A Change in the Wind ..?

Over the years, we have watched agriculture in general struggle with the vagaries of prices, imports, new WTO rules, new food safety rules, retail distribution, processor and retail consolidation, etc.,etc. The dairy industry has had it's fair share of concerns and issues to deal with as well as those mentioned above. In general, from the farmers perspective, one could say that agriculture in this country does not receive the attention that should be warrented by our governments.

Any change in that attitude has come at the cost of hard, hard work by the commodiites invovlved and are mostly regionalised (provincial). They are also only as good as the government of the day and the skill or tenacitiy of the farm commodity involved. Governments have to do better than this for Canada and her agricultural resources.

In this respect, the crazed handling by the current government of the Canadian Wheat Board Issue, has had one large positive come forward out of it.

In a few short days the Liberal Party of Canada is closing on the hunt for a new leader. But policy discussion is also part of the Convention. From the disasters of the past few years and recent times, have come some stunning resolutions to this Convention.

The most notable: from the Policy Workshops to the 2006 leadership and biennial convention

N o v e m b e r 2 9 - D e c e m b e r 3 , 2 0 0 6
M o n t r e a l , Q u e b e c

34) Canadian Food Policy

WHEREAS Canadian farming is at a critical juncture; and

WHEREAS the agricultural producers have invested to produce high-quality foods; and

WHEREAS the cost of producing this high-quality food cannot be recaptured through the pricing of the products to consumers; and

WHEREAS the U.S., Europe and other trading countries use creative means of paying their agricultural producers through environmental, tourism, and other creative avenues in order to ensure their farmers maintain a reasonable return for their costs;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Liberal Party of Canada develop a Canadian food policy that addresses the current economic realities and ensures that Canadian agricultural producers are able to make a reasonable income as they produce the highquality food required for Canada.

New Brunswick Liberal Association
Liberal Party of Prince Edward Island

E c o n o m i c P o l i c y

115) National Food Security Policy

WHEREAS government agricultural programs and policies in recent years have been designed on the premise of a successful outcome of the Doha round of WTO negotiations : talks aimed at reducing domestic supports, increasing market access, eliminating export subsidies and maintaining our supply management system as well as the Canadian Wheat Board; and

WHEREAS these talks have failed, making decisive action necessary to help Canadian producers face a new economic and policy reality; and

WHEREAS Canadian producers must have sustainable incomes and all partners in the agri-food production chain deserve the opportunity to succeed and be profitable; and

WHEREAS Canada has no formal strategy to maintain a safe, affordable food supply;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Liberal Party of Canada supports setting as a national priority the establishment of a fully funded and long-term National Food Security Policy which views the nation's ability to produce safe and reliable agricultural products as an issue of national sovereignty and security; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Liberal Party of Canada supports the provision of an immediate and one-time cash investment into the agricultural sectors, at the primary producer level, of $3.66 billion.

National Liberal Caucus

Note: There is a least one more in addition to the above.-CG
Let's wish them well and hope some of these policies see the light of day, soon.

Almost a Disaster .....

For all those in the dairy industry who do NOT understand that we are living in a new world....

The only place I have found this report is in an Ontario agricultural newspaper & FSnet, a food safety Internet page. Lucky, lucky dairy farmers, that this is NOT being seen in the major papers.

How they could have missed this one is any body's guess. Traceability has advanced to the point they can and did identify the VAT # the tainted batch came from. If you can't be bothered to read this article.....think again. The judge awarded $5,019,091.50, to Schneider's . Did the plant contaminate the batch or did the milk arrive that way? The article does not speak to this issue, but dairy farmers had better think about it long and hard.-CG

SCHNEIDER WINS FOOD POISONING SUIT; A JUDGE HAS AWARDED COURT COSTS, DISBURSEMENTS AND INTEREST TO SCHNEIDER IN ITS CASE AGAINST PARMALAT

November 14, 2006Ontario Farmer

Jim Romahn

Toronto - The courts have sealed all of the documents for the 27-day trial of the lawsuit Schneider Corporation filed against Parmalat Food Inc. over the largest food poisoning case in Canadian history. There are five boxes full of testimony, exhibits and other court documents in storage at Cooksville, but court officials will not allow anybody other than the lawyers involved in the case to look at them. Justice Blenus Wright cited business confidentiality as the reason for sealing the files.

What is open to public scrutiny is a small file containing documents and letters lawyers filed as they argued over court costs. The judge awarded costs in the case to Schneider Corp. Schneider claimed fees of $2,219,441.50 and disbursement costs of $772,067.22, but Justice Wright called the fees "absurd". Parmalat countered that the fees ought to be no more than $848,352.71 and disbursements $462,307.56. The judge set the fees at $884,518 and disbursements at $517,128.54 and tacked on $1,726,420.72 for interest. His judgement in favour of Schneider Corp. was $5,019,091.50, so the bottom line came to $8,197,158.70. At one point Schneider Corp. offered to settle for $6.8 million, but Parmalat did not accept.

That's what Schneider's lawyers said in their letter to Justice Wright to explain why the costs rose so high. They said Parmalat fought the case on every front, throwing up a myriad of possibilities for the source of salmonella bacteria that contaminated Schneider Lunchmate products that sickened thousands of Canadians, including many school children who had the snacks packed in their lunches.

Parmalat even fought inclusion of Canadian Food Inspection Agency test results right up to the beginning of the trial and it fought inclusion of provincial lab results until it finally yielded on that point five days into the trial.

Justice Wright put all of the blame on Parmalat and that's why he awarded Schneider Corp. more than $5 million, plus interest plus costs. The interest, at five per cent, accumulated from 1998, when the food poisoning occurred, to May, 2005, when Wright issued his decision. Justice Wright said Schneider Corp. made "a poor use of resources" in putting 10 lawyers, four articling students and nine law clerks on the case. Schneider's law firm was Gowling, Lafleur, Henderson. Parmalat hired Dutton, Brock.

The documents indicate Schneider's paid $5,504.63 for the appearances of 10 witnesses and $557,561.33 for experts. Parmalat's costs for witnesses, experts and legal fees are not disclosed in the court documents.

Schneider originally sued for between $7,999,000 and $8,352,000 plus an unspecified amount for defamation. Schneider's lawyers withdrew the defamation claim during the trial, but wanted to add $1.5 million to $2 million to cover increases in insurance premiums. Wright originally awarded Schneider Corp. $4,660,291.50 on May 20, but when Schneider Corp. pointed out another $300,000 for products other than its Lunchmate lines that were involved in recalls, and $58,800 for days lost from production, Wright agreed to add them for a new total judgment of $5,019,091.50 he awarded June 6.

Schneider was making two private-label products - No-name Lunch Box and Our Best Lunchkins - that were involved in recalls. No contamination was ever found in those lines. The court documents indicate that the judge decided that the salmonella that poisoned consumers came from Parmalat vat 1804 manufactured at Millbank.

Note: emphasis mine-CG

Uh Oh?!

The cat is out of the bag when Conservative MP's start to talk. I am glad to see some of them remember this country is a democracy. I wonder what other jewels we will see in the coming weeks. -CG

Let farmers decide about wheat board, Tory MP says
JOE FRIESEN 11/11/06 Globe and Mail

WINNIPEG -- A Conservative MP from Manitoba is breaking ranks with his colleagues over the Canadian Wheat Board, saying the government is ignoring its own polls that show two-thirds of farmers in Manitoba and Saskatchewan don't want to see major changes to the board.

Inky Mark, MP for Dauphin-Swan River-Marquette, said the future of the wheat board is by far the most important issue in his constituency and he's proud to be a dissenting voice in caucus.
"There's a huge support base for the wheat board here. At least, at a minimum, two out of three votes, if not higher," he said. "Whatever changes should take place should be made by the farmers, not the politicians -- that's basically what I hear everywhere I go. Let the farmers decide."

Mr. Mark said he has urged his caucus colleagues to reconsider their campaign pledge to end the wheat board monopoly on export sales of wheat and barley, but to no avail.

More than 60 per cent of Manitoba farmers support the wheat board, and the number may be even higher in his riding, he said.

"It's probably at least two out of three support the board. . . . Saskatchewan's about the same. I've seen lots of numbers, both government and non-government. Alberta's a different kettle of fish -- about one-third supports the board and two-thirds want to dismantle it," Mr. Mark said.
The wheat board falls under Agriculture Minister Chuck Strahl's portfolio, but Mr. Mark said responsibility for the issue lies with Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

"It's not Chuck Strahl," Mr. Mark said. "He's basically following orders."

Mr. Strahl recently announced plans for a plebiscite among barley producers early in the new year, but has said he has no immediate plans to hold a vote on whether to keep the board's monopoly for wheat.

A spokesman said yesterday that implementing marketing choice for wheat and barley remains a government priority.

The issue has been hotly contested in the prairie provinces. Farm groups in Manitoba and Saskatchewan, where about 75 per cent of western wheat is grown, say the wheat board gives farmers clout in an industry dominated by a handful of multinational companies. Their opponents say they want the freedom to sell their wheat independently, and believe they can earn more money without the board. The wheat board has annual sales of more than $4-billion, and exports wheat to 70 countries.

In Saskatoon yesterday, the NDP premiers of Manitoba and Saskatchewan said they will hold their own plebiscites on the future of the wheat board if the federal government refuses to act, even if such a vote would be largely symbolic. They said farmers should be allowed to determine their own future.
********
See Wendy Holm's website for the details at the link below-CG

MP Inky Mark's media release: Mark supports constituents
- votes against Bill to bypass the Canadian Wheat Board

Nov. 11, 2006

November 11th is Remembrance Day. This day is special as it marks for "remembrance", all those battles fought by my Father and grandfather and others before them and all those that are lost. I can honour their gift to us, while I rail at those who so blithely want to abuse them. My Father and those young men from other wars... preserved for us the irreplaceable gift of 'freedom'!

Make sure you do not take it for granted.

It's hard to see our elderly vets and understand what it was like for those young men. To get a sense of those battles and lives lost there are a few sites you can visit.

http://www.warmuseum.ca/cwm/remember/poppy_e.html

http://www.cwgc.org/

http://www.cwgc.org/

>