by SUSAN MANN
Dairy Farmers of Ontario and the Ontario Dairy Council will be meeting soon as the Milk Industry Advisory Committee to hash out the details of implementing the new milk ingredient class in Ontario approved by the Ontario Farm Products Marketing Commission on Thursday.
The class will be in place for April 1 “to allow the dairy industry time to prepare for implementation,” says commission chair Geri Kamenz. Previously it was proposed to be in place for Feb. 1.
The commission still has to approve the final regulatory text for creating the new class, and that will be done within the next week.
Both Dairy Farmers and the council, which represents Ontario dairy processors, deemed the advisory committee as the appropriate forum to talk about how the new class will be implemented in Ontario, Kamenz says. The commission chairs the committee.
In Canada, raw milk sold to processors is classified and priced based on end use. The classes range from fluid milks and creams (Class 1) to milk used for further processing (Class 5, also known as the special classes). The price of milk in the special classes is based on world prices. The new ingredient class in Ontario would work the same way as the special classes and be based on world prices.
The new ingredient class in Ontario “will include skim milk solids in all forms that can be used as ingredients, including but not limited to skim milk, skim milk powder, ultrafiltered and diafiltered milk, whole milk powder and condensed or evaporated milk (not for retail),” it says in the Ontario Regulatory Registry posting that was posted Nov. 4, 2015. “In establishing this class, certain milk products will be moved from existing classes into this class.”
There wasn’t a list in the posting of which milk products would be moved into the new ingredient class.
Kamenz says the new milk ingredient class “will allow Dairy Farmers of Ontario to move forward with implementation of a provincial ingredient strategy to position Canadian ingredients to be more competitive in the domestic market. If Canadian ingredients are more competitive, then there is more stimulus for investment and growth.”
During the 45-day comment period, most of the other Canadian provinces and Dairy Farmers of Canada submitted responses urging the commission to turn down the ingredient class for Ontario. There were also submissions from other dairy industry stakeholders. Kamenz says the commission reviewed and considered all input “in reaching its decision to approve the new ingredient class.”
Meanwhile, national negotiations among provincial and national dairy industry officials for an ingredient strategy that would apply to all of Canada were ongoing this week in Ottawa. Peter Gould, CEO and general manager of Dairy Farmers of Ontario, says talks will continue “in the very near future through conference calls or scheduling another meeting.”
Gould says he can’t be specific but negotiators “have narrowed the gap on many of the issues. There are a couple of key ones where we still haven’t and we’ll see if we can.”
Kamenz says while the negotiations for a national ingredient strategy are ongoing “the commission made its decision (to approve the ingredient class for Ontario) in recognition that DFO and Ontario’s butter and (skim milk) powder processors have reached an agreement to proceed to implement an ingredient strategy.”
The Ontario class is “expected to strengthen the industry (in the province) and address needed investment,” he says.
DFO fully supports the development of the national ingredient strategy, Gould says. “That is our preferred outcome. But if we can’t achieve that, then obviously we have to consider going ahead in Ontario” with the new ingredient class. BF
Comments
This is the best news Ontario Dairy farmers and Processors could get ,This new class will STOP market Losses. We tried for years to get the DFO to implement a class to deal with imports that breached the Tariff Wall ,That is a sizeable share of the domestic market! This will increase the amount of milk needed to fill the market, Growth that is needed to take pressure off Quota demands. Everyone WINS ,including the retail sector and CONSUMERS! They now have 100% Canadian Dairy in their stores, protects the food industry and even allows some growth abroad! What a good news story, SUPPLY MANAGEMENT AT WORK! Bill Denby ,Importer/ Exporter
Lack of consistency equals low credibility.
To view Mr. Denby's recent thoughts google ' better farming Ontario praises trade deal but wants compensation for cheese producers"
Raube Beuerman
The whole time I was a Dairy farmer and milk export broker ,we challenged the DFO to bring in new classes for milk ,not only to deal with products coming in ,but to allow Canadian exports. Now finely they are moving in the right direction, by introducing these new prices and classes of milk the Federal Government will not have to compensate the industry. That is good news for all stakeholders, It is to bad your not in the Supply Management Industry! This may over time allow for entry into dairy business, It opens the door for new programs and more changes down the road! What you are referring to, You should be jumping for joy! Bill Denby Activist for farming
I'll take that as an admission of guilt that for years and years, the DFO was literally milking consumers.
Or put it this way, if there was no imports finding their way in, nothing would have been done.
Raube Beuerman
Have you not learned by now that DFO does not sell one thing to consumers, What is it going to take for you attackers to understand! Dairy farmers sell to Processors only ,always have , Farmers lost the legal right to sell directly to consumers in 1964! Every legal drop of milk is sold though the Marketing board DFO ,in 50 years nothing has changed. The only dairy farmers that sell direct to consumers are GAY LEA and the few farmers that have processing on farm and they still have to sell their milk to DFO and buy it back at class prices! Raube is that plain enough , Now to answer your other false statement about imports. Imports have came into this country long before Supply Management was put in place and even to day their is unrestricted imports that come in every day. CROSS BORDER SHOPPING ,duty free ,we have trade agreements that have let product come in before the 1950's and the GATT,NAFTA, TATA, TTP, and their will be more bi lateral trade agreements.
The Canadian Dairy
Industry has faced imports for ever and will continue to meet them head on, I am not sure you understand that Supply Management is here to stay! Now is the time to invest and get ready for the future! Bill Denby retired Dairy Farmer
(A) On one hand, Mr. Denby fiercely defends the position that DFO and rip-off farm gate pricing have nothing to do with high retail prices and lagging consumer demand for dairy products, .
(B) On the other hand, Mr. Denby appears to fall all over himself to congratulate the new DFO world-price strategy for its ability to increase consumer demand.
He simply cannot have it both ways - if the low, world price at the farm gate category is seen to increase sales, the high, cost-of-production price at the farm gate must, by first principles, decrease sales.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
I would think you can have it both ways . If you don't the consumer/taxpayer pays even more through subsidies .
Thing is that you can't just have an end date with out a transition period or else you will end up like other countries dairy farmers . We should start now to allow farmers to produce milk with out quota but with an agreement with a processor . Starting with young beginning farmers !
Why would you need two systems ,Supply Management dairy farmers are the only ones that can produce milk for the Canadian market. This has nothing to do with milk for EXPORT, we have limits that Canada has to live within. This may open the door to introduce programs to help young farmers into producing milk under Supply Management. But lets be clear, it does not open the door for shipping milk without quota! This new class is not and will never be open to people that do not hold quota, the Supply Management program operates under a Quota System and always will! Bill Denby ex Dairy Farmer
Well Bill what young person can afford to start with the cost of quota unless they have parents who will gift them quota or an ongoing SM enterprise .
Really it should be that young people get the price support of a closed system and no farmer should be allowed to own and the price under quota for more than 20 years but the rich SM farmers will fight that tooth and nail . So then we need to look at a different system where quota will be phased out to get costs to a realistic level , where imports are increased and exports can also happen .
You don't understand,a young dairy farmer in this country could not survive without supply management.Look around the world, it's becoming increasingly difficult if not impossible for small dairy farms to operate in a overproduction/depressed milk prices world.
I am a dairy farmer. My parents didn't farm or sign for me or help. I worked for it and I got it. I am starting my second year now. I am donig just fine
You are a full time dairy farmer with no off farm income ? How many cows are you milking ?
I applaud you for doing it . I know many who have parents who own dairy who say it can't be done .
I think by now Raube you should understand how strong Supply Management is in this Country and Province. The introduction of this new class and all the products covered under it will secure the dairy industry for decades. I am not sure you under stand how the border works ,NOTHING gets into Canada's Dairy market unless a Canadian company or importer applies for a custom ruling or holds import quota issued by the Federal Government. The border is locked tight, this bold move by the Dairy Farmers of Ontario to supply milk at U.S. prices is Legal under all our Trade Agreement. This over time will allow Canadian Dairy Farmer the right once again to supply milk into these new classes. This move a lone by Ontario will force all provinces to get on Board or else give up the growth only to Ontario Producers and processors. Importers will have a hard time keeping their further processors as customers with the high U.S dollar and costs to deliver product into Canada. This is history in the making, I tried hard at the Butter -oil -sugar blends imports Hearing back in 1998 at the Canadian International Trade Tribunal to convince DFC and DFO to introduce such a class then and now some 18 years later they finely seen the light. I am very excited and pleased, this hopefully get back all the domestic markets we have lost. Their is one word that sums this move up ,GROWTH! Bill Denby ,retired Dairy Farmer
Supply management was implemented to increase farm-gate prices and did so at the expense of growth - a business truth is that one can have either margins or growth, and supply management opted for the former.
Now, almost 50 years later, the adopting of a Class 6 -world price category indicates that the "margins instead of growth" strategy has largely been thrown out the window because world price instead of cost-of-production price is assuming an ever-greater share of total farm gate milk sales.
While Mr. Denby may see growth as a good thing, even if it means abandoning cost-of-production pricing and margins (always a good thing), dairy farmers who are focused on margin to pay for horribly-expensive quota, horribly-expensive new barns (and houses) and horribly-expensive additional land aren't going to be at all excited about growth, especially in sales of milk at world-class prices, because they need the fat margins earned on sales of cost-of-production milk to pay their bills.
Finally, since the adopting of a new Class 6 - World price scenario means that growth at world prices is increasingly replacing the emphasis of margins at cost-of-production pricing, there's no need for supply management at all because the only thing supply management ever did was isolate Canadian dairy farmers from world prices.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
The dairy industry could explode from this new class, it has the opportunity to take back a Billion dollars worth of business! We import over 1 Billion dollars of product that will now be covered under this new class. Any one can check the numbers at the CANADIAN DAIRY INFORMATION CENTRE, IN 2015 the dairy industry marketed over 7 billion dollars of milk to processors and processors for the domestic market, We imported for use by processors & further processors a BILLION dollars worth of dairy mixes that will now be available, priced, supplied by Canadian dairy farmers! Talk about growth in an industry, not only the jobs this creates and demand for more feed! This will have a big impact in other sectors of Agriculture and the Canadian economy. This will be one of the top news story for Supply Management and all industry stakeholders of 2016! GROWTH , Now get to work and refill the market with Canadian Milk! Bill Denby ,retired Dairy farmer
While selling more milk at world prices is good for consumers and good for the dairy industry, particularly processors, it's not good for supply management which was implemented to shield dairy farmers from world prices.
Mr. Denby seems to not be able to understand that world pricing and supply management are concepts at complete and irrevocable odds with each other because:
(A) supply management depends on avoiding world pricing
(B) world pricing means we do not need supply management,
or, in other words, we can have either world pricing or supply management, but not both.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
You do realize the different classes of Canadian milk ? As l understand it,world pricing applies to only one and as of right now only Ontario is attempting to make it "true" Supply Management
Neither the above poster nor Mr. Denby can deny:
(1) Supply management was put in place so that farmers wouldn't have to take world prices for their milk, eggs, chicken and turkey.
(2) Supply management did raise farm-gate prices above world prices
(3) Unless DFO and Better Farming are both wrong, Class 5 and Class 6 are both based on world price.
(4) In 1995, the dairy industry introduced Class 5a - world and/or US pricing for mozzarella cheese ingredients for frozen pizza makers only because the federal government forced them to do so.
(5) In 2013, the dairy industry adopted a hybrid price (30% above the price paid by frozen pizza makers) for mozzarella cheese ingredients for fresh pizza makers only because they were shamed into it.
(6) DFO recently adopted the Class 6 - world price category rather than continue to see the dairy farming sector laid waste by unstoppable imports of duty-free milk protein replacements.
(7) World pricing, therefore, represents everything supply management was created to avoid - therefore, "true" supply management avoids world pricing like the plague.
(8) As world pricing:
(A) Class 5a in 1995,
(B) hybrid world price class for mozzarella pizza makers in 2013
(C) Class 6 in 2016
becomes an ever-larger component of the farm gate "marketing mix" for milk, the benefits of supply management become, by simple arithmetic, less-and-less.
(9) Why, because the benefits of owning dairy quota are decreasing, thanks to the increasing importance of world pricing for Canadian farm gate sales of milk, would any farmer, young or old, want to buy dairy quota in 2016?
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Stephen's issues, point by point, some correct - but mostly wrong.
(1) Supply management was put in place so that farmers wouldn't have to take world prices for their milk, eggs, chicken and turkey.
Wrong – to find the correct reasons, Stephen should read the two Ontario Commissions of Inquiry that lead governments to put supply management in place - one by Hennessey and one by Ross.
(2) Supply management did raise farm-gate prices above world prices
Non sequitur, since less than 10 % of all dairy production globally is at world (dumping) price. Every developed country’s domestic milk price is above world price. And every developed country, including New Zealand, still has some form of supply management. 80% of New Zealand’s milk is effectively sold at above world price as well. All of US milk production farm gate price is above world prices!
(3) Unless DFO and Better Farming are both wrong, Class 5 and Class 6 are both based on world price.
Wrong – the four classes within Class 5 are not at world price – See DFO MILK PRICING REGULATION 01/16 published online. And, correct, Class 6 will relate to the world (dumping) price for milk protein.
(4) In 1995, the dairy industry introduced Class 5a - world and/or US pricing for mozzarella cheese ingredients for frozen pizza makers only because the federal government forced them to do so.
Wrong – the 10 year phase-out of the 15% tariff on frozen pizza under CUSTA left DFO with a decision – match US price for cheese on frozen pizza or face certain loss of two fairly new frozen pizza plants and all the jobs and milk volume connected with the plants. Farmers decided – not government – to keep the plants viable in a CUSTA and NAFTA environment. Good move and since then a new large European-owned plant (Dr. Oetker) has opened.
(5) In 2013, the dairy industry adopted a hybrid price (30% above the price paid by frozen pizza makers) for mozzarella cheese ingredients for fresh pizza makers only because they were shamed into it.
Wrong – it was in response to price signals – which you think is not possible under SM in spite of the first four points above and all other evidence – but you can choose to incorrectly call it shamed since it fits your viewpoint.
(6) DFO recently adopted the Class 6 - world price category rather than continue to see the dairy farming sector laid waste by unstoppable imports of duty-free milk protein replacements.
You got this one almost completely correct! But you ignore the critical fact, or don’t know perhaps, that those same milk protein isolates and concentrates that can move into Canada duty-free can’t move the other way into the US on the same basis! Why? - because the US – unlike Canada – HAS TARIFFS IN PLACE AT THEIR BORDER for these milk protein products as part of the US supply management system for milk.
(7) World pricing, therefore, represents everything supply management was created to avoid - therefore, "true" supply management avoids world pricing like the plague.
Wrong – see all of the above.
(8) As world pricing:
(A) Class 5a in 1995,
(B) hybrid world price class for mozzarella pizza makers in 2013
(C) Class 6 in 2016
becomes an ever-larger component of the farm gate "marketing mix" for milk, the benefits of supply management become, by simple arithmetic, less-and-less.
Correct – as the world (dumping) priced volume and US priced volume (Class 5) has grown from 5% to 10% of Canadian milk marketing, our farmers have made less. Note that US tariffs and border controls still keep them with only 3% of milk entering their US supply management system.
(9) Why, because the benefits of owning dairy quota are decreasing, thanks to the increasing importance of world pricing for Canadian farm gate sales of milk, would any farmer, young or old, want to buy dairy quota in 2016?
Well, that is what about 1,000 Ontario dairy farmers do every month in Ontario – buy quota - I guess they are not all equal to you in intelligence, Stephen.
When any farmer in Canada can produce milk for whatever the market is willing to pay, without facing criminal prosecution for doing so, will we not have a SM system that DOES raise prices of farm products.
This poster claiming that SM does not raise farmgate prices is as true as claiming their boring post would not put us to sleep.
Raube Beuerman
It's always so-easy and so-much fun to poke gaping holes in the arguments offered by people who don't offer any evidence to support what are always, at best, half truths, especially when it comes to supply management.
For example if either Hennessy or Ross allowed, or even invited, any member of the ag economics discipline to offer any input, that input was ignored. In addition, even when it came to the implementation of supply management for poultry in the mid-1970s, the proponents of supply management figured they wouldn't need border controls and, therefore, nobody but members of the ag economics community were prepared to, and did, tell anyone who would listen, and obviously neither Hennessy nor Ross did listen, that border controls would change everything for the worse. In addition, it's nonsense to try to claim that price wasn't the biggest driver behind supply management and the above poster insults everyone's intelligence to claim otherwise. The only reason farmers ever demand supply management is because prices are too low - if that didn't come through loud and clear on every page of the Hennessy and Ross reports, the government wasted its money by hiring them. In addition, I'm old enough to remember the tractor parades of the mid-sixties and the discussions by my neighbours who were in those parades - price was ALWAYS the only issue.
Secondly, there's no debate that supply management raised farm gate prices and it's disingenuous for the above poster to go into a red-herring issue about whether the enhanced farm gate prices were above world prices, above the price in Cucamonga or above whatever base price was used as a reference point. The point the above poster is trying to shield is that farm gate prices were higher than they would have been without supply management - the above poster is, therefore, being slippery and duplicitous with the truth.
Thirdly, I refer to the original Better Farming story written by Susan Mann and published on this site (above) on January 22, 2016 which reads:
".....to milk used for further processing (Class 5, also known as the special classes). The price of milk in the special classes is based on world prices. The new ingredient class in Ontario would work the same way as the special classes and be based on world prices."
In my posting, I even prefaced my statement by writing "unless DFO and Better Farming and DFO are both wrong" yet the above poster fell all over his/her pompous hide to claim I was wrong - if the poster believes, and can prove I am wrong, he/she should object to Better Farming. I'm simply referring to what has been published by an experienced journalist from a responsible farm publication. The haste to pillory me, and especially doing so anonymously, for publishing, and properly citing, what was published by others is childish, petulant and grossly un-professional.
Fourthly, when it comes to who implemented the cheese price roll-back for frozen pizza makers, I refer to a Globe and Mail story by Barrie McKenna on April 14, 2013 which reads, in part, as follows:
"McCain Foods Ltd. and other frozen pizza exporters won an exemption from Ottawa years ago that allows them to buy cheese at the cheaper world price."
Once again, if the above poster has an issue with what I wrote, he should take it up with McKenna, not me - I pretty-much guarantee that an anonymous letter from the above anonymous poster wouldn't even get read before it got trashed, which is exactly what the Editors of this site should have done with the above posting.
Fifthly, when it comes to the price roll-back on cheese for the fresh pizza industry in 2013, the above poster has a highly-selective and highly-partisan understanding of the truth. The fresh pizza people complained loudly from 1995 to 2013 that they were facing price discrimination. Adding fuel to their complaints was the highly-publicized arrest, in late 2012 of a ring of mozzarella cheese smugglers who were smuggling US cheese into Canada for sale to fresh pizza makers.
Once again, I refer to the Globe and Mail and Barrie McKenna on May 1, 2013
"Ottawa and Canadian dairy farmers have bowed to pressure from the fast food industry and will let thousands of pizza restaurants buy heavily discounted mozzarella cheese"
Yet again, if the above poster wants to correct anyone it should be Barrie McKenna and, once again, an anonymous letter trying to correct McKenna will immediately join the previous letter in McKenna's trash can and even more reason for the Editors of this site to have trashed the above posting.
Therefore, I'm not prepared to (and why bother?) continue to skewer the above purveyor of half-truths and un-referenced distortions - it would be both a waste of my time and little more than "piling-on". I don't know why anonymous/pompous/pedantic/hair-splitting people feel the need to offer half-truths about supply management on this site unless they've been ordered to do so as a condition of employment.
It's like this - I've cited my sources and published my name - the above poster did neither and his/her credibility is, therefore, in the electronic trash-can.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
I had thought of ending my skewering of the above posting with only one response, but the egregious and multi-level intellectual dishonesty in the last sentence of the offending post cannot go unaddressed. The sentence is:
"Well, that is what about 1,000 Ontario dairy farmers do every month in Ontario - buy quota....."
(1) The first response, admittedly somewhat-flippant, is to evoke the quote commonly mis-attributed to P.T. Barnum -"There's a sucker born every minute", but that would imply that dairy farmers are suckers, and even though it would be entirely consistent with the convoluted logic used by the above poster, as well as entirely consistent with the dismissive rhetoric used by the above poster, it wouldn't accurately reflect reality.
(2) The second response to the implication that 1,000 dairy farmers doing something specific each month implies legitimacy in numbers, would be to note that the opposition to supply management expressed by the Consumers Association of Canada, representing almost 35 million consumers, must be ultimately-legitimate. Or, in other words, if 1,000 dairy farmers, by virtue of their numerical superiority, can prove one individual, me, wrong every month, then 35 million consumers must be able to prove 1,000 dairy farmers wrong - thereby going straight to the heart of the intellectual dishonesty of the above posting.
(3) The third response is to examine the "face-value" of the sentence. For example, 1,000 buyers of quota a month usually indicates, given the principle that for every buyer, there must be a seller, and since there are, if my understanding is correct, about 4,000 dairy farmers in Ontario, in three months Ontario would have only 1,000 dairy farmers who wouldn't be buying quota from anyone because there would be no sellers left. Therefore, the statement simply cannot be taken at face value, once again going straight to the heart of the intellectual dishonesty displayed in the above posting.
(4) The definitive and ultimate facet of the intellectual dishonesty in the offending sentence arises because, thanks to the Soviet-style regulations currently affecting dairy quota transfers in Ontario, particularly the face-saving attempt to put a cap on dairy quota values, quota can be easily sold but almost impossible to buy. Therefore, there are many buyers of small amounts of dairy quota, but a relatively-few sellers of large amounts as they typically exit the dairy business entirely. The crux of the matter, and a graphic demonstration of the industry-wide intellectual and moral bankruptcy of the supply managed dairy industry can be found in the following story, written by Susan Mann, and published on this site on Nov 1, 2014, regarding the tribulations of the Eastern Ontario dairy farming partnership of Senn and Suter when they bought another dairy farm and then tried to move quota from one farm to another in order to consolidate the two operations at one location:
"If (these) eastern Ontario producers were to buy the 186 kilograms of quota on the Provincial quota exchange that they obtained through the purchase of a nearby farm two years ago, it would take them 39 years to get all of it."
(5) There's one further, and by no means final, intellectual dishonesty demonstrated in the above posting because the first group of new entrants into DFO's New Entrant Program will soon have to start buying quota to replace what was loaned to them by DFO, and won't be able to buy enough, if any at all and will, therefore, find themselves violating their New Entrant contracts with DFO - a looming crisis, one that DFO seem to be powerless to prevent, as well as one studiously ignored by the entire dairy industry which already has too many crises and double-standards on its plate.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Well done.
The two very lengthy responses below did nothing to refute the main point - that every country's domestic milk price is higher than world (dumping) prices - that render Stephen's arguments meaningless.
Also, FYI, quoting a journalist does not provide any "source".
For only one example, quoting Susan Mann does not trump quoting posted DFO MILK PRICING REGULATION 01/16 published online.
That would be a fail in any university economics course in this century.
And, one more pitch for a 140 character limit to stop people that think quantity is important than quality.
If supply management wasn't screwing everybody:
(1) we'd have at least one Chobani plant in Canada,
(2) there would have been no need to implement Class 5a pricing in 1995
(3) there would have been no need to give fresh cheese makers a price break in 2013
(4) there would not be an unstoppable flow of duty-free milk protein replacements into Canada and therefore, no need to implement Class 6 pricing now.
(5) Americans would be coming to Canada to buy dairy and poultry products, and not the other way around.
(6) the Consumers Association of Canada, the National Citizens Coalition and every leading newspaper in the country would support supply management instead of staunchly opposing it they way they do now.
Arcane arguments about what does, or does not, constitute the world price are relevant only to people who, like the above poster, the dairy farm aristocracy and the bloated bureaucracy defending that aristocracy, are using every "kitchen sink" argument they can find, in a last-ditch, desperate attempt to hide the truth which is that supply management, while once able to screw everybody blind, is gradually, albeit surely, losing that ability.
The inconvenient and very-unpalatable truth for the supply management aristocracy is that Class 6 pricing is being implemented because the unstoppable flow of duty-free milk protein replacements:
(A) is forcing domestically produced milk's share of the total Canadian milk market increasingly closer to the toilet.
(B) is making supply management and the protectionist policies of the Canadian dairy industry increasingly look like something that fell out of the north end of a south-bound cow.
(C) caused so-much stone-walling by the Canadian dairy lobby that CBC reporter, David Cochrane, christened it - "Lactosa nostra" in the fall of 2015.
In addition, the rush in this instance to accord DFO the ultimate in credibility is in stark contrast to the studious rush by supply management supporters to ignore the DFO release in late 2010 that showed the farm gate price of milk in Ontario to be within pennies per liter of the US retail price and that the US retail price of milk was almost 38% above the Ontario retail price. It's incongruous for supply management supporters to not believe DFO in 2010, yet fall all over themselves to believe DFO now.
Finally, why would and/or why should anyone reading this site pay any attention to anyone who, like the above poster, provides absolutely no references of his/her own, but turns around and complains that my accurately quoting experienced journalists from a reputable agricultural publication and Canada's "National Newspaper", the Globe and Mail, is not providing a "source"?
At least I, and every other supply management critic, can provide sources and references - the only thing supply management supporters can provide to defend supply management is the self-serving propaganda they generate themselves or pay to "Judas Iscariot" consultants to produce for them. Therefore, the above poster is, I suggest, simply being pissy because he/she can't provide any arm's length, third-party sources or references at all, and, in a fit of pique, is reduced to being dismissive about mine.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
apparent dyslexia on my part resulted in an inversion in my posting above - DFO's numbers showed that the Canadian retail price of milk was, in late 2010, almost 38% above the US retail price of milk, and not the other way around as I mistakenly printed it.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
I can not believe you are still posting your GARBAGE, You have no credibility left and yet you still ATTACK dairy farmers! What is wrong with you, I showed all your posts to Friends of mine that you say knows nothing about SUPPLY Management. They were shocked that a grown man would attack farmers that work hard and supply us food. They said that they have never read anyone Attacking farmers the way that you do and cannot stop. This is very concerning, I would ask better farming not to post anymore of your ATTACKS until you prove your of sound mind! I feel sorry for you ,best of luck! Bill Denby retired Dairy farmer
When I show my postings on this site to my friends, they tell me I'm completely-correct in my assessment of the huge damage caused by supply management and, if anything, I'm not nearly critical enough.
In addition, they invariably thank me for having the courage, on behalf of the next generation of farmers, to be one of the very-few from within agriculture to post the truth about the biggest scourge of modern-day Canadian agriculture.
I suggest Mr. Denby needs to cultivate a new group of friends:
(A) at least one of them a cross-border shopping consumer
(B) at least one of them a hard-working young non-supply managed farmer who can't get ahead because he's being bullied on all sides by the purchasing power of the 200% tariff barriers given to his/her supply managed neighbours.
And, of course, Mr. Denby's so-called "friends" would probably also claim that:
(1) the Consumers Association of Canada
(2) the National Citizens Coalition
(3) the Financial Post
(4) the Globe and Mail
(5) the Canadian Food and Restaurant Association
(6) every economics professor in the country (except for the few in the employ of SM5)
(7) every cross-border shopper
(8) every young non-supply managed farmer who is being financially bullied by his supply managed neighbours
also "knows nothing about SUPPLY management"
Once again, and as always, Mr. Denby is so completely-unable to deny and/or refute any of my arguments, he resorts to the time-honoured tradition of supply management supporters when attempting to defend their sinecure - shoot the messenger.
I dare Mr. Denby to show THIS posting to his so-called "friends".
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
I thought we were dealing with a person that just hated SUPPLY MANAGEMENT & Dairy Farmers but I was WRONG! Sir ,I would debate you anywhere about the benefits of SUPPLY MANAGEMENT for CANADA and STAKEHOLDERS. Bill Denby retired Dairy Farmer
The topics Mr. Denby wants to debate simply aren't, in 2016, open to debate or even discussion. Supply management has vividly demonstrated, in many ways, and over the course of many years, that other than being an effective way of transferring vast amounts of wealth from poor consumers to what is now the richest group of Canadian farmers, it is regressive, and even outright harmful, to the economy and to society in every way possible.
Hatred has nothing to do with anything, except for the hatred directed at supply management critics by supply management supporters when they can't deny the truth about the evils inherent in supply management's legislated "gravy-train'.
I write about the reality faced by the next generation of non-supply managed farmers and the current generation of consumers - it's obviously a reality Mr. Denby can't accept or even consider.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Steven you have a very hard time separating Truth from fiction, any young person that wants to start farming to day will be challenged. Farm lands have gone from $ 1,000.00 an acre to over $ 15,000.00. Cost of machinery has gone from a 100 hp costing $12,000.00 to over $120,000.00, livestock have gone from 300.00 a cow to over $3,000.00 a cow and so on. Are you still living in the 80's ,do you not think that the price farmers are receiving for produce not a fair price. Cash croppers have drove up the land rents and prices as crop prices moved upwards ,any time a farmer has disposable income before taxes ,they invest it in their business. Supply Management farmers are not the reason ,land, machinery , and other costs have risen! It is the costs of farming to day because competition for market share of theses resources is in demand by all farmers! Supply Managed farmers are meeting the challenges like all other farmers, Price adjustments in returns change monthly. The market place for all farmers is becoming unpredictable if they want to supply as much of the Domestic market. This is no different than other business that compete for market share, you should know that Steven! I find your obsession bazar that you attack Farmers, These are people that work hard and take great pride in what they do. But everyone has to make a little money at it, even what you do! I do agree with you that if something doesn't change in Agriculture that will assist young farmers to start. This Country will be in a mess down the road 20 years, I would hope that instead of attacking agriculture and farmers ,you would spend your time focused on Governments to promote and introduce programs that assist young farmers to get into Agriculture! Bill Denby retired dairy farmer.
Mr. Denby does a disservice to reality by insisting that supply managed farmers are above being criticized because they "work hard and take great pride in what they do".
The stark reality and the sad truth of 2016 is that supply management has created two classes of farmers:
(1) an "uber" class of quota-owning farmer who, thanks to the advantages of 200% tariff barriers available to them alone, can walk over, through and around anyone else/everyone else when it comes to buying what he/she wants.
(2) a second-class of non-quota owning farmer who, in addition to:
(A) working just as hard, and often even-harder than his/her "uber" neighbours
(B) taking no less pride than his/her "uber" neighbour in what they do
must live on the "scraps from the table" of his/her "uber" neighbours.
While Mr. Denby seems to be able to constantly fall all over himself to defend our quota-owning rural aristocracy and the protectionist legislation propping up that aristocracy, I don't and won't, nor should I.
Alas, by the time Mr. Denby and his "baby-boomer" sycophants wake up and realize that the biggest hindrance to the dreams of many aspiring farmers is the rural aristocracy that he/they staunchly defend, I fear it will be far-too late for an entire generation of farmers to start.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Who benefits if supply managed farmers are forced to live off "scraps from the table" left by other sectors? If we didn't have supply management to blame for high land prices we would blame buyers from other countries like they do out west. Imagine if we focused on solutions for non supply managed commodities instead of trying to bash a great system!
There are oodles of examples in economic history to support the truism that the entire economy and society benefits when protectionist privileges are taken away from the favoured few.
In addition, while supply managed farmers continually mouth the platitudes that "we're all in it together" they can't stand the thought that we would finally be "all in it together" if supply management ended.
Furthermore, beef and hog farmers are proud to be free-traders, but they shouldn't have to be second-class citizens and second-class farmers just so the elite can boast about how elite they are.
The "problem" for increasing numbers of Canadian non-supply managed farmers, especially younger ones, IS supply management, and therefore, the "solution" for them is to get rid of it before we lose a complete generation of farmers.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Steve you could well say that we are working on the second if not the third generational loss of farmers . Yes much of it is due to SM but some also is due to old farmers not wanting to let go of the reigns .
Back at the bogus old 38% figure, eh? This was one of Stephen's favourite selective "facts" until it was destroyed in the Jan. 2015 post - "Focusing on one year - ignoring all the rest!!"
He then dropped using it, likely out of embarrassment that someone said "Hard to believe an "economist" would misuse data in such an obvious way."
Now, one year later, he is pretending it is valid again. Funny, eh?
Although, to my continual regret, I didn't keep a copy, a full-page "advertorial" appeared on the back page of one section of either the Globe and Mail or the National Post in either the last week of November or the first week of December, 2010, wherein DFO's Bill Mitchell produced figures clearly showing that:
(A) the retail price of milk in Ontario was almost 38% higher (the actual figure was more than 37.5%) than the retail price of milk in the US
(B) the farm gate price of milk in Ontario was within pennies per litre of the retail price of milk in the US.
Therefore, since the ad occupied a full page, and in a national newspaper, any astute reader of this site should be able to find it, even though, to my knowledge, it appeared only the one time (and given the damning figures contained therein, no wonder!). The potential sources include:
(1) DFO (it might take a Freedom of Information approach to get it)
(2) Bill Mitchell, even though he left DFO, only to re-surface at the Egg Farmers of Ontario
(3) archival research at the Globe and Mail and National Post for the critical two weeks in question.
More to the point, it's amusing, yet sad, to see the quibbling and obfuscation on this site by supply management supporters in response to DFO's de-facto admission, by creating a Class 6 milk pricing category, that supply management's artificially-high farm-gate milk pricing strategy is:
(i) undercutting DFO's market share of the Ontario and/or Canadian market
(ii) making a mockery of the "made-in-Canada" pricing strategy made possible by supply management.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Creating a "smoke-screen" about world prices is exactly like arguing about who got the assist on the goal that cost your team the game.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Steven again you miss the point, you hate SUPPLY MANAGEMENT and a good news story! This new class is based mainly on U.S. prices not World price! There is no World price ,where do you find World price? Countries that sell surplus Dairy mainly Butter and Skim milk powder is at dumping price because of it's age! If you follow the Dairy exporting countries prices for unprocessed milk ,they are no where near Dumping price or what you think is World price! You know nothing about importing or exporting, you are a bean counter ,not a player in the Dairy Industry! You have a real problem that Supply Management can adapt and meet challenges head on! You likely have clients you told to get out before the system crashes, Now you have to back paddle! This new class will likely be between 38.00 to 50.00 per HL depending on the CDN and you forget FREE QUOTA ,could be up to 2 BILLION liters of milk ! That is good news for Dairy farmers that expanded and have room to double their production over night. Steven would you like to make a bet ,That this new class will create new Growth and the blend price will drop only a bit! I predict the blend price will only drop between $5 to $10 per HL and all that Free Quota will help the bottom line of producers and the Dairy Industry! How much are you willing to bet who is right, $1,000 ,$2,000 or $5,000 and we will let Better Farming hold the Money! Just say how much Steven, put your money were your mouth is, after all you are a financial ADVISOR! Bill Denby retired dairy farmer
If Mr. Denby had read the article, he would know what world pricing is.
Also, I would have to add that I was wrong about Mr. Denby flip-flopping on his support for supply management. Upon reading more of his recent comments it is becoming ever more clear that he supports a stronger dairy industry by lowering prices in an effort to achieve "growth", which by definition means he does not support supply management.
Denby described "world price" perfectly.
If the person Knew what class 5 prices were based on ,which are mainly U.S. prices, Not World prices. Do a little homework and look at the Canadian Dairy Information web site data ,it will show you class 5 pricing. Supply Management pricing is always above the true cost of production, their is No class that returns full cost of production to farmers. Each class is made up of 3 factors, Supply Management does not mean you get top price for every hl that you produce, if it did the only market Canadian Dairy Farmers would fill would be the fluid Market and no place for surplus butter fat to be used or sold! Please do your home work, just because you create lower class priced milk, in no way does that undermine the pillars of Supply Management! Bill Denby
Even though Mr. Denby claims that Class 5 milk prices are "mainly U.S. prices, Not (sic) World prices", he needs to be reminded that the above story on which this string of comments is based, clearly states that both Class 5 and the new ingredient (Class 6) prices are based on world prices.
Therefore, while Mr. Denby waxes eloquent that others need to do "Do a little homework", it appears he has either forgotten to do his own or else DFO issued mis-information about Class 5 and Class 6 milk pricing to the media, including Better Farming - simply stated, Mr. Denby and DFO can't both be right.
Furthermore, even if Mr. Denby was correct, and Class 5 and Class 6 milk was to be priced at the US farm gate price level, he should review the information published by DFO in late 2010 which showed that the farm gate price of milk in Ontario was, apparently even when including sales of Class 5 milk, almost 38% higher than the farm gate price of milk in the US. This means that the milk sold in Classes 1 through 4 must have been sold at significantly higher than the prices received for sales of Class 5 milk in order to produce an overall price differential of almost 38%
In addition, Mr. Denby's statements about supply management pricing and cost-of-production are contradictory gibberish and accounting impossibilities. For example, he claims:
..... "Supply management pricing is always (apparently also including Class 5 and now, Class 6) above the true cost of production."
Yet, in the next sentence, he completely-contradicts himself by claiming:
..... "their (sic) is No (sic) class that returns full cost of production to farmers"
Finally, Mr. Denby doesn't seem to understand that supply management was created to increase farm gate prices and, because of that, anything that fundamentally reduces farm gate prices, including the adopting of Class 5 and Class 6 pricing, absolutely DOES, by definition, undermine the pillars of supply management.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Supply management was created to manage the supply. It was not created to jack up prices.
The milk industry prevents boom and bust markets so that consumers who don't like $6.00 cauliflower (however briefly) or no supply at all can have a stable supply and at the same time know that farmers aren't going bankrupt and hurting suppliers like they do in other ag sectors. Input costs in unstable sectors cost more because suppliers need higher margins to deal with uncollectable invoices
The ONLY time farmers ever want interventionist measures is when the farm gate price of something is seen to be too low, and that was exactly the case with all supply managed commodities.
Furthermore, EVERY introductory ag economics class in the past 40 years was, and still is taught that there were three reasons behind the creation of supply management (and the border controls that try, spectacularly-unsuccessfully of late in the dairy industry, to prop it up):
(1) Increase prices
(2) Stabilize prices
(3) Preserve the family farm
meaning that the above poster would earn an automatic failure on any economics test or exam in the past 40 years.
The way supply management increased farm incomes was to figure out a "cost-of-production" and then produce what consumers (at least those who don't flee to the US) seemed to want at the artificially-high prices created by cost-of-production pricing.
Supply management always was, and still is, all about price, regardless whether it's the level and/or stability thereof, and that, my anonymous friend(s), is so basic to agricultural economics that it isn't open to debate or even discussion.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Yes, everyone is talking about Cauliflower and vegetable prices in the same way everyone was talking about meat prices being so high the last couple of years.With food costs estimated to rise almost 2.5% for 2016 there will be plenty for consumers to complain about.
With Dairy and eggs set to rise the least (0.2%) they might be the only think grocery shoppers won't be complaining about.Ask any grocery store Manager,its hard to explain the price spikes in any foods
The National Organization has to pull the PROVINCES ON SIDE, Quebec needs to come on side with Ontario. The biggest co-op in Quebec opposes the new class 6 prices because it is not in their business plan interest. They operate on the other side of the border in New York and import by-products & Ingredients back into Canada duty free ever since they set up in the U.S. They are milking farmers both side of the border, They need to get their act together. The Quebec dairy farmers need to know what has been going on at their Co-OP and put a Stop to it! The fasted way to stop this ,is to support Ontario Farmers for implementing a ingredient class as ASAP! If Quebec does not support this ,then they DO NOT SUPPORT SUPPLY MANAGEMENT! Bill Denby importer/ exporter
Quebec farmers Co-op and Saputo have both been importing large amounts of imported proteins from their U.S. operations since 2013 ,other importers have been bringing it in from New Zealand & Europe which ever was the cheapest. This is hard to except as they are both stakeholders in Supply Management, What make it worse is Dairy Farmers of Canada knew and did nothing ,let them both erode the Canadian dairy farmers markets! This is Farmers from Quebec stabbing Ontario Farmers in the heart, No body has done nothing until know! This has going on for decades by Quebec farmers having it both ways. They scream protect Supply Management or Else and at the same time they are doing everything to undermine the system for producers in other Provinces! Thank goodness Mr. Gould has finely stood up to Quebec for Ontario Industry Stakeholders, This should have been stopped in 2013 everybody knew! The Province of Quebec and it's dairy farmers/processors want it both ways to rape the Canadian market and Destroy it with Imports that replace Canadian Milk! Bill Denby ,Retired Dairy Farmer
Mr. Denby, if you were a member of the Quebec farmers co-op or a shareholder of Saputo shares, wouldn't you do the same. Why buy the cow when you can get the milk cheaper-pun intended.
Further, I watched a representative from Saputo on TV before the outcome of the TPP, and he said they would be just fine with or without SM, it didn't matter one iota to them.
Raube Beuerman
Steven ,Your usual comments are NOT EVEN WORTH A RESPONSE! How ever I never pass up a opportunity to correct you again. You again do not even understand how supply management works, Never has every class 1 to 5 returned full cost of production! The cost of production formula was and is used to set the support price for butter and Power at the Canadian Dairy Commission if you knew anything. It is used to establish in each province class prices and processor margins. The rest of your Garbage need no reply, except you forgot the real challenge ! How much money are you prepared to bet? Bill Denby Retired Dairy Farmer
In a posting on this site on January 24, 2016 at 7:07 PM, Mr. Denby wrote:
"Supply Management pricing is always above the true cost of production..."
yet he now claims:
....."Never has every class 1 to 5 returned full cost of production!"
Mr. Denby obviously doesn't seem to realize that "true cost of production" and "full cost of production" are, by definition, exactly the same thing.
I'll put it as graciously as I can and with as little respect as I can muster - My understanding of supply management is light-years ahead of Mr. Denby's understanding of even the most-basic principles of managerial accounting.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Steve ,You will never stop ATTACKING A SYSTEM YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT! You Sir ,are so jealous you were never a dairy farmer worth millions ,have a organization that looks out for you, can retire with millions and still enjoy life! Supply Management farmers deserve every dollar they earn milking cows, it is a 365 day commitment. Big risks, high management skills and big rewards at the end for your retirement years! Steve ,I think that's might be why you hate Supply Managed farmers!You on the other hand will likely have to work into your 80's and still be spouting your mouth off. That's if you can find a sucker to pay you, You have failed to answer how much you charge a client ,how many clients you have ,how many have gone BROKE from your advice and how many people you discouraged and did nothing? But the one thing that really shows you will not put your money where your mouth is ,OUR BET ON SUPPLY MANAGEMENT! Bill Denby ,retired dairy farmer
The DFO is introducing this class to compete with the products that are able to make it across the border.
Although, this makes no sense since anyone with half a brain knows that SM is all about restricting supply, to boost prices, thanks to gov legislation.
So how do they keep income up?
By raising prices higher on products that are not able to sneak across the border so easily.
For example, according to Mr. Jim Romahn's blog, the price support for butter has increased, while the price for skim milk powder(the product that is coming across the border even with the low dollar-how embarrassing) has fallen.
The result is a 2.2% increase in net farm income.
A raise at a time when borrowing costs have fallen and fuels are at lows we haven't seen in years.
Go figure.
Raube Beuerman
I think anyone involved in the dairy industry knows Mr. Roman has had his own peticular view of Supply Management for quite some length of time.If this class 6 pricing works for DFO,then almost certainly it will be adopted across Canada,thus displacing imports of concentrated ingredients,which are on pace to be worth over 200 million and costing Canada dairy producers almost 10% of this Country's dairy consumption....and you ask how they will keep their income up ?
I pointed out that incomes are kept up by raising prices on other classes of dairy, such as butter.
Raube Beuerman
The 2.2% increase is due to a 3.1% increase in the cost of producing milk.Even Mr.Romahn would have to agree that fuel prices and interest rates are only a part of what goes into the COP.
Bank of Canada has a target of about 2%, yet they claim that inflation is closer to 1%
Raube Beuerman
Steven ,How much are you betting on your advice about the end of SUPPL MANAGEMENT ,you keep avoiding my questions with more garbage! Come on ,put your money where your mouth is,$1,000, $5,000 or $ 10,000.00! I am positive Supply Management will be here 50 years from to day, but if you want to bet on 10 years! You have been spilling and shouting your mouth off for 5 years about the END is coming! Put your bet up and how many years until the DEATH of SUPPLY MANAGEMENT! Be a man and take my bet! Bill Denby Retired Dairy Farmer
Let me see if I've got this straight - we have:
(A) an individual who identifies himself as a "Retired Dairy Farmer" and who therefore, by definition, has none of his own money at risk when making his predictions.
(B) the same "Retired Dairy Farmer" who has none of his money at risk is challenging the credibility of someone else because that person appears to have none of his money at risk.
Mr. Denby is, therefore, taking the position that my opinions, based on sound economic principles and appropriate educational qualifications, are of no merit because I have none of my money invested in the outcome. What Mr. Denby seems to not understand is that because:
(1) he has none of his own money invested in quota
(2) his opinions would guarantee him an automatic failure in any ag economics class at any time during the past 40 years
he is trying to have it both ways because he simply cannot deny my oft-stated, basic and undeniable economic truths about the net-negativity of supply management - all he does is claim my opinions, based on cited references and sound economic principles, are "garbage", yet offers no basis in basic economic principles and/or cited references to justify his own.
If Mr. Denby's "logic" made any sense, US Presidential-hopeful, Donald Trump, would be, by-far-and-away, the most-credible candidate because he more of his personal money on the line than any other candidate - Trump's money doesn't make him right or even more-credible, it just shows he is prepared to lose more money than any other candidate, and it's the same thing with Mr. Denby's willingness to let his money (and his intemperate language) rather than his acuity, try to continually browbeat both Mr. Beuerman and myself.
More to the point, I don't do business with and I don't make bets with people whose postings are nothing more than a Donald Trump-style attempt to "shoot the messenger" because of an inability to deny the truth of the message.
I stand by my sources, my qualifications and my opinions.
Finally, I get a lot-more than just a little cranky in that I am often accused of being a bully on this site, yet when Mr. Denby acts like a bully and a boor, (using terms like "garbage", "spilling and shooting your mouth off" and "Be a man") nobody says a peep.
On that note, I would invite this site's Editors to end this discussion.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
I can't believe it. Is the legendary supply management debate on this site over?
Comment will be published when the author signs it and resubmits.
Steven ,please put your money up, The Supply Management House is Stacked! Now with the appointment of Mary Jean McFall to the Federal Ministers Chief of Staff ,Supply Managed Farmers have Nothing to fear! The Hudson Family have over $140 million dollars in Chicken Quota and operate both sides of the border! I was hoping you would take me up on my wager, I already knew about her appointment last week. Steven ,you have no idea what goes on in Supply Management ,it is a very powerful, entrenched program in this Country. You will never win at trying to destroy this Great program, We will fight you and destroy any attack you fire . Why would you want to destroy a Canadian Success Program that allows all stake holders a living ? Are you a Canadian or a member of ISIS ,in the war against Supply Management and the Farmers that operate under it. I would have WON, you have no idea what you are ATTACKING! Bill Denby retired dairy farmer
Mr. Thompson both you and Mr. Beuerman are gutless bullies at Supply Management Farmers, you two jealous that these farmers made a good decision to go into the dairy business and follow the rules of the program. While you two took the wait and see approach, well get over it! You never see dairy farmers attacking other sectors in Agriculture but everyone that's having a bad day goes after SUPPLY MANAGEMENT. I for one had the right to challenge the program ,I made that choice to buy quota a long time ago and be part of the industry. You two are just jealous and try to tare something down, Not once have either of you commented anything positive that dairy farmers have done for this country. Yes SUPPLY MANAGEMENT is not perfect but at least it WORKS for farmers and industry stakeholders! Good luck to the both of you, I won the bet ! Supply Management is here to stay, thanks to every consumer that supports the farmers that produce their food under the CANADIAN program! Bill Denby retired dairy farmer
Mr. Denby may be right that supply management will, God forbid, last another 50 years and that terrifies me for what it will to do agriculture and to the country.
For example, in the past 50 years, supply management has:
(A) created a rural aristocracy that cares for nobody and nothing but themselves
(B) created a bloated bureaucracy that does nothing but defend the aristocracy
(C) consistently picked the pockets of every Canadian except those lucky enough to live within shopping distance of the the US border.
(D) pitted farmers against one another along age and sector lines
(E) created a windfall business opportunity for US dairy and poultry farmers, processors, distributors and retailers near to, and in, US border cities.
(F) created opportunities for organized crime to smuggle cheese into Canada.
(G) chased Chobani right out of the country
(H) impaired the attainment of Canada's broader trade policy goals.
(I) turned dairy and poultry farmers into wards of the state, completely-dependent on the perpetuation of existing policies.
(J) made a laughing-stock out of dairy farmers by implementing three completely-different pricing strategies for exactly the same product, depending on whether the purchaser makes frozen pizza, fresh pizza or home-made pizza.
(K) caused the percentage market share, at "made-in-Canada" prices, Canadian farmers dairy farmers enjoy of the domestic market, to shrink since 1995.
(L) created a united "anti-supply management" position held by every economic think tank, economist, financial journalist, food industry association and consumer advocacy organization in the country.
In short, the above 12 points illustrate just some of what dairy farmers have done TO this country, not for this country, for the last 50 years and if Mr. Denby's belief that supply management will last for another 50 years turns out to be correct, God help us all.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Steven, you are the only one and a few more ISIS members that will attack supply management farmers for the rest of your Hateful life! That's Sad, these farmers do not deserve your attacks, most are pillars in their community and help there fellow farmers . We do not understand how you think and come up with your garbage! Supply Management farmers deserve your respect, they have done nothing but participate in the Program. You Sir should be ashamed of yourself for attacking farmers you do not even know! If it makes you feel like a big man then keep up your ATTACK on farmers, you need some help! Bill Denby Retired Dairy Farmer
In response to Mr. Denby's oft-stated claim that consumers support supply management, a very-quick Google check identified:
(A) a press release from the Consumers Association of Canada dated December 11, 2003 titled - "Canadian Dairy Industry Milking Consumers"
(B) the current website of the National Citizens Coalition has a page titled - "End Supply Management Boards" and asks for donations to help make it happen.
Mr. Denby can marginalize me as much as he likes, but good luck to him if he thinks he can marginalize two of the biggest organizations representing Canadian consumers and taxpayers.
I would also invite Mr. Denby to review his position that consumers like supply management, because the two biggest organizations purporting to represent Canadian consumers, clearly do not.
The odds are not looking good for Mr. Denby. Let me see:
(1) one one hand we have two organizations representing well-over 30 million consumers and which are clearly on record as opposing supply management.
(2) on the other hand we have about 16,000 quota-owning aristocrats and their sycophants who support supply management
If Mr. Denby wishes to place me in the same category as ISIS because I oppose supply management, so-be-it, but his bombast and vitriol will, because of who else opposes supply management, serve him and the aristocracy he defends, quite-poorly.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Steven ,Why do you keep trying to convince everybody you are right! Both those organizations have to oppose something and it is easy to ATTACK Farmers. These groups get their funding from people who think they should get everything FREE, Like you! I would not use either of them as being CREDIBLE! They both get paid if they attack Supply Management or any other marketing board. Mr. Thompson it appears you cannot help yourself, I must remind you that you lost the bet! I have no idea why you keep beating your DEAD HORSE but do yourself a favour and STOP! Supply Management Does not deserve all your attention, but it must make you feel GOOD! Bill Denby Retired Dairy Farmer
For years, the last thing I asked to have adorn my take-out sandwiches bought at Subway, anywhere in Canada and the US, has been a dash of grated parmesan cheese - yet, tonight, to my horror, I was advised, at my local store, that they don't offer grated parmesan cheese as a topping any more.
Fortunately, to borrow from the wisdom of Foghorn Leghorn, I had some grated parmesan cheese at home "for just such an emergency" and was able to enjoy my sandwich as per normal.
Mr. Denby and his anonymous sycophants on this site will, I trust, be vociferous in claiming that Subway knows nothing about supply management yet, I suggest, Subway, as a company doing business in both the US and Canada, knows all-too-well about the price-gouging Canadian supply managed dairy farmers implement at the farm gate.
As an aside, I don't think the local dairy farmer behind me in line was impressed by my fake, fall-on-the-floor heart-attack at learning the news that grated parmesan cheese was "off the menu".
Ah, yes, every day, and in so-many ways, supply management offers its head on a plate!
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
I hear McDonald's new McTasters sandwiches are loaded with Parmesan cheese.They must know something about what Canadian fast food consumers want that Subway doesn't.
The must be toying with you Steve . I was in your local Subway today and the Parmesan cheese was sitting right there . Maybe they hide it when they see you coming in .
Its my understanding (NWO ) new world order has total control of all markets around the world and I mean everything. Look up (BLACK POPE ) and learn a new education in 2016 called reality..
There has long been three eternal verities in farming:
(1) death
(2) taxes
(3) calls for protectionist measures by government
There is, alas, a fourth verity - the belief in conspiracy theories, especially theories supporting the premise that there is a vast and constant conspiracy against farmers and farming.
A rather benign example of this type of conspiracy theory is the oft-stated "farmers buy retail and sell wholesale" adage, thereby implying that farmers face conspiracies when they buy and again when they sell. If that "conspiracy against farmers" nostrum was true, we wouldn't see the constant and spectacular failures of attempts by farmers and farm organizations to enter the retailing and/or processing sectors, but alas, vast, dark and murky conspiracy theories continue to bubble up to the surface of the farm "pond", as evidenced by the profferings of the above, in this case thankfully-anonymous, poster.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
The one thing completely-unthinkable in agriculture is deflation. Farmers fundamentally believe farm incomes and assets can, with the exception of normal fluctuations in prices, only go up in value.
After all, we:
(A) plant seeds and watch crops grow
(B) breed and raise livestock
(C) fall victim to lures like - "buy land they're not making it any more"
(D) assure ourselves a bright future by believing that a doubling of the world's population by 2050 can mean only good times for agriculture.
(E) have never seen a decline in the value of quota and, therefore, believe it simply couldn't possibly ever happen.
(F) have people, even on this site, exhorting young people go get into farming, 50:1 price/earnings multiples for land notwithstanding, claiming a never-brighter future in farming.
The one thing wrong with this optimistic "picture" is that nobody can imagine that anything but the status-quo could ever exist - and that's exactly why the status-quo won't last.
The "hole-in-the-wall" of constant price and income appreciation has to be the development of world pricing for even only part of what the Dairy Farmers of Ontario (DFO) sells - it's an admission by DFO that deflation is here, and here to stay.
Added to that is a story in this week's Financial Post about how Prem Watsa, the CEO of the ultra-successful investment firm, Fairfax Holdings Ltd. is betting $650 million of the firm's money on deflation. Watsa, according to the story, has made oodles of money on the long side of the market over the years, but made $2 billion by starting to short the market in 2006 when everybody else believed the market could only go up - a VERY successful move considering he then had the cash to buy distressed but otherwise sound companies after the 2008 crash.
Now Watsa is shorting the market again - as the Financial Post notes - "With stock markets around the world tanking and negative interest rates becoming commonplace in both Europe and Japan, the market is beginning to price in deflation as a real possibility."
Simply stated, if Watsa is right, and he has the track record to indicate that betting against him isn't a good idea, his $650 million investment could earn him $109 billion but destroy inflationary life as we know it, especially in agriculture.
Nowhere will deflation cause more grief than in agriculture because of our mindset that deflation simply couldn't happen in agriculture and because we depend so-heavily on inflation to bail us out when we bid up land and quotas to stratospheric P/E multiples.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Post new comment