The FCC VS the C.D. Howe Institute

The C.D. Howe Institute has painted a target on the back of supply management for a long time.  "Never let the truth get in the way" seems to be their mantra. For many years supply management and their farmers have fought to try to get this institution to use more balanced material and the farmers and their organizations  have failed.  They should be honoured that they are now not the ONLY target of this august institution of fiction.

 Recently the C.D Howe Institute also set its sights on the FCC (Farm Credit Corporation).  Now one would expect that all the facts would be available for anyone to research if they so desired.  In fact a few phone calls and a request to the FCC, would have elicited the information that the C.D. Howe Institute so obviously did not want to have.

Governments would do well to be cautious with information published by the C.D. Howe. This could have had serious consequences for the agriculture industry and the country.

The normally sedate and composed FCC  responded this past week with a letter to both the Ontario Farmer and the Financial Post. .

For your reading pleasure here it is in its entirety:


Letter to the Editor

FCC submitted the following Letter to the Editor to the Financial Post in response to an opinion item from the C.D. Howe Institute, published in the Financial Post on March 20, 2013. Letter content below:

At Farm Credit Canada (FCC), we believe that a healthy agricultural credit market offers customers choice from a range of financial institutions. We share this viewpoint with 100,000 FCC customers, as well as thousands of farmers and agribusiness operators who are not our customers.

That’s why I continue to be amazed at how opinions on this issue are being presented repeatedly as facts – without balanced opinions from multiple groups who are actually involved in the industry. The most recent example is the March 20 opinion piece that appeared in the Financial Post by academics Finn Poschmann and Phillipe Bergevin, authors of a recent C.D. Howe report on financial Crown corporations entitled Reining in the Risks: Rethinking the Role of Crown Financial Corporations in Canada. They use inflammatory and unsubstantiated words like "subprime," "dodgy," and "hypercompetitive" to describe FCC lending practices.

Here are some facts about FCC to add to the record.

FCC has been growing and profitable for more than two decades. We are a prudent and responsible lender. Our financial strength has never been better. More than 98% of our $25 billion portfolio is in good standing, which reflects the overall strength of the agricultural industry and a deep commitment and business savvy by our borrowers to run sound businesses.

FCC doesn’t receive money from the Government of Canada. FCC is self-financed and pays millions of dollars in dividends to the government each year. The Auditor General of Canada conducts FCC financial audits every year, which are available to the public. The majority of our profits are reinvested in additional lending and learning activities for our customers.

As with other federal financial Crown corporations, FCC borrows funds from the government. The accusation that this advantage is used to undercut the market is false. Where banks, credit unions and FCC compete for business, our research shows that, on average, our customers pay us a modest premium.

The authors have inferred that the best way to rein in FCC’s supposed "risky, hypercompetitive practices" would be to return us to a lender of last resort. Ironically, being returned to a lender of last resort is exactly the step that would expose taxpayers to more risk. Providing access to capital to customers of various sizes, in a wide range of sectors, all across Canada helps FCC keep its overall risk portfolio healthy.

FCC continued lending to agriculture through the financial crisis in 2008-09 when many other lenders did not. Some FCC growth occurred as a direct result of other lenders exiting the market at that time, and many involved in the industry today will say its current good health relates to the fact that access to credit was available through the 2008-09 period. In 2009, the banks collectively withdrew from an agricultural finance market that, overall, was still healthy, while FCC continued to provide new lending capital and grew its portfolio. FCC is in agriculture for the long run and this sets us apart.

Furthermore, the insinuation that FCC is not interested in enhancing risk management practices could not be further from the truth. Like it did with the Business Development Bank, the CD Howe Institute and the authors made no effort to contact FCC to express an interest in seeing the systems and processes we have in place to manage risk, which might have provided at least some balance or insight. We welcome the current Office of Superintendent Financial Institutions (OSFI) review, both to help us validate what existing practices are working well and to learn what new steps will strengthen our risk management even more.

Finally, the opinions and direct experience of FCC customers and the agriculture industry at large matter a great deal. We have more than 100,000 customers across Canada. Virtually every one of them also deal with other financial institutions for deposits and other financial services, neither of which are offered by FCC. In the authors’ research and commentary, the views of customers and the industry are completely absent. That makes one wonder exactly whose perspective they represent, and who would really benefit if their views were implemented.

We routinely send business to credit unions and banks across Canada, and partner with them on deals. We will continue to operate in a spirit of cooperation, no matter what mud-slinging and misrepresentation occurs about FCC.

Sincerely,
Greg Stewart
President and Chief Executive Officer
Farm Credit Canada

Powerful Words

One of the most talked about, viewed, watched and shared Super Bowl Commercials this year is about farmers.  It is a perfect example of advocacy, something that supply management would do well to consider.  Done right, it would provide balance and real information to the general public about the importance of the industry and the very real services it provides to Canadians. Below is a reprint of the Farms.com article about the commercial and what it achieves.

You can watch this wonderful you tube video again here:

“So God Made A Farmer” Super Bowl Commercial Gives A Boost To Agvocacy

Ram Pays Tribute to Farmers with Voice of Paul Harvey and Powerful Images

By Amanda Brodhagen, Farms.com

It’s the Super Bowl commercial that everyone in the agriculture community is talking about - Ram Trucks version of the famous 1978 speech with the voice of Paul Harvey known as “So God Made a Farmer.”

Not only was the commercial a great advertisement for Ram Trucks, but it also gave a boost to “agvocacy”. For those of you who aren’t familiar with the term agvocacy, it’s the combination of the two words – agriculture and advocacy to create the word agvocacy. The whole purpose of agvocacy is to communicate about agriculture with the non-ag audience.

One of the biggest challenges to being an impactful agvocate is ensuring that you are engaging with the non-ag audience and not preaching to the choir. Ram’s commercial was able to reach that non-ag audience, which helps set the stage for agvocates to connect with the average consumer. The message was bold, the images were powerful and it was a positive message about those behind agriculture production.  Thank you to Ram Trucks for their tribute to the American Farmer!

 Paul Harvey’s “So God Made A Farmer Speech:

And on the 8th day, God looked down on his planned paradise and said, "I need a caretaker." So God made a farmer.

God said, "I need somebody willing to get up before dawn, milk cows, work all day in the fields, milk cows again, eat supper and then go to town and stay past midnight at a meeting of the school board." So God made a farmer.

"I need somebody with arms strong enough to rustle a calf and yet gentle enough to deliver his own grandchild. Somebody to call hogs, tame cantankerous machinery, come home hungry, have to wait lunch until his wife's done feeding visiting ladies and tell the ladies to be sure and come back real soon -- and mean it." So God made a farmer.

God said, "I need somebody willing to sit up all night with a newborn colt. And watch it die. Then dry his eyes and say, 'Maybe next year.' I need somebody who can shape an ax handle from a persimmon sprout, shoe a horse with a hunk of car tire, who can make harness out of haywire, feed sacks and shoe scraps. And who, planting time and harvest season, will finish his forty-hour week by Tuesday noon, then, pain'n from 'tractor back,' put in another seventy-two hours." So God made a farmer.

God had to have somebody willing to ride the ruts at double speed to get the hay in ahead of the rain clouds and yet stop in mid-field and race to help when he sees the first smoke from a neighbor's place. So God made a farmer.

God said, "I need somebody strong enough to clear trees and heave bails, yet gentle enough to tame lambs and wean pigs and tend the pink-combed pullets, who will stop his mower for an hour to splint the broken leg of a meadow lark. It had to be somebody who'd plow deep and straight and not cut corners. Somebody to seed, weed, feed, breed and rake and disc and plow and plant and tie the fleece and strain the milk and replenish the self-feeder and finish a hard week's work with a five-mile drive to church.

"Somebody who'd bale a family together with the soft strong bonds of sharing, who would laugh and then sigh, and then reply, with smiling eyes, when his son says he wants to spend his life 'doing what dad does.'" So God made a farmer.

PAY ATTENTION PEOPLE

Of note in this article is the concept of a concerted attack with a goal in mind; the end of farmers and their families controlling  their industry and receiving a fair price for their work. It is hard to ignore the PR war against supply management. The industry needs to respond with it's own educational  PR campaign in a big way. 

Check out the face book pages and twitter feeds for the 100% Canadian Dairy page you see a miserable number of  tweets or Facebook 'likes'.  This is not enough activity to spread the word. 


Where are the  directors and their producers? Is anyone paying attention?-cg

Supply management: a worst-case scenario

By Patrick Meagher

If you’re reading the daily newspaper headlines to get a gist of what Canada should do, you’ll find that almost every columnist with an opinion thinks supply management should get the heave-ho.

As the argument goes, why make poor families pay three times the market price for milk to prop up capital-rich farmers? Yet supply management does not cost taxpayers a cent and we don’t know if the price will drop by two-thirds in a freer system. The poor families that columnists pretend to defend receive a minimum $200 monthly government cheque per child under six to help pay for diapers and milk. Many also get subsidized housing, free food, free bus fare. So, the cry to end supply management is not about poor families.

The current debate is about power and trade. Dairy processing companies want more power and other sectors want more trade. The processors launched their attack on supply management in time to use the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) as a scapegoat. Farmers Forum columnist Ian Cumming said a group of processor executives, standing with him under Florida palm trees at an industry convention last year, laid out their strategy to take down the protectionist system. It included the push for a lot of media coverage. They’re getting it while farmers are losing the propaganda war.

Supply management was meant to sustain the family farm but when it creates millionaires on paper it becomes an easy target. It’s no secret that even many non-supply managed farmers would not shed tears if supply management were dismantled.

Wrote The National Post’s John Ivison on June 21: "It’s long been known that supply management is a racket — an indefensible, anti-competitive cartel. Politicians of all parties have known it, condemned it in private and then voted unanimously in support, as they did in November 2005."

You get the same line reading a plethora of recent articles in The Globe and Mail and The Toronto Star, both of which are so far left they disagree with The National Post nine times out of 10.

It helps that Prime Minister Stephen Harper was never a friend of fixed prices but we don’t know what he’s thinking. Who wouldn’t want to sit in on trade talks to have a look-see? But if it’s pull-plug that he wants, this could be the moment.

And now there are so few Canadian supply-managed farmers — about 15,000 — a new argument is that support for supply management will not give a politician a significant number of votes. "There are few, if any, ridings where dairy votes could plausibly swing elections — particularly compared to the votes of all those in those same ridings who would benefit from dismantling supply management," wrote Martha Hall Findlay, whose mischievously-timed academic paper on the issue added fire to the debate last month, particularly because the former MP is a possible choice for the federal Liberal leadership.

Only a few months ago, I wrote that supply management is safe for now. Under the current climate it begs the question: how long is safe?

Consider that for the past three years farmers are cash flowing purchases of new milk quota since there is so little available (see page 7). Prior to that, the Farm Credit Canada quota loan policy for dairy, poultry and eggs was a 10-year term, which means dairy farmers have seven years to pay off existing loans. Do you think multiple countries would strike a deal with Canada, if Canada were to end supply management, starting with dairy, in seven years? Of course they would as talks could take years anyway and rule implementation a few more.

This brings us to the farmers’ trump card: Quebec. What politician would want to diss la belle province? Try Prime Minister Harper. He has so few friends in Quebec — support hovering just above 10 per cent — that he has nothing to lose. "No one ever speaks in favour of Mr. Harper in Quebec," longtime Quebec Tory Peter White told The National Post (June 23). Harper already crossed the line with Quebecers when he rightly shelved the long gun registry and made changes to employment insurance. He could advocate dwarf tossing and banning Jos Louis sponge cakes and he couldn’t be worse off. Moreover, Quebec farmers with shares in its milk processing company have a soft landing. The earnings from Agropur are known as the 13th milk cheque and in a free market system that cheque is likely to get a handsome boost.

All of this unpleasant news is important to consider. I’ve laid out a worst case scenario in which supply management has seven years in a climate of screaming critics. But as St. Isidore dairy farmer Thomas Kirchmeier points out: "You don’t usually eat the soup as hot as you cook it."

Other reasons indicate that supply management might have a long, healthy life.

One telling sign will be whether Canada thinks the access it can get from up to10 foreign markets is more beneficial to the economy than protecting 15,000 farmers who no longer have quota debt.

Patrick Meagher is the editor of Farmers Forum.

Government moves forward on Trade again!

Farmers would be well advised to pay attention to the comments attached to the article below. There are over 300 today alone. It is interesting how much "inaccurate" detail some have provided. It might make you wonder if someone has hired people to pound away ...... hmmmmm.

Since there are powerful forces looking for the demise of supply management, I wouldn't put anything past anyone.-CG

Supply management on table as Harper touts trade at Americas summit

JENNIFER DITCHBURN

OTTAWA— The Canadian Press

A message for Supply Management..

Farmers are concerned by all the media coverage and negative press supply management has been receiving and rightfully so.

Continued government assurances, public letters and appearances by the Minister have settled dairy farmers down for now. The underlying concern is still there.

Sometimes it helps to see another point of view. It can reminds us of events and comments that could be important.

From that perspective 3 articles by Wendy Holmes are very important.

Why you should care about the CWB vote In this article she reminds everyone of the legalities and history leading to the vote.

Lulled by the Spin Cycle captures the nasty, big business pundits who have been fueling the anti-supply management press.

The latest column is a humdinger called "the Elephant in the Milking Parlour".

The government is not likely to let us in on their plans. There may not be any warning. Time to forge a plan to make the government think twice. The power of public opinion is likely the only thing that will stop some of this. That cannot be harnessed when the public do not know what supply management brings to Canada. It needs to start now before something irreversible happens.

The media is in control of the supply management message and it isn't good. It is time to take control back.

The Canadian Media strikes again

More articles are hitting the mainstream about supply management again. One in the Globe and Mail goes from the undemocratic treatment of the Wheat Board, to the Governments’ policies on these two systems and the unbalanced treatment they receive to “Supply Management is a rip off for consumers”…etc., etc.

Recently foodie articles are showing up ( In search of higher fat butter) with plenty of zingers in them to try to nail that coffin shut. Phrases like:

"Canada is a butter backwater, with less variety and quality and far higher prices than nearly any other food-loving nation."

"it’s a monopoly-produced dairy commodity"

"a government-mandated 80-per-cent fat content"

"What’s worse, Canada’s government levies a 289.5-per-cent tariff on all but a tiny quantity of foreign butter."

"The Dairy Commission doesn't bother itself making the price of butter competitive for everyday consumers,"

Instead of using the article to help make consumers more informed about the issues behind the rules, there is one negative term after another.

The lack of logic and real information in these articles is one thing. The force behind them all is quite another. In the middle is the Consumer and the farmers that serve them wondering just who and what is going on.

An old but still true adage is ‘follow the money’. Someone is spending a great deal of time (and likely money) drawing in the right wing media and fueling this whole thing. That’s actually pretty easy to do because our media seems to want to ignore what farmers themselves and their defenders are trying to say.

If a sampling of comments on this same article is anything to go by, consumers are being affected by this negative press.

Since no one can get any print or air time of consequence, other tactics are required.

I don’t believe the industry has put enough money behind this issue yet.

The Canadian Press ... nasty stuff

If you google "supply management" today, hundreds of article pop up.

Most of them would be grounds for legal action if supply management was a company.

As the media continues its relentless onslaught against the system of supply management, one has to wonder exactly who they are satisfying and why.

I thought I lived in a democracy with a free press. They are free all right, free to embellish, lie and ignore.

Why is it that not one reporter has sought to find out what the system really means to farmers? No one even seems prepared to tell their side of the story in spite of mountains of comments full of information that should make people pause.

The issues about the safety and security of our food supply (remember the China syndrome?) and the need for safe secure local food supply seem to have gone missing too.

If we cannot depend on our press and media to give us some reality and truth where can we find it? - cg

Feb 12th is Food Freedom Day!

The article below is reprinted from Dairy Farmers of Canada's Feb Action FAX.

On February 12, 2010, the average Canadian will have earned enough income to pay his or her individual grocery bill for the entire year, making it Food Freedom Day!

Food Freedom Day occurs on the same day it did last year, due largely in part to the fact that Canada’s food costs have risen by less than 1% over the past year. This is very low, especially when compared to the United States and the European Union where food prices have gone up by 4% and in some cases over 5%.

Despite the low rise in food prices for Canadian consumers, the Farmers' Share, a recent study commissioned by prairie members of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture (CFA), showed that, on average, only 27 per cent of the cost of an entire week's worth of groceries for a family of four goes back to the farms where the food is produced.

To ensure that consumers are able to identify Canadian food products and support our agriculture sector, DFC supports the position of the CFA that they will continue to advocate for effective ingredient-based 'Product of Canada' guidelines that are both informative to the consumer and practical to the agri-food sector. Additionally, consumers know they can continue to support Canadian dairy farmers by looking for the 100% Canadian Milk logo on dairy products.

Products with this logo ensure that consumers are buying highquality, safe and delicious products made with Canadian milk ingredients. “Farmers are very proud of their role in providing high quality food produced at the highest food safety and environmental standards," - Laurent Pellerin, CFA President

This article is courtesy of information from the Candian Federation of Agriculture. For more information please visit cfa-fca.ca

The Great Canadian Moo!!!

This is all about great Canadian fun AND innovative advertising to highlight Canadian milk products and a very familiar little blue cow. A friend told me about the "great Canadian moo". Since she works in Toronto and a lot of her friends are 20 something... well ... they are having a lot of fun with it. I am sure on the appointed day we all need to send those 'moos'!

After all, at the very least it should send profile through the roof.

I went to check it out though and was surprised to see that it is part of the promotion of the updated blue cow logo, from Dairy Farmers of Canada. The newest commercial is just great! Maybe the great Canadian moo, will send the YOUTUBE commercial viral. If every dairy farmer in Canada were emailing their friends and relatives, this stuff would be viral in no time.

Watch it now on YOUTUBE

Calcium Confusion - Health Canada vs Research

This morning on Canada AM, Dr. Shapiro gave calcium a boost. But this was not just any boost. She commented twice that the preferred source and her preferred source of calcium was food, ie) dairy products. WOW!!! See the whole video clip here.

So I went hunting. The rest of this posting tries to make sense of some of what I found.

I also found the print article at CTV which is much more cautious. The good Doctor also talks about 3 servings of dairy. Hmm I think the last rewrite of the Food Guide (Dairiblawg 2006) blew that one out of the water. She goes further and quotes the necessary grams as 1500 per day!

Well, those of us in dairy land who have been paying attention knew that one too, just another reason to blast the Canada Food Guide and the bureaucrats who wrote it!!! I am getting very tired of Health Canada and the simple things they do not do for our health.

In fact I believe it is time some of us reminded the media that Health Canada may have some really serious problems, the least of which is inaccurate dietary advice!!!! What do ordinary Canadians do now?

Other articles link the same study which was written up in the Archive of Internal Medicine. I found another good one at CBC.

While I was there I also found disparaging and very negative remarks by the Nutrition Sleuth! I also spent some time trying to find this person or group. There were some interesting comments on the site as well. One that that still thinks milk may contain rBST (Bovine somatotropin)!!!

Holy cow!!! This just goes to show that farmers and their organizations can never rest when it comes to trying to educate the public. I think they need to farther and take on Health Canada and at the same time keep the public informed about the battle.

One just has to wonder if Candaians are doomed to a litany of deficiency related diseases that our governement should be taking the lead on? -cg

Internet trolling-Guess What??

I have had no time lately for poor old dairiblawg. To be fair though, there were a lot of really wild and unexpected things happening out there at the same time. The McCain's food fiasco, a possible 'coalition' government, economic collapse, the presidential elections .......

So today, I thought I'd troll around on the Internet. Sometimes really good stuff shows up and sometimes not.

Today I hit a bit of pay dirt. Terence Corcoran: The dairy farmers' annual price heist was not unexpected and I'm sure the dairy farmers and their organizations have seem this article, however, I was surprised to see all the anti articles listed so nicely on the Financial Post pages.

I went trolling some more and came up with: Keeping Canada's food safe from the Guelph Mercury and the thought provoking : How Safe is Our Food Supply? by P.J. Wade.

And if anyone from the food or farming sectors think Canadians or the Media have forgotten about the listeria outbreak, check out: What's next for food supply after deadly outbreak? from CTV.

And to round out your reading pleasure : The End of Food from the CBC.

Just goes to show you that vigilance is required to stay on top of the many, many issues that can have a detrimental impact on us, our food systems and our country. Have a great day!- cg

National Food Policy

Liberals launch consultations on food safety

OTTAWA - The Liberal opposition announced today the beginning of a nation-wide consultative process to establish a comprehensive national food policy designed to protect the health of Canadians, Liberal Health Critic Carolyn Bennett and Liberal Agriculture Critic Wayne Easter said today.

“As we search for solutions to shore up our economic health, we must remember that health and social safety nets are essential ingredients to boosting the economy,” said Dr. Bennett. “Stephen Harper may have locked the doors on Parliament but the Liberal Party is continuing to work for Canadians.”

“Canadians are expecting us to work together to deliver a stimulus package that boosts the economy, creates jobs, and improves our social safety net. A comprehensive food policy for Canada is one way that we can improve our economic and social health,” added Mr. Easter.

In addition to Dr. Bennett and Mr. Easter, Associate Health Critic Kirsty Duncan and fellow MPs Brian Murphy, Lise Zarac, Anita Neville and Mike Savage will be instrumental in the consultative process.Liberal MPs and past candidates will be traveling the country in January speaking to Canadians and seeking input on various aspects of a comprehensive food policy, including:

the global forces of food security;
ecological threats to food security;
food production/distribution;
food safety and public health; and
food security and poverty.

“If we fail to include health and social issues in a stimulus package, we are destined to come up short in our attempt to help" said Dr. Duncan.

You have to give Mr. Easter credit for continuing to battle for what is best for Farmers and Canadians. It looks like he is getting more support for these ideas. Farmers and consumers need to be part of this process.-CG

Someone IS paying attention....

While researching for more material on the listeria outbreaks in Canada, I ran across an interesting Blog site on the topic. It is called : Marler Blog

In it he has many American articles but he also details outbreaks from Canada, as well. There are other links from the site to many,many other blogs and webs that discuss this issue in detail.

Food processors and producers need to pay attention here, this fellow is a LAWYER. Litigation over due diligence and plant and processing standards, regardless of the size of the processor (here I am thinking of those 'on farm' plants) is rampant. The media isn't talking bout this either.

Go and check it out.

Food Safety Disaster

When I last wrote in Dairiblawg , the article that set me off had been buried deep in the back of newspapers. Changes to CFIA, the 5% cut in budget, etc, etc. Even though in my bones I felt this was the path to disaster, I didn't think we would see it happen so soon.

I have been reading and watching the news stories as the Maple Leaf Foods disaster, just keeps on growing. Worse, they are one of the few large plants left in Ontario to process pigs for farmers.

Again, consumers are probably shocked at how many brands were handled by that single plant. Our illusion of choice has disappeared and consumers are left wondering where to go.

I think they are flocking to farmers markets, and local butcher shops (if you have one) . Ontario better have its food safety guidelines and inspections up to snuff. There are not enough small processors or local suppliers out there to keep us all in fresh food. Things could get darn interesting.

Massive modern, distributions systems for food like we have, are very efficient. They have brought us food for a ridiculously cheap price, nation-wide. But they can also be deadly, spreading disease or food borne illness across massive distances and numbers of people.

This was always the Achilles heel of the food industry. I guess we just have been darn lucky it hasn't happened sooner!!

******

Since I first started this post, Maple Leaf has finally come back on line, Quebec has had its own food safety issue, this time surrounding cheese and China has had several more food safety scandals surrounding illegal additives in baby formula and other products.

These days, when I go into my local butcher shop, I hear questions like, "Who does your processed meat?" Maple Leaf anyone?

I will be detailing more on this issue as it continues to dominate consumer thinking. The larger problem is that the media has not followed through on this topic. It comes and goes as food safety issues hit the headlines. No one has asked why we should accept this level of risk in our food system.

Consumers are quietly doing what they have always done. Finding other places to buy or source their food.

Food Crisis .... a warning.

I have been listening to and reading numerous articles and reports this week, about the 'Food Crisis' faced by many impoverished countries. There even is an article warning the 'crisis' could hit this country,too!

At the same time, we have Ontario beef and pork producers faced with their perfect storm and the depopulation of their herds as a solution to their crisis.

Meanwhile, grains and oil seeds farmers are just beginning to see the light of day, with the rise in prices for wheat, corn and soybeans.

Canadian supply managed farmers (dairy, turkey, chicken and eggs) are worried about their governments' goal at the World Trade Organization and what may happen to their stable system.

Something is terribly wrong with this picture.

For one thing, this country's food supply is dominated by a retail strangle hold. Their suppliers look for the 'cheapest' source of their food products for you (Walmartized).

Distributors and processors push backwards to their suppliers, the farmer. Processors of food for many products have been allowed to consolidate or have been sold off to foreign buyers. Large processors have way more political power and power over the farmers of many products who are forced to sell to them. With free trade agreements in force they are moving their products into this country at the expense of our own food supply.

Really bad agricultural policy ignoring "Made in Canada' labels among other national food issues and focused on the World Trade Organization and the globalization of food instead, are responsible as well. There have been all kinds of special Agricultural reports to Parliament that could have gone a long way to begin to solve the problems. They were ignored.

The result of course has been a reduction in produced crops, loss of farmers in production and loss of world stocks, pushed ahead by drought in many countries. This is just a tiny part of the result.

Agriculture has been such a pawn of commodity brokers, prices set by outside forces (not the farmers themselves) and government, including our own federal government, it is no wonder some have given up.

In all the attention the media has showered on the "Food Crisis" issue I have yet to see anyone focus on the farmers themselves and this country's own food price and source dysfunction. There are all kinds of 'reports' from our own members in Parliament that too many governments have ignored.

Our media could do us all a great service if someone would take an in-depth look at the whole mess. We have way too many ridiculous inconsistencies of supply of food, price of food and who controls it. It's time for CTV or Global or the CBC to try to get to the bottom of it all. Maybe now, there is an appetite to do it.

WTO Storm Clouds again?

I haven't been paying a lot of attention to recent WTO activity. Besides, it's been kinda quiet out there. But when contradictory stuff appears 'out there' , wise citizens concerned about our ability to continue to feed ourselves need to pay attention. So too, do farm organizations for turkey, eggs, milk and chicken.

As noted in a Dairy Farmer's of Canada newsletter, last week, Supply Management (dairy) and the government's support for it, was detailed in question period. That was the first rumble.

About the same time the Ontario Farmer arrived and in it was a letter to the editor from former Senator Jim Tunney. This is the second rumble.

Entitled: 'Wheat Board Politics are of the worst kind', his letter gives some very interesting insights into the scanky and contradictory activities by the government, with regards to the Canadian Wheat Board. It is a quick history that all farmers and citizens should read. The last point in the whole letter is the part that made me pause:

Farmers want to trust our ministers, but have doubts when we see the results of a referendum and then hear another senior minister, David Emerson warn poultry and dairy farmers that they should prepare to find another way than with supply management to market their production.- Jim Tunney, Grafton

These are remarks Mr. Tunney, obviously knows about or has seen written, by the Minister for International Trade, the Hon. David Emerson.

Now Mr. Tunney has a respected background. He " was a director of the Dairy Farmers of Canada for 18 years and of the Dairy Bureau of Canada for 8 years. He was also a director of the Ontario Milk Marketing Board, representing farmers in six counties including his native Northumberland County. "[English]

During his term as Senator he was a member of the Standing Committee of Agriculture and Forestry. He is, as I would term it, "plugged in". His concern for supply management and the Dairy Farmers of this country is well known.

If farmers know what's good for them they need to have a hard look at the Hon. David Emerson and his government. No matter what they have said, are saying or will say, their track record with the Wheat Board is not calculated to inspire confidence in their activities with the WTO.

At the very least, supply managed farmers need to figure out what kind of options they may have to derail any stupidity coming from this government.-CG

R.I.P. !

I thought it particularly important to mark this date. This is the day Cangro marked for closure of it's Ontario Fruit and vegetable processing plants. This has weighed heavy on my mind for weeks since I first heard about it. Today this article showed up in Sun Media.

Cheaper imports threaten the 752,000 people employed by Ontario's agriculture and food processing sector.

Fruitless labour
Hank Daniszewski Sun Media
March 13, 2008


The slogan is Good Things Grow in Ontario. But finding those good Ontario-grown products in your supermarket is getting tougher.

The rising value of the Canadian dollar means food manufacturers are finding it easier to go global when they buy and process products. It's a trend that threatens the 752,000 people in Ontario's agriculture and food processing sector, the second-largest employer in the province. ( see complete article...)

This is our last peach and pear processor. It is about time somebody in the media tried to let the public know just what is going on out there.

As a consumer looking for Ontario processed foods it does not matter to me why they were leaving. I was SURE the 'why' is all about the money. It usually is. According to the article the Canadian owned processor was purchased 2 years ago by an American company. It is obvious, now, why they are leaving.

With a huge increase in the 'Grow Ontario" advertising budget, Ontarians are going to be even more aware of those products that are NOT from home. Since this is such a compelling issue for many consumers and growing daily, one has to wonder why the food processors left in this province fail to take advantage of all that free advertising to promote their products!!!!!!

I wonder if NAFTA and free trade rules will impact our ability to label food sourced in this country? Maybe we better work on keeping our processors before we have to sort that one out.

It looks like is going to be a long summer .

What do American Consumers Think?

While Canadian consumers struggle to locate Canadian processors and their products on most retail shelves, a new book has been published in the U.S. to provide their consumers with hard information. The article below provides some surprising statistics from the book.

WASHINGTON - Would you be willing to pay a little extra for goods made in the USA?Join the club.

Polls show a majority of Americans willing to do the same. And with China charging Americans to ship its hazardous materials to line the shelves of Walmart, Roger Simmermaker thinks he has the answer - a guide to buying American."How Americans Can Buy American: The Power of Consumer Patriotism" is hot off the press, providing tips and listing thousands of retail outlets owned by Americans as well as manufacturers still operating in the U.S.

If you think Americans no longer care about where goods are made or have concerns about safety of foreign products, think again. Simmermaker has assembled some surprising statistics:

92 percent of Americans want country-of-origin labels on meat and produce;

68.6 percent of Americans check labels for information like manufacturer, nation of origin and ingredients - up from 52.9 percent a year ago;

86.3 percent of Americans would like to block Chinese imports until they raise their product and food safety standards to meet U.S. levels;

33 percent of Americans would be willing to pay four times as much for American-made toys;

63 percent were willing to join a boycott of Chinese-made goods in general

(see full article ...)

In the past, Canadian figures on issues like this, follow American trends and in some cases they are ahead of our American neighbours. I think food is one of those areas. Canadian consumers are generally even more knowledgeable than their American counterparts. After all, I am one of those consumers, too!

If I am right ..... then a lot of grocery retailers and processors will have to pay the piper for their lack of foresight.

Of note though, food retail giant Loblaws has another new commercial offering a dessert product (apple dumplings) made by Ontario farmers, which is a start. How about large, clearly identifiable signage for Ontario products?

Are they paying attention or are they just paying lip service? Only time will tell and consumers are watching.-CG

Tit for Tat?

Just prior to the news release by the Minister of Agriculture, Gerry Ritz, this article showed up in the news wire:

MPs say time for feds to abandon barley campaign
Updated Wed. Feb. 27 2008 4:27 PM ET
The Canadian Press

OTTAWA -- Opposition MPs say it's time for the government to abandon its campaign to end the Canadian Wheat Board's monopoly on sales of western barley.
Liberal Wayne Easter says consecutive losses in the courts make it clear that the government can't go on.

He says the move to allow farmers the choice of selling their barley themselves or through the board threatens the existence of the marketing agency.

The Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeal have both ruled that the government can't change the barley marketing rules through regulations and must follow a process set out in the Canadian Wheat Board Act.

Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz says western producers support the change and the government will bring in legislation to allow them a choice.

The opposition parties have said they'll fight such legislation.

Obviously, this was like waving a red flag to a bull and they are just as unpredictable.-CG

Where will YOUR Food come From?

This sad little article I noted recently, is a sign of the times. Just one in another long line of food processors leaving this province. It begs the question; just where ARE they going TO?

CanGro to close; Local peach growers to make tough decisions
Posted By BOB BOUGHNER
Posted 5 days ago

The imminent closure of a fruit processing plant in St. Davids will leave nearly a dozen Chatham-Kent farmers without a market for their peaches and pears.

"It will leave me with little choice but to rip out my 17 acres of processing peach trees," veteran Cedar Springs farmer John McGuigan said Friday.

The owner of McGuigan Orchards said growers were informed a few weeks ago that the CanGro Fruit Canning Plant in St. Davids, near St. Catharines, will close March 31.

Both the company's St. Davids facility and another in Exeter are scheduled for closure unless a buyer is found. "That's highly unlikely," said McGuigan. "It's cheaper for processors to import peaches from China and Greece than it is to grow them here."

McGuigan said the plant closure would remove any market for clingstone peaches or peaches grown specifically for the processing industry. (more...)

It amazes me that a company one would hope is looking towards its future growth, etc., would make such a stupid move. Have they not been listening to Ontario consumers? Even our mainstream media have noticed something may be wrong with the food system. In a time when consumers are clamoring for "local" products it is insane, that Ontario's only remaining peach processing plants should be closing!!!

I don't want to purchase canned peaches from some other country!!! If the big food retailers in Ontario can't supply me with Ontario canned peaches, I may have to dust off the canning jars. I can guaranty a lot of other people will be trying to do the same thing too.

Are our local food supplys secure? If all the major food chains go looking for a 'local' supply, I am convinced that many people will be shocked at the state of affairs out there.

Any sovereign state/county/province wanting to safeguard it's citizens, MUST look at these situations in a different way than in the past.

Maybe it is time our provincial government started to take a hard look at what is going on out there.