyer for the eight former directors said another application will be made for an immediate injunction.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Friday that he doesn't expect a court to issue an injunction.

"Western Canadian farmers have demanded that choice for a couple of generations now and we've passed legislation in that regard. Parliament is certainly within its right to pass such legislation, even if the wheat board doesn’t agree with it. It is our right, we've done so and I know western Canadian grain farmers are looking to marketing freedom in the 2012 crop year," Harper said.

It's unclear what other changes are planned by the new government-appointed board, now that the transition to a new smaller, voluntary wheat board is underway.

Farmers split over changes
The new law has been welcomed by some farmers who have long said they want the right to sell their grain to whomever they want. But others say the decades-old monopoly has helped ensure good prices for their crops.

Under the new law, the wheat board loses its grain-marketing monopoly on Aug. 1.

The wheat board will still exist, but will no longer be the only buyer for many grain farmers. Some critics say that will be the beginning of the end for the Winnipeg-based agency.

Ritz said a "reinvigorated" wheat board "will still be there" for farmers who want to use it to market their grain.

Passage of the law means farmers can begin to negotiate contracts with flour mills or grain companies as long as the delivery date is Aug. 1 or later.

[Robair]

Yogi Yogi:

Seems that you are against \choice., Rob!


IF farmers feel that they are going to 'get screwed' by Viterra et al, then they still hve the option of using CWB. Rather than the producers being forced to deal with a monopoly, or being thrown into jail for not they now have a 'choice\. The strongest/best marketing method will survive.

There is no such thing as a dual market. It is either single desk, or it isn't.

The wheat board has no assests, not ports, no terminals. Why would the private companies that own these assets be motivated to move wheat board grain? The board is toast.

Farming is a business, it is about the bottom line. That against choice line is an empty platitude that seems to work on the dimmer bulbs in the room.

Choice would be letting farmers decide, not deciding for them. Over 60% of farmers chose single desk. That is despite Conservative anti-board rhetoric.

If they were acting in producuers intrests, the would make the entire board farmer elected. What they have done is fire farmer elected members and replace them with Conservative appointed ones.

Where do you think all of this money Vittera and Richardson plan on making is coming from?

[Yogi]

Robair Robair:

Yogi Yogi:

Seems that you are against \choice., Rob!


IF farmers feel that they are going to 'get screwed' by Viterra et al, then they still hve the option of using CWB. Rather than the producers being forced to deal with a monopoly, or being thrown into jail for not they now have a 'choice\. The strongest/best marketing method will survive.

There is no such thing as a dual market. It is either single desk, or it isn't.

The wheat board has no assests, not ports, no terminals. Why would the private companies that own these assets be motivated to move wheat board grain? The board is toast.

Farming is a business, it is about the bottom line. That against choice line is an empty platitude that seems to work on the dimmer bulbs in the room.

Choice would be letting farmers decide, not deciding for them. Over 60% of farmers chose single desk. That is despite Conservative anti-board rhetoric.

If they were acting in producuers intrests, the would make the entire board farmer elected. What they have done is fire farmer elected members and replace them with Conservative appointed ones.

Where do you think all of this money Vittera and Richardson plan on making is coming from?

First, and foremost I am not a farmer, nor do I come from a farm background. I am not trying to argue with/bait you. My questions/interest are genuine.




The farmers whom I have discussed this with are 'pro-choice'm hence my statement 'the strongest (entity) will survive'.

How did the wheat board market/ship grain previously?

Also, just an observation on my part, As with the telecommunication companies, would not those with grain handling facilities, be obligated by law, to work with marketers regardless?

[Robair]

Yogi Yogi:

The farmers whom I have discussed this with are 'pro-choice'm hence my statement 'the strongest (entity) will survive'.

How did the wheat board market/ship grain previously?

Contract out to the companies it will now be competing against.

The wheat board's objective was to maximize return at the farm gate.

Richardson and Vittera's objectives are to maximize return for their shareholders.

That is why you, the taxpayer, are now bailing out the port of churchhill. These companies see better returns by running this grain through their ports on either coast, even though it is a lot shorter distance to the port of churchhill. This port was used extensivly by the wheat board becuase their concern is best return for the farmer.

Yogi Yogi:

Also, just an observation on my part, As with the telecommunication companies, would not those with grain handling facilities, be obligated by law, to work with marketers regardless?

That's funny.

So, where do you think all of this extra money Vittera plans on making is coming from? (second time I've asked)

[Yogi]

^^^


I didn't answer a question which I thought has an obvious answer, but here's 'my take' on it. Viterra and Richardson will make their money by reselling the grain they buy from the farmers.

Now I have a couple questions for you.
How is it that 'V&R' been around for a number of years along with the CWB?

And again, What is wrong with 'choice'?

You see, my questions are those of the non-farming masses. For many,many years, farmers have 'gone about business' in their world, saying nothing, or very little at all, while 'we' go about our business,knowing nothing/very little at all about farm business.

All 'we' know is that the price of a loaf of bread is $2-4. "Maybe with farmers 'having choice' then the cost of bread may not go down, but hopefully it won't 'rise too much more". ( sorry. Couldn't resist the pun!

And again, If more farmers support & continue to do business with the CWB, than not, won't 'the strongest survive'?

[Robair]

Yogi Yogi:

I didn't answer a question which I thought has an obvious answer, but here's 'my take' on it. Viterra and Richardson will make their money by reselling the grain they buy from the farmers.

Where has that money been going under the single desk system?
Viterra and Richardson gain, who loses?

[DrCaleb]

Yogi Yogi:

Also, just an observation on my part, As with the telecommunication companies, would not those with grain handling facilities, be obligated by law, to work with marketers regardless?

What do you think the legislation creating the Wheat board did?

[Yogi]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Yogi Yogi:

Also, just an observation on my part, As with the telecommunication companies, would not those with grain handling facilities, be obligated by law, to work with marketers regardless?

What do you think the legislation creating the Wheat board did?

Exactly my point. Grain is still going to get to the customer! Seems to me that the real complaint is that som e farm operators are 'predicting' a loss of future income. And I say 'predicting', because the new free-market system hasn't been put to the test yet, so really, there is no basis for complaint at this point in time.

[DrCaleb]

Yogi Yogi:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Yogi Yogi:

Also, just an observation on my part, As with the telecommunication companies, would not those with grain handling facilities, be obligated by law, to work with marketers regardless?

What do you think the legislation creating the Wheat board did?

Exactly my point. Grain is still going to get to the customer! Seems to me that the real complaint is that som e farm operators are 'predicting' a loss of future income. And I say 'predicting', because the new free-market system hasn't been put to the test yet, so really, there is no basis for complaint at this point in time.

I agree that it's hypothetical whether the CWB will be able to still operate at all without it's legal framework protecting it.

But you are incorrect that there is no need for complaint. The need has passed. The effect of removing the CWB legislation should have been studied long before the legislation was written. If the CWB goes teats up, it is impossible under NAFTA to undo what has been done.

Grain may get to the customers, but the people producing that grain may find their way of life ending. Our food producing industries will one day look and act like the US's. We have taken a huge step backwards.

We protect loggers, car manufacturers, fisherman, seal hunters, cattlemen, dairymen . . .but the grain farmers are fucked.

[Yogi]

My position remains that 'the majority of producers' will ultimately determine the fate of the CWB. Either by continuing to support it, or not!

[Robair]

The fate of the single desk wheat board has been decided by the Conservative party of Canada. It is not, and never has been, a grain marketing company. It has no assets, it has no capital base to even pay employees.

Every cent minus operating expense has been returned to farmers every year. The single desk is all the wheat board is. There is no such thing as a dual market.

Yogi Yogi:

First, and foremost [i]I am not a farmer, nor do I come from a farm background. I am not trying to argue with/bait you. My questions/interest are genuine.

It has become apparent that this statement was bullshit.

[Scape]

Yogi Yogi:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Yogi Yogi:

Also, just an observation on my part, As with the telecommunication companies, would not those with grain handling facilities, be obligated by law, to work with marketers regardless?

What do you think the legislation creating the Wheat board did?

Exactly my point. Grain is still going to get to the customer! Seems to me that the real complaint is that som e farm operators are 'predicting' a loss of future income. And I say 'predicting', because the new free-market system hasn't been put to the test yet, so really, there is no basis for complaint at this point in time.

My guess is that once this is done it can not be undone. 20 years from now we will have grain still produced but it won't be by Canadian ownership. We will have killed the goose that laid the golden eggs.

[Yogi]

Robair Robair:

The fate of the single desk wheat board has been decided by the Conservative party of Canada. It is not, and never has been, a grain marketing company. It has no assets, it has no capital base to even pay employees.

Every cent minus operating expense has been returned to farmers every year. The single desk is all the wheat board is. There is no such thing as a dual market.

Yogi Yogi:

First, and foremost [i]I am not a farmer, nor do I come from a farm background. I am not trying to argue with/bait you. My questions/interest are genuine.

It has become apparent that this statement was bullshit.

Because I may not necessarily agree with you, I' m now baitng/arguing???

(Over & out!)

[commanderkai]

Robair Robair:

Is that supposed to be a joke??

About the corporate taxes? No. About the reality that governments are wasteful? More a sad observation of reality.

$1:

Yes the corporations will make money selling farmer's grain. That is money that used to be returned to farmers by their wheat board.

Except farmers will be making money on selling their grain to the various corporations, leading to competition and better prices for farmers, since they don't have to sell to one entity. Pretty basic economics here.