Long before the recent Chinese action to block shipments of canola from well-respected Canadian firms like Richardson and Viterra, we have had an ongoing dialogue with China to secure and maintain our market access.

That important and productive work was based on sound science and led by the best scientific and technical experts. We are absolutely confident of the high quality, cleanliness and technical superiority of Canadian canola.

The restrictive measures imposed by China are said to be rooted in science. We have asked for the evidence. To date, none has been supplied. We will keep pushing as hard as we can on this vital point.

• Editorial: Solution to canola dispute easier said than done

The prime minister, Foreign Minister Freeland, Trade Minister Carr and Agriculture Minister Bibeau are fully involved in this file — along with the canola council, the relevant export companies, our diplomatic officials at the Canadian Embassy in China, our leading scientists and regulators, and provincial governments too. We must have a completely co-ordinated Team Canada effort. We will intervene at the right level of seniority and intensity (scientifically, strategically and diplomatically) to have the best possible impact.

In our representations, we can note that Canada has had a long and constructive relationship with China, including the humanitarian work of Norman Bethune in the 1930s, the grain trade with Mitchell Sharp and Alvin Hamilton in the 1950s, the excellent commercial activities of the Canadian Wheat Board in the 1960s and 1970s, and early Canadian diplomatic recognition of China in 1970 — at a time when few other countries would.

We can also note that measures that defy science and contravene sound business and trading practices detract from the good reputation for reliability which all trading nations seek to maintain.

A further important point is that Minister Carr is Canada’s minister of international trade DIVERSIFICATION — and he will be seeking every opportunity to find, market and deliver Canadian canola to other potential buyers worldwide.

You can be sure that we will spare no effort to achieve the best possible outcome for Canadian canola producers.

Ralph Goodale is Canada’s minister of public safety. He has been a member of Parliament for more than 25 years, and has at one time been federal minister of agriculture, finance and natural resources and was federal minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board.

The post Comment: Defending market access for Canadian canola appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Few farmers were ever asked about this change. There was no producer vote, no public hearing, no respectable debate in Parliament. There was no cost-benefit analysis. There’s not even a business plan to guide the process.

An entity called the “CWB” continues to exist. But without single-desk authority, it’s now just one of many wheat and barley sellers in a marketplace with no more buyers than before. That’s a formula for lower prices. Moreover, with no grain collection facilities of its own, this much-diminished CWB is available to farmers only in a subordinate way — through handling agreements with private-sector competitors.

Farmers’ costs will go up, for such things as administering cash advances and financing grain payments on delivery. Farmers will also have to pick up part of the tab for initial payment guarantees.

Logistically, without the wheat board as a watchdog, grain companies and the railways are now in full control of the handling and transportation system. They have no incentive to service farmer-owned terminals, community-based short lines or producer-loaded rail cars. There’s no one in the system with either the will or the clout to challenge excessive rates or charges.

Internationally, without the board, Canada’s distinctive “brand” in world grain markets is slashed. This is compounded by the totally predictable sell-off of domestic firms like Viterra to foreign commodity traders like Glencore.

With the wheat board out of the way, global grain buyers expect they’ll get Canadian grain at cheaper prices. Value-added pro-cessers expect the same. Railways and grain companies expect to extract higher margins. If that’s all true, you can imagine who gets stuck with the short end of the stick.

For the next two or three years, the impact of killing the single desk will be camouflaged by droughts and other global production problems which are cutting supplies and pushing grain prices to record levels.

In the longer term, whether farmers will actually be better off will never be known with hard facts and figures, because the government refuses to measure (or even monitor) the full consequences of its changes.

The post You can’t manage what you won’t measure appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Consult with the CWB’s board of directors; and

Hold a clear, democratic vote among producers to determine whether they support the specific changes the minister has in mind.

Since the Harper government came to power in 2006, no such vote has taken place. The closest they’ve come, a few years ago, was a multiple-choice survey of general marketing philosophy which generated no conclusive result.

In the wake of the recent federal election, the Conservatives are again vowing to kill the wheat board. To do so will require legislation in Parliament. Before any such legislation can be introduced, the two conditions mentioned above must be met.

The Harper regime should have the courage of its convictions. No tricks. No deeks or dodges. Just put the issue to a fair vote among farmers. That’s what the law requires.

The two questions to be asked are quite straightforward.

Do you want the CWB’s single-desk marketing system for wheat: yes or no?

Do you want the CWB’s single-desk marketing system for barley: yes or no?

If the Conservatives decide not to proceed in this direct and honourable manner, there are only two other alternatives.

They might try to mislead people into believing the wheat board can somehow be “optional” and still remain functional for those who want it. But this is simply not possible. Either you have a single-desk seller or you have the open market. You can’t have a bit of both.

Or, before presenting legislation to kill the single desk, the government might try to amend Section 47.1 of the CWB Act to eliminate farmers’ right to vote on this issue.

Now wouldn’t that be a strange spectacle – the Harper regime changing the law to remove producers’ democratic right to vote on whether they want the CWB or not.

Ralph Goodale, MP for Wascana, was the federal minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board when the act was amended to give farmers more control over its future in 1999.

The post Let Farmers Vote On CWB — It’s The Law! appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.