Nominations have closed and Western Canadian permit-book holders are sending in their ballots in the first-ever Canadian Wheat Board directors election.
District 8, encompassing Weyburn and area, has the most number of candidates in the election - 11 are running.
The director elected in District 8 will hold office for a two-year period beginning on the day he or she assumes office unless he or she resigns or is removed in accordance with the bylaws of the board.
Votes will be tallied in a preferential-ranked ballot vote. That means if no candidate has received the majority of votes, the candidate with the least number of votes will be eliminated. The second preference of those voters who voted for the eliminated candidate will be added to the ballots of the remaining candidates.
All completed ballots must be returned in the official postage-paid envelop provided in the voter's package, post-marked no later than November 20, 1998.
Below are the platforms of the 11 candidates running in district 8. (Some platforms have been edited for length.) Platforms were taken from the CWB directors election website: www.cwbelections.com
I have been a member of the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool for 30 years and have served on the local committee as both chairman and secretary. From 1982-1996 I held the position of delegate, and from 1992-1994 was elected as director. As a grain and livestock producer, I support a strong and vibrant Canadian Wheat Board. I believe in a single desk, price pooled system that is supported by government guaranteed initial prices. I believe Bill C-4 will give producers more control over the future of the CWB. This new direction should allow changes that are necessary, so that we can adapt to an ever changing marketplace.
The CWB must be an integral part of all grain collection, car allocation, and grain transportation decisions, as each is impacted on producers and the marketing of their grain.
The Canadian Transportation Act does not address a number of problems in grain movement and needs to be revised.
Presently, western grain producers pay all demurrage charges for ships not loaded on time. All players must be accountable for their performance. I would support a reward/penalty system that would address this problem.
Although the sale of government-owned hopper cars is a complex issue, I believe producers should own the cars and thus achieve a significant presence in the management of the grain handling system.
The cash advance program must be continued as an integral part of producers options in their marketing plans. I fully support an interest-free cash advance on farm-stored grain.
I believe the new board of directors will be a vital link between producers and the CWB. If I am elected I will represent the producers in District 8 with honesty, integrity and to the very best of my ability.
I strongly support the CWB. I believe there is strength in numbers and I believe other farmers also think this way. The evidence is in the large number of marketing clubs that have sprung up in recent years.
I am also aware that changes must occur. Farmers have not been entirely satisfied with the performance of the CWB. I feel a large part of the problem arose because farmers felt - and justifiably so - that they had no control over an organization that was supposed to be their organization.
The CWB is an organization created for farmers and therefore, farmers should not be left feeling that they have no influence in the decisions made by the CWB.
In its simplest form, I believe that farmers want the CWB to be open and honest about the board operations and to be accountable to farmers for their performance. This is OUR grain we're selling, we want the BEST price, we want to capitalize on the marketing expertise of the employees that we hire to sell our grain. If the employees don't provide us with good, efficient performance for the dollars we pay, then we should be able to do something about it. We want value for the dollars that we spend.
There will always be differences of opinion on how to achieve this goal. Is it dual marketing? Is it single-desk selling? Is it a change to the transportation system, the collection system, etc.? My challenge is to listen to the voters, weigh all options, suggest viable alternatives, and then vote for the option that accomplishes what I consider to be the main purpose of the CWB: getting the best price for our products with the least cost.
The CWB Act, Section 5, says the board is incorporated with the object of marketing in an orderly manner, in interprovincial and export trade, grain grown in Canada. Section 7 says subject to the regulations, the board shall sell and dispose of grain acquired by it pursuant to its operations under this Act for such prices as it considers reasonable with the object of promoting the sale of grain produced in Canada in world markets.
These two mandates of the board are entirely wrong. The CWB must be legally required to maximize returns to the producer.
The board must be open and accountable to producers. Any information required to protect the CWB's marketing position must be controlled by Canada's Access to Information Act.
The board must have the maximum flexibility to use marketing instruments and payment options to respond to producer's requirements.
The CWB must promote value-added processing on the Prairies to increase domestic consumption. This will insulate the producers from ups and downs of the world commodity markets and will increase economic activity and employment here on the Prairies.
The grain and transportation companies must serve the producers in a competitive manner. They must be bound by contract in the performance of their role in grain handling and transportation. Producers must no longer be held financially accountable for problems which are completely out of their control.
I believe that the CWB was and is a good idea but it needs some major changes.
I would like to see the six major grains in a dual marketing system where the farmer decides how and to whom he or she will sell grain. The CWB should have to compete for the grain it sells. This would create a more market-driven system instead of monopoly system.
I would also like to follow some of the things that the Australian Wheat Board (AWB) has done. The AWB has diversified its operations to include vertical integration of grain processing and marketing.
I have looked at the changes proposed in Bill C-4 and I think they are good ideas except for the use of modern risk management tools. I would be against this idea at this time but it could be considered in the future.
Finally, I believe the CWB needs to be more accountable to farmers. If elected, I would publish the wages I receive. I would also ask for ongoing feedback from the farmers in my district to get their direct input into the future direction of the CWB.
I believe this is a significant election that in itself signifies change. Farmers want a marketing agency that promotes their concerns rather than defending government policy.
The first question is single-desk marketing. I have a concern about the polarization that has and is taking place on this issue. I support a strong, efficient, effective CWB. After all, it is, and will continue to market for us.
Yet I recognize that there are a number of farmers who want to be given latitude to explore avenues to maximize return such as processing durum or participating in niche markets such as organic grains.
If there is a cost associated with compromise let me assure you that the cost of conflict is much greater. One ingredient in a disaster is constant, that being hostility.
Some say this is a weak position. I ask, when has compromise every been easy?
The CWB needs to lobby on our behalf because if prices do not increase many farmers will simply not make it into next year.
Each year world population increase requires additional food production greater than the entire Canadian crop. Why then does demand continue to fall? Demand requires ability to purchase. Any long-term solution involves sitting more people at the table. Fanciful, difficult, but if impossible, all will eventually be lost.
As much as we all would like to sell to those markets with high ability to demand that will not be reality. Is market development a role for the CWB? Certainly, I want my marketing agency doing that which has long-term benefit for everyone.
Elected three times to represent this area of southeast Saskatchewan on the CWB's advisory board, I remain dedicated to maintaining single-desk selling and the strength and equity to all producers as provided by the CWB. I have promoted changes which make the CWB more responsive and flexible to producers. I supported the move to a farmer-elected board to govern the CWB and worked to have malt barley purchased at the elevator to reduce the farmer risk of rejection at unload. I promoted many changes to the contracting and cash advance program to better respond to the producer needs. I was a farmer representative designing the NISA program. One of my proudest accomplishments with the CWB was the opening this year in Regina of the first regional office in Western Canada. This begins a process of bringing the CWB to you, the farmer.
Your CWB cannot invent higher world prices. The new board members must speak for western farmers as we enter a new war in grain prices between the U.S. and the Europeans. The board must pressure our federal government to protect Canadian farmers from the massive subsidies which will surely drive world grain prices to their lowest level in 20 years. The transition period to the new board structure will be a difficult but exciting period. Our integrity and reputation with both farmer and customer of the world must be maintained. Broad experience at the board table will be required and at age 54 I believe I have both the ability and perspective to responsibly represent your interest in your marketing agency. I hope you the producer will give me the opportunity to see this process of change to its successful completion.
For the first time in history, farmers are going to have a direct say in policy development that impacts the marketing of their product. Generally, I support the marketing philosophy of the Canadian Wheat Board. However, I feel that the Board has not maintained an effective operation that is in keeping with the tremendous changes that have taken place in agriculture over the last three decades.
Some issues that need to be addressed:
1. The CWB needs to adopt an aggressive selling policy in all potential global markets, large and small.
2. Have the CWB more accountable to producers by opening financial records within a reasonable time after the closure of the crop year.
3. Changes in the way malt barley is marketed, so the producer gets paid up front.
4. Grain companies should be paid to handle grain only, not to store it. This would give an incentive to move the grain quicker.
5. Eliminate the paying of shipping charges on dockage which does not belong to the producer any more because the producer does not share in profits made from them.
6. Railroads must be more responsible for moving the grain to export sources to prevent loading shortages.
7. Organize port loading to make it more efficient and hopefully, minimize demurrage payments.
There are my main points of policy and I will be willing to discuss these or share your concerns.
Every candidate should be elected by farmers. To appoint five positions is an insult to the intelligence of every farmer in Western Canada.
Competition is the greatest motivator in existence. The CWB must become competitive and voluntary.
I am not suggesting doing away with the Canadian Wheat Board. But those who would like to try it on their own - opt out for five years or for life, should have that option.
In a regulated monopoly system, if you don't like something, you have to lobby the government for a review and hope that changes will be made. Under a competitive system, you simply take your business elsewhere and the system responds.
An immediate solution to the U.S. turning away Canadian cattle, pork and wheat because of our state trading monopoly is a very critical problem that would be remedied by an announcement by the Canadian government making the CWB optional and voluntary and thereby living up to the NAFTA agreement.
Finally, SARM offered Ralph Goodale and the Liberal government their services to manage and direct this all important vote. This vote could have been held, scrutinized, and counted on the local level, cost saving and flawless work.
To counter this tyranny, we are asking every voter, every permit book holder, to duplicate the way they voted and send us a copy to test the validity and honesty of the system to be used.
Change, big change, is needed to salvage Western Canada. Freedom isn't free, you must be prepared to defend it everyday, you must be prepared to die for it. If you are not, it will be taken from you.
Courval-area farmer Wally Meili states that he would be a voice for change in the CWB.
Objective he would pursue on behalf of producers are as follows:
- A system that always gives farmers the best possible price for their grain.
- A completely producer-controlled organization.
- A CWB that is more open and directly accountable to farmers.
- A new pricing and pooling system to allow for risk management and quicker payments.
- A process to allow producers to vote on all options in changing their organization.
- A more pro-active and accommodating policy for local value-added processing.
I am running as an independent. I have no support from any grain companies or special interest groups. I wish to represent farmers.
I believe the CWB is like a 50-year-old house and requires some renovations.
I strongly believe we need value-added industries in Western Canada. I will work for changes within the CWB to aide value-added industries.
I believe the CWB needs to be accountable. I would like the Auditor General to have access to the books. I support the release of actual sales figures after a period of time so as not to jeopardize future sales.
I would like to see alternatives looked at in regards to transportation such as allowing trucks to unload at the ports, therefore allowing real competition with railways to eliminate crippling strikes and keep freight rates in line.
I would like to see a motion brought in that would restrict all board directors from holding a position longer than two consecutive terms so as to allow new ideas to constantly flow into the CWB.
I would like your support, so we can have a strong grassroots voice in Winnipeg dealing with farmers' concerns.
While having long-term interest in the debate over the future of the Wheat Board, I have no polarized views on how the system should be run. On one hand, every day we see the formalized rigidity of the Wheat Board - this election process is a good example - and no clear proof it is getting a premium for our product. It seems odd that while claiming to be the best way to market grain, the Wheat Board says it would be unable to compete in a dual-marketing situation. On the other hand, to think that the large grain companies are working for the farmer rather than their shareholders is naive!
I see this job as:
1. To do whatever is possible to get more money per bushel for Wheat Board grains!
2. To get accurate information out to producers about the pros and cons of the Wheat Board and to push for the wants of the producers in this area.
3. To offer my experience in seed production and testing, and interest in organic production to the board.
Let's hope this board makes a difference!
Box 400, 904 East Avenue
Weyburn, SK
S4H 2K4
Phone: (306) 842-7487
Fax: (306) 842-0282
E-mail: production@weyburnreview.com
This web page and its contents are copyright of the Weyburn
Review (1987) Ltd.