Board member resigns from Dairy Farmers of Ontario

© AgMedia Inc.

Description (Tag): 


Not only did they loose VERSTEEG OFF OF D.F.O. ,he has to jump ship also from D.F.C ,that is more prove the ship is going down ! Dave Murray is gone to from both levels ,rumor has it also Murray and family are getting the hell out to before the ship sinks to the bottom !! rumour has it close dairy friends are getting out also ,time will only tell rather it is a rumour or fact !! I bet fact ,they all know the writing is on the wall at the Federal Government Trade Departments AND HAVE BEEN TOLD CLEARLY BY THE FEDS !! With trans fat free dairy products lining up at the border waiting to come ,it is only months away !! This is how the U.S.A.DAIRY INDUSTRY PAYS BACK IT'S BUDDIES TO THE NORTH FOR CLOSING A LEGAL IMPORT !! ( pizza kits ) Regards , Bill Denby c/o The NEGOTIATORS AND ASSOCIATES

There seems to be a lack of logic here Bill. If David was indeed afraid that the ship was sinking, do you think he would have gone through the processes of election and a slim chance appeal. I don't think so. He would have bowed out early at election time with little noise or hassle. I can't speak for David but it would seem from his actions that he believe this ship may be under attack but it is worth saving.

So as far as rumors, I would guess they are created by people to spread fear and create doubt in a system that serves all parties quite well. So producer and processor be aware of the fear spreaders. Lets keep our heads out of the sand and hope for leadership that is able to lead us through these choppy times.
Peter Koobs

Only a dairy farmer would have the gall, and wilful blindness, to claim that a system which even the Dairy Farmers of Ontario admits to forcing Ontario consumers to pay almost 38% for milk than US consumers, "serves all parties quite well"

Only a dairy farmer would have the gall, and wilful blindness, to claim that a three-price system for milk used to make mozzarella cheese, with the upper-most price being almost 87% more than the lowest price, is "a system that serves all parties quite well".

Only a dairy farmer would have the gall, and wilful blindness, to claim that a system which drove yougourt maker, Chobani, right out of the country, is "a system that serves all parties quite well"

Only a dairy farmer protected by 200% tariff barriers which gives dairy farmers an absolute income and purchasing power advantage over every non-supply managed farmer, would have the gall, and wilful blindness, to claim that, when it comes to non-supply managed farmers, supply management is "a system that serves all parties quite well".

With as little respect as I can muster, I suggest, Mr. Koobs, that supply management might serve you well, but you are dead-outright wrong, as well as obviously completely out-of touch with the reality of being a non-supply managed farmer under the age of 40, to claim that supply management is "a system that serves all parties quite well".

Perhaps Mr. Versteeg has merely developed a conscience and has no desire to continue to be a part of a system which so-completely distorts reality, and which so-completely abuses consumers, processors, and other farmers.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

Well said , Only a dairy farmer that does not live in the real world of trade ,would make that statement!! But I have to agree with him and his remarks because I to was ONE OF THEM and my family for over 100 years producing milk for processors and selling milk directly to the public in the early 1900 in the Toronto area !! If my grandfather was alive now he and a lot of other dairy farmers loved doing business with the dairies and public till 1960!! then he and my father were forced to produce milk under the government agency ,The Ontario Milk Marketing Board .,then my son , I, my father, and grandfather were all forced to produce and be controlled under the Dairy Farmers OF ONTARIO ,that same government agency only with a name change !! NOW YOU HAVE TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY IN THE MILK BUSINESS TO KNOW THAT HISTORY ALWAYS REPEATS ITS SELF HERE IN CANADA, IF YOU LIVE LONG ENOUGH !! THAT IS WHAT MY GRANDFATHER SAID ,AFTER THE GOVERNMENT TOOK AWAY OUR FAMILIES and others RIGHT TO SELL MILK TO THE PUBLIC ,FIRST AND THEN 2nd TO THE DAIRIES IN ON.!! I MY SELF GOT TO EXPERIENCE DEALING AGAIN DIRECTLY WITH THE PROCESSORS ,WHEN WE HAD A EXPORT PROGRAM IN ONTARIO !! I WOULD HAVE TO SAY I SOLD MOST OF ONTARIO'S DAIRY FARMERS EXPORT MILK FOR THEM THOUGH MY EXPORT BUSINESS AND MOST OF MY CLIENTS WERE HAPPY WITH THE PRICE THEY GOT FOR THEIR MILK !! I HAVE TO SAY IF WE HAD NOT BEEN PUT OUT OF BUSINESS ILLEGALY I WOULD HAVE BEEN I OF THE BIGGEST EXPORTERS OF MILK IN NORTH AMERICA BY NOW ,WITH A FULL LINE OF PRODUCTS FOR SALE AROUND THE WORLD!! O YA ,I FORGOT THEIR WOULD HAVE BEEN NO D.F.O. OR D.F.C. IN THE GAME !! HISTORY IS ABOUT READY TO REPEAT ITSELF ,I MADE MY GRANDFATHER A PROMISE ,IF I CAN GIVE FARMERS THAT FREEDOM OF CHOICE AGAIN ,I WILL !! REGARDS ,BILL DENBY C/O THE NEGOTIATORS AND ASSOCIATES ,OFFICE

Back in the days before the milk board every farmer on our road was a milk producer of some scale.l am not sure where you get your information from but the whole reason for the board beginnings were because milk producers were unhappy with the Dairies,such to a point that a call to dump full cans of milk in the ditches went out in protest but some (probably like your father and grandfather) would not go along with it.
The unpopularity with the Dairies was the beginning of the Ontario Milk Board and everyone on our road HAD a choice the same as your Grandfather had.

Why are you so afraid to sign your name to your comments? It would be nice if you got the facts straight , the reason why the O.M.M.B. was forced on all farmers ,was some could not negotiate their price and entitlement with the dairies in their area !! The producers that were in the golden horse shoe area were getting a better price than the ones outside of it !! Also the government of that day was not going to have their voters go to the store and their is no milk their!! You should get your story correct or read the milk history book ,my uncle is in their ,he was president of the Toronto Whole Milk League for a number of years !!It was all about Government CONTROLLING the supply of milk ,NO different now !! Again why don't you print your name ? BILL DENBY C/O THE NEGOTIATORS AND ASSOCIATES

Your family had a choice and they chose to make a good living under Supply Management for probably over 40 years like so many other dairy families have done so.
You however chose to try and undermine that same SM and got your hand slapped and now you have the nerve to degrade something that served your family very well for generations.

The irony of it all is without Supply Management you would have had no illegal export business and without Supply Management protection your family would probably have been out of the dairy business decades ago.

Invoking the past serves no purpose but to muddy the present - the fact of the matter is that supply management screws consumers now, supply management pits farmers against one another now, and supply management drives companies like Chobani out of the country now.

It is also quite-telling that the poster falls all over the place to boast about how well supply management served dairy farmers for generations, yet seems to neither notice, nor care, that the loot these dairy farmers received because of supply management, came directly, and dis-proportionately, out of the pockets of the poorest group of consumers.

Why can't dairy farmers ever think about anyone but themselves?

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

It is always fascinating to read unsubstantiated hypothetical arguments opposing supply management as hurting consumers and farmers. Current economic and statistics, empirical evidence, not supposition and hypothesis, shows where supply management was dismantled in Australia and UK, farmers lost market and income, while consumer prices were unaffected. See here

Reality vs Angry hypothetical rhetoric.

I,ve read the same story , yet some people will sit and smash SM farmers to the ground and say its untrue. Maybe just Maybe some people has Glasses on that can only see what they want to see? Hate runs deep in some people heart that they can never see the truth if it came up and bite them in the rear least there is hope for some.

This is what we are pointing out about dairy farmers ,even from other parts of the world! They all cry broke and want governments to save them, if it was so bad as he tries to portray ,where are all the farms that are bankrupt ? Instead this is more save us ,just like all the dairy farmers do here ,mean while they all are millionaires!! Their are all types of people that cannot even afford to buy milk for their families !! This is the kind of bullshit that they bring forth to save us or else this will be the outcome !! GROW UP !! You all should go work for $ 10.50 a hour and see if after you pay all your expenses you can buy all the dairy products you would like !! That is reality here in Canada under supply management ,then cross the border with the same amount of money and see how much dairy products you can buy for your family!! Like I said ,I had all kinds of dairy farmers producing milk at 20 to 30 dollars a hundred and they were making money !! Why you ask ,because they did not have to buy quota to produce it !! END of argument ,you loose ,now wait till all Canadian families can buy at U.S.A. PRICES then we will see how well they will support dairy farmers in Canada at your god given price !! Regards, Bill Denby

You keep saying that after SM is gone prices will drop, we tried this with beef during BSE and until farmers sold beef out of the back of trucks in the grocery store parking lot, beef didn't drop in the store, even if we were getting bills for sending cull cows to the action barn instead of a check. It IS NOT the job of farmers to produce food for the poorest people in society and loose money doing it, just like the market doesn't care about cost of production to quote one of the frequent posters on here, the market also doesn't care if some people can't afford to buy, as long as the market can find buyers for what it has produced it is happy. In the food market in Canada with 1 or 2 major processors for each commodity and highly perishable food products that require processing before selling, not having a SM type system is not going to allow the farmers to be very successful.

John Gillespie

Mr. Denby's claims that oodles of Ontario farmers were/are prepared to sell milk at world prices, would seem to fit well with DFO stats which showed, in late 2010, that the Ontario farm gate price of milk was within pennies per liter of the US retail price, thereby giving the fairly-clear inference that the farm-gate price of milk under supply management is out-of-touch with reality in both the US, and in Canada.

Secondly, while Mr. Gillespie raises the observation that retail beef prices were sticky downward during the BSE crisis, this retail price inelasticity arguably had more to do with the cross-elasticity of demand for beef when compared to the price of pork than the actual supply/demand equation for beef by itself.

Therefore, it is not-all-that relevant, or meaningful, to compare retail price responses of a product with a strong cross-elasticity of demand, like beef, with retail price responses of a product with little cross-elasticity of demand, like milk.

The broader lesson is, therefore, that it is not all that relevant, or meaningful, to use so-called "lessons" from BSE and beef here, and the end of supply management in Australia, to affix inevitabilities to dairy farming after supply management ends.

It is clear that lessons from a product (beef) with a high degree of cross-elasticity of demand, aren't really all that applicable to a product (milk) which doesn't. It's also clear that lessons from the end of supply management in Australia don't factor any growth in export demand once the barriers to exports ended with the end of their supply management system. More to the point, Canadian dairy farmers never seem to get the point that somebody, whether it is Saputo, or somebody else, is going to ship milk from Australia, not from Canada, to China.

The only way to evaluate, and compare, the end of supply management in Australia, and the possible comparisons to Canada, is to evaluate the whole cost/volume/profit equation, which, in Australia, includes the possibility of exports to China at the expense of Canadian dairy farmers.

Or, in other words, when Canadian dairy farmers evoke the Australian experience in an attempt to save supply management here, they take only the short term view, and ignore the far-more relevant long-term growth potential.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

When Australia deregulated their dairy industry they failed to take in one major factor,Droughts! The Country is headed for another one, they will be fortunate to meet their own domestic markets let alone export to China.

As in all things, follow the money. Saputo can't meet the increasing primary demand for dairy products in China from Canadian sources, thanks entirely to the no-export policies dictated by supply management, so, like any well-run business, it goes somewhere where it can.

That's why, by now, Saputo has more plants outside Canada, than within, and that trend is, as long as supply management exists, the way Saputo is going to expand.

In addition, if Saputo believed that Australian drought was going to affect them to the same extent that Russian winters affected Napoleon and Hitler, they wouldn't now be in a bidding war for the plant they want to buy in Australia to act as a spring-board to enter the Chinese market for dairy products.

The really dumb thing on the part of the Canadian dairy industry is the extent to which they will grasp at straws like Australia's fickle weather, rather than admit that by the time the TPP trade talks conclude, Saputo, and companies like them, will have a sound base outside Canada to meet increasing primary demand in Asia, and won't need to rely as much on Canadian milk to meet that demand as they might if they hadn't already invested in Australia.

A rather-ironic "icing on the cake" would be if Saputo, after the end of supply management as a condition of approval of the TPP talks, were able to bring dairy products from a plant in Australia, and sell it here for enough less money that nobody would want to buy any dairy products in the US.

It would serve our dairy farmers right for being so doctrinaire and unrealistic about the world beyond their farm gate, not to mention being so patronizing, and so-dismissive, to Canadian consumers for over 40 years.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

Saputo should be looked at as a Supply Management success story,without SM they would probably been gobbled up by some US processor years ago.

Australia and its close proximity to Asian markets makes it a good investment opportunity for Saputo but l am sure New Zealand and its stable climate would have been preferred.Fonterra and its monopoly in NZ dairy made that impossible.

I guess one has to wonder why a share in the Dairy Processing plant is for sale in the first place and why fonterra wasn't involved? Like l have said before,Australia is a great springboard to Asian markets but the Dairy Industry can't be taking a 10-20% drop in production with every 5 or 6 year occurring drought.With protectionist policies and export subsidies in the US and EU the Asian market is all the Australian dairy farmers have! You can't afford to have highs and lows with export contracts.

Why would they not find other countries to enter and expand in, out there is a big world and the more places you can get your business in the more chance of profit. Why do you think Walmart and other retail and other business get their foot in the door , because they can make to much money in the US or Canada. Why is China Buying land up all over the world so they can flood Canada with milk when the quota is done with, I bet you believe that. Land in Canada is so plentiful and rich, they can likely supply the rest of the world in SM products and feed ourselves. Saputo can build all its plants here and get its milk from us to supply the world, sounds great. If all I can read about is a couple of people so bent on hate towards a group of people I think its time they start putting time limits on a subject, and get on with another subject (Boring) . Well it just like the series I seen on Hitler the people didn,t like his ideas at the first but after 10 years of teaching them he finely got enough people to agree and the rest is really Bad History.

Did you ever think that maybe they would build where the population is or closer to it . Transportation is not free .

Look at the people that can,t afford to pay the hydro bills or gas for their heat or car , look at what the CEO of the hydro makes or the workers and all you can come up with is the poor people cannot afford to buy a bag of milk. How can they go across the border to buy their hydro or oil to heat their home. Don,t you think its about time you quit the BS about SM farmers and start fighting for cheaper hydro and oil to heat their home, they won,t died from missing a glass of milk or an egg every day compared to going without the hydro or the oil to heat their home. The farmers that sold milk on contract likely had enough money from their quota milk to pay everything and the other milk was icing on the cake.

We started over 50 new farm families that never milked a cow before ,but where the best dam milk producers in the province till they caught shut down !!That is why I am so pissed off at supply management farmers ,these farmers borrowed all their money to build an export only system and got screwed by farmers like you !! They took a chance because it was the only way that they could get into the dairy industry and I fought like hell for them and also got shut down buy .D.F.O. !! YOU SHOULD GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT , I am tired of SMF thinking every body owes them something !! Regards ,Bill Denby C/O

When, in late 2010, the Dairy Farmers of Ontario released information showing that Ontario consumers were paying almost 38% more for milk than US consumers, and that the farm gate price of milk in Ontario was within pennies per liter of the US retail price, why would anyone need to look any further to be able to determine that Ontario consumers are being gouged, and that the chief culprits are dairy farmers?

I mean, really, is this sort of thing coming from DFO "unsubstantiated" or "hypothetical"?

Furthermore, are those great many Canadian consumers who regularly flock to US stores to buy dairy and poultry products "hypothetical"?

Is Montreal-based dairy processor, Saputo, "unsubstantiated" or "hypothetical" for realizing they can't get access to the Chinese market from Canada because of supply management, and propose to buy a dairy processing plant in Australia to do the same thing, thereby benefiting Australian dairy farmers at the considerable expense of hide-bound protectionist dairy farmers in Canada?

Is Ryan Parker, an appraiser with Valco Consultants in London, "unsubstantiated" or "hypothetical" when he frequently points out that the chief driver of land prices in Oxford, Perth, and Huron counties is supply management, thereby, in effect, freezing almost every other type of farmer out of the market?

Is every economist for the past 150 years "hypothetical" for opposing tariff-based systems because they are net-negative for jobs and economic activity?

More to the point, who is being more-hypothetical - dairy farmers for cherry-picking arguments from half-way around the world, or non-supply managed farmers under the age of 40 who know, because they deal with it every day, the chief obstacle to success is supply management?

People with legislated entitlements, and that includes supply managed farmers, will always go to incredible lengths, and use incredibly-preposterous arguments to defend that entitlement.

Unfortunately, none of this will do any good because if government doesn't start to dismantle supply management now, the next generation of farmers will, as soon as they get the baby-boomer generation into nursing homes.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

MY family did not need supply management, all the rest of you do because you people are afraid to compete in the real world !! Just look how you all behave and run to the government to protect you all !! From what ,each other, Iused to laugh at all you dairy farmers calling wanting contracts to produce milk for export at 20 to 30 cents a litre and then want the public here to pay you 80 to 85 cents a litre !! Do you all know how silly that made you all look !! Now here you all are again and if their was a export market opportunity tomorrow ,you all would want in !!What I learned from that is that dairy farmers in general are greedy and self centred people ,that like to tramp on the rest of agricultural community and take what ever they can !! Regards, Bill Denby , P.S. thank god I am not a Ontario dairy farmer !!

MY family did not need supply management, all the rest of you do because you people are afraid to compete in the real world !! Just look how you all behave and run to the government to protect you all !! From what ,each other, Iused to laugh at all you dairy farmers calling wanting contracts to produce milk for export at 20 to 30 cents a litre and then want the public here to pay you 80 to 85 cents a litre !! Do you all know how silly that made you all look !! Now here you all are again and if their was a export market opportunity tomorrow ,you all would want in !!What I learned from that is that dairy farmers in general are greedy and self centred people ,that like to tramp on the rest of agricultural community and take what ever they can !! Regards, Bill Denby , P.S. thank god I am not a Ontario dairy farmer !!

Mr. Thomson,
I don't know you and, unlike you, am not going to make any presumptuous or unfair assumptions about your personal character due to your profession. It's easy to pull isolated incidents and statistics out of context and use them for one's own personal agenda. What I'd like you to consider is this: Whether or not you think supply-management is "a system that so-completely distorts reality, and which so-completely abuses consumers, processors and other farmers" is irrelevant. Ultimately, if the public wants a cheap, inferior product with questionable content and doesn't care about animal welfare or supporting our own national economy, than the American system of milk production is definitely the way to go. Perhaps this is where we as dairy farmers have failed. An uneducated public doesn't understand the benefits of our current system and so the alternative could seem appealing. And this is where we, as quota-holding farmers need to step up to the plate and let our consumers, and the general public, know that we are not just a bunch 'out-of-touch' individuals full of 'gall and willful blindness', seeking to 'distort reality...and abuse our consumers, processors and other farmers'. In fact, when I think of the hard-working, loyal, conscientious, community-minded and sincere individuals and families that make up our industry I'm hard-pressed to think of who you're pointing your finger at? Thanks for the challenge! Our industry needs to know that, as crazy as it seems, there's people like you out there thinking things like this.
All the best,
Peter Koobs

Supply management benefits nobody but existing quota owners, never has, and never will. I get really tired of listening to dairy farmers "wrap themselves in the flag", especially those who import things like bale wrap directly from European suppliers, and care not a whit about either their local dealers, or even domestic manufacturers.

In addition, I get angry at dairy farmers who seem to think they corner the market when it comes to "hard-working, loyal, conscientious, community-minded and sincere individuals and families" - that is complete hogwash, and is completely patronizing to every hard-working farmer who doesn't milk cows.

If, to use just one example, dairy farmers had one scintilla of conscience, they'd willingly forgo the 200% tariff barriers which simultaneously screw consumers, processors, and non-supply managed farmers.

And, with respect, I talk to non-supply managed farmers under the age of 40, all the time - and it's obvious you don't, because the overwhelming sentiment in that generation is that supply management has definitely not well-liked, and will not be missed precisely because of the way it allows supply managed farmers to be financial bullies in the farm community.

Incomprehensibly, the biggest mistake you, and the entire dairy industry continue to make, is to underestimate the intelligence of what you deem to be "an uneducated public". Any time a producer and/or a producer group, believes their customers to be, even after 40 years of continuous propaganda, "uneducated", this is an industry long-overdue to fail because of their own arrogance.

Finally, in a way it's good to see comments like yours, because they do nothing but stiffen the resolve of non-supply managed farmers to do whatever they can to prevent any sort of quota buyout when, not if, supply management collapses.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

I guess if a person wants to resign it,s up to them and if they want to give a reason it,s up to them? When it The board made some bad moves in the last decade , but hey they were elected and its up to the farmers to speak up if they feel their lively hood is being railroaded. But if you are elected and the going to resign you owe it to the ones who voted you in or not , to give them a reason why at the very least.

Hey Bill - could you use "rumour has it" any more often? Do you actually have any facts you could use? Having to step down from DFC because Versteeg is no longer a DFO board member is hardly the same as "has to jump ship". Better Farming - does that post not count as unsubstantiated???

That is like you ,who ever you are printing little remarks from behind the no name postings protecting DFO TROOPS FROM THE TRUTH!! YOUR JOB ,OR DO YOU NEED ONE, should be helping your fellow dairy farmer sell out quick to beat the rest of them !! Why don't you show all the readers who you are and print your name or call me 705-340-5309 !! Regards ,Bill Denby c/o IMPORTER AND EXPORTER

If you can't sign your name your post should not be printed. Too many have there own agenda with twisted facts-kg kimball

How is milk to expensive? Have u checked how much a bottle of water is? And the pump that straight out of the ground!!!

You comment might make sense when only quota owners can sell water and when there are 200% tariff barriers on the import of bottled water.

The point is that the price of milk is held artificially high for the sole benefit of existing owners of dairy quota, and nobody else.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON


Dear Bill ..... wow how times have changed since you have been a farmer..... I read your comments and makes me smile and laugh. Also if everyone take note that bill no longer farms! Can you please inform everyone why that may be! You are a very intelligent man Bill , and if you put all that energy once upon a time and worked with the board, I believe we could have made some real progress! But you I'm not sure just what happened to you and your family farms? Please expand and tell everyone! Wishing you the best of luck Bill! Oh yes one last point my dad and myself really miss your old daily calls...... and court threats! So you have a nice day Michael Sims

You could have dealt with the issues rather than assassinate the character of the messenger. Unfortunately, it's this type of smugness and arrogance which, over time, has made supply management widely-disliked in the farm community.

We need to get rid of supply management, if for no other reason, than to deflate the stuffed shirts, and overblown egos, of those in it.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

Stephen.... I'm just telling people the way it is! If you noticed I did compliment the man. Maybe you need to do some fact finding on him! I respect agree/disagree with your points! Have a nice day . Michael Sims

My theory on why people who support supply management don't sign their names and mostly don't bother posting is because the sm bashers are mostly but not all bullies. This has all been discussed here actually. Bullies give themselves away by things like posting in all caps when asked not to. They use debating tactics that have been well documented as not leading to fair and open discussion. SM supporters are hard working lawabiding people. Why subject yourself to personal abuse. I can only imagine the reason a bully would want someones name so badly.

While the above posting decries so-called "bullying" by anti-supply management individuals, the poster seems to see nothing wrong with the obvious fact that supply management allows dairy and poultry farmers the exclusive right, because of 200% tariff barriers, to be financial bullies in the farm community.

Indeed, which is the bigger crime? - to hide behind legislation allowing you to be financial bullies, or to use strong language to object to what allows dairy and poultry farmers to be financial bullies?

Almost as bad as being the pot calling the kettle black when it comes to who is the bigger bully, supply management supporters seem to have this innate ability to infuriate people by invoking the mantra that they are "hard working and law-abiding", as if to imply that if you're not a supply management supporter, you are somehow lazy and/or not law-abiding.

There's a truism that when you have nothing else to defend your position, wrap yourself in the flag, declare yourself to be a law-abiding patriot, and imply that anyone who doesn't share your narrow opinion is somehow less of an up-standing citizen - and that approach, and/or mindset, seems to be the basis of every pro-supply management posting on this site of late. Tragic!

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

Lots of posts here from you Stephen telling us what's wrong with sm and what's wrong with farming and farmers in Ont. It's easy to criticize.
How about giving us your vision of Ontario agriculture in the future? How do you see it working?
Which sectors of Ontario agriculture do you think are doing things right?

That's funny. You don't expect a detailed response do you? Too easy to criticize.

Hogs are doing well, and will continue to do well, even though we don't have a double-shift packing plant in the province.

The big problem is that supply management has such a huge advantage when it comes to incomes and purchasing power that an entire generation faces the strong possibility of being effectively shut out of primary agriculture.

The simple answer is to level the playing field by eliminating the structural advantage enjoyed by supply management for far-too long, and we'll see agriculture blossom like we haven't seen for decades.

However, as long as so many continue to believe not only is there nothing wrong with supply management, but also that there could never be anything wrong with it, the next generation will chafe and curse the day supply management was implemented.

More to the point, why not just ask any non-supply managed farmer under the age of 40? - this generation of farmers tells me all the time that not only am I completely correct in my assessment of the damage caused by supply management, but also that, if anything, I don't go far enough.

It's not me anyone has to worry about - I'm too old to matter, it's the next generation which has no use for supply management, and can't wait to get rid of it.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

Hogs will only continue to do well till the next crash which probably won't be too long. The cycle for hogs is constantly up and down and I know that better than you do. Anyone in the industry knows that. Stick to your sm bashing, since that's what your best at.

So to be successful, ag in Ontario needs to model itself after the hog industry? That's your vision? That's your idea of success?

To be or not to be is not the question . When is the hog industry going to get it's next buy out and support check and how soon is the real question ?

I can see the price of farm land going up Up UP with the hog cash cow . Hog farmers will just blame SM though .

He's kidding! I'm surprised he didn't say the pigeon business just to mess with us.
Nobody who is familiar with the hog industry would suggest it's a model for anything other than taxpayer bailouts, bankruptcy, animal welfare issues and the loss of 10s of thousands of producers.

You could all save yourselves a lot of effort by looking up troll definition on Google. No it doesn't include the name Stephen Thompson but you will recognize the type of answer he gives here about the hog industry.

In the rush to crucify me, nobody seems to want to admit that supply management pits farmers against one another, along both generational and sectoral lines, and it is slowly, but surely, turning primary agriculture, at least in Ontario, into an rural aristocacy where some farmers are protected by 200% tariff barriers, while most are not.

This division, and divisiveness in the farm community, is not sustainable, and will only come to grief. Too many farmers are so-enamoured of what they believe to be the strengths of this rural aristocracy, and the protectionist legislation which created it, that they have become blind to its many, and rapidly-increasing, flaws.

I've pointed out before that we owe it to the next generation of farmers to level the playing field for them, before they, quite-understandably, get angry enough to do it in a way which will definitely not treat our aristocratic quota-holders well. I once read that support for supply management in the farm community is dying, one funeral at a time, and I believe that to be a fairly-accurate depiction of where supply management is headed, if it doesn't get well-deservedly beheaded first.

I get enough private e-mails on this subject, especially from younger farmers, to know I'm completely correct, and then some - BTW, the messages I receive always heap abuse on those who would denigrate me, and my always-signed postings, by anonymously claiming I am "trolling" or some other insidious activity, when all I am doing, is reporting on what I am reading, and making fairly-obvious, and fairly-rational predictions based on what others are telling me.

The thing most-shocking to me, and also the thing supply management supporters simply refuse to understand, is the ever-increasing extent to which supply management is becoming detested, even in/especially in, the farm community itself.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

I really have come to believe what someone else suggested on here, that Better Farming has you on their staff just to keep these forums going.
Your theory of rural aristocracy is nothing more than jealousy of ones better off farm neighbour, which has been going on far before Supply management ever came along.
Over the years we have envied the guy with the new seed drill,the shiny new pickup,the guy on the block with a tractor with cab! I even remember the first farmer on the road that had the nerve to own 2 farms (300 acres) and he was NOT a Supply Management farmer! The only thing we detested was when he spread that liquid manure but even that we understood as being part of farming.The Hostility toward SM farmers only exists in your mind alone

Yes you do see this from a few people ? The youth would like to farm and can they get the farm for free, that is very unlikely unless they work at another job to make enough money to buy one. The land is getting used up in buildings, roads ,etc. and the population is growing like crazy so naturally the land will go up. Well if SM is so detested it will one day run its course and be done , until that happens we have it and its getting really sad reading from Hate Mongers on the subject ( Period) every day. Look at the other things in life of Agri. that can help the youth or other people farming .

Stephen if someone you know told you he was going to take their young son out to a mountain tomorrow and stab them to death because God told him to, would you admire his religious commitment or call the authorities? In earlier posts you say God and the bible are against supply management but these same two religious sources of yours endorse lunatic behaviour like the guy with the son. Not trying to "crucify" you but don't you think it's a bit of a stretch to suggest that sm offends religious principles?

It has never been easy to get started in farming . Back when I was young it was just the same . Putting bids on different farms to get beat out by other farmers whose parents had hog operations , teachers and other rich city folk .
When I finally did buy my first farm from dad I had to pay fair market value in a market which at the time was being driven higher by hog farmers because they were riding a wave of endless profits . So I am not sure that blaming Sm and solely Sm makes any sense .

I think I have read about enough here to make me gag or at least puke in my mouth .

One last question . Since you claim others are wanting to crucify you , are you looking for a cross ? If so I am sure some one some where will be willing to "supply" one for you .

Signed non sm farmer

There has never been a time when it was so hard for anyone to get into farming/buy their first farm. The biggest impediment to the younger generation are those that were lucky enough to have had the opportunity years ago that they deny the younger generation now.
While some will moan and groan about high interest rates of years ago, that was nothing compared to the ridiculously high cost of land now...driven by government programs such as ethanol, but mainly the government tariffs to protect SM. Any young non SM farmer will tell you that...and it is absolutely true!

Now how can a young farmer afford to buy the SM farm from even his parents , they have to have money to retire on and I sure bet you that they are going to hand it over and see them sell it a couple of years down the rod and retire from it. I seen farm that the kids didn,t have to pay for it and sold out in no time and ones that paid a fair price for it and is still farming today. Another thing if the kids are still on the farm with the parents chances are the farm is still in the parents name and they control everything including the money. Some people may be gullible enough to believe that the parents just hand it over to them , I got a chunk of land in the middle of the ocean for sale.

One feed salesman compared Hog prices over the years to a graph of Christmas trees all in a row.I believe in the Pork/Hog industry they call it "cleansing" followed by a recovery period only to go back to cleansing again,its hardly the scenerio you want to leave to ones children.
The banks and feedmills aren't real fond of of either!

I was out in my non sm barn feeding my non sm sows (not resenting my sm neighbours) thinking how does anyone who knows anything about agriculture in ontario make a comment like this. All I can come up with is better farming has to be paying him to make these comments. With out his constant sm bashing there probably wouldn't be many people looking at the site very often.
If you teach economics at u of g I am begging you not to teach my son that the hog industry is what ontario agricultre should be modeled after.

Probably one of the biggest reasons there is no double shift plant is instability in the hog industry. In other words a failure to manage supply over any period of time.

Comment removed by editor in accordance with our guidelines.

Confrontational,l don't take the Supply management bashers to serious because the odds are they have the same attitude towards a multitude of other issues and organizations,the Internet forums just gives them a larger venue for their rants.
I had a neighbour that loved to confront the Hydro meter reader every time they drove in, as if that person had control over his Hydro bill? Then he complained about the smart meters, l suspect he just missed his rants with the meter reader,albeit they were always one-sided.

With all these trade talks all provinces need to get their ass ingear and come up with a p10 agreement ASAP. Our supply management would look a hell of a lot stronger if all canadian producers stand behind one system of policies and marketing. This would make us allow us to defend our great supply management system so much better. To me, today our system looks like a mess, good management on the boards should be able to change that if they really have a passion for supply management.

Why should a name be required ? Maybe so some people could go into gang smashing mode. Does printing your name make your words more saintly and trustworthy , or is the fact that a name sign makes the signer right and honest working person. Its all come down to sign and make the words true ( got to work for the government ) laugh of the day.

It is nice to see old friends posting things from the past ,it seems that you can sell the farms but you cannot take the farm out of your live !! Well Mike I remember when you and your father shipped a lot of export milk though us and even went as far to sell all your quota to be a export milk shipper only!! Then when things started to go sideways on us ,your father bought all his quota back and then fought to shut it down for the ones that were truly committed to the export trade !! If you must know I own a number of businesses and get to travel to different parts of the world !! check out or or just call the office 705-340-5309 I was always told their is life after FARMING now I live it !! Regards, Bill Denby thanks Mike How Is farming ?? HAS NOT CHANGE MUCH SINCE I LEFT !!

Yes we did sell a lot of export milk bill . But a no time did we sell any quota Fact! Since the export days we have bought more quota and carried on! So when are you introducing a new milk export program for ont farmers ?

We will just bring in dairy lines from the U.S.A. ,better quality and price for the public !! It is coming in every day in small amounts ,wait for the larger ones to start in coming months at a grocery store near you !! hey Mike ,I guess I shouldn't told all your fellow dairy farmers you where export milk shippers only ,I still have all my records and list of dairy farmers that supplied export milk ,don't worry so did your neighbours !! Regards, Bill Denby

Stephen Thompson I don't know if you are a farmer or what type of farmer you are but if there is a way to help other primary producers get a stronger negotiating position with buyers and thus a greater % of the consumer $, I support it 100%. Perhaps instead of bringing the dairy industry down, you can focus on elevating your own industry.

To be honest, I have a hard time believing that you are a farmer. Farmers don't wish lower prices upon their fellow farmers because they know the knowledge/skill/workload/risk/wisdom/resilience.... etc. it takes to run a farm.

Please, please lets not get in a race to the bottom. If you have vendetta(s) with certain dairy farmers, I understand that but I resent being painted with the same brush.

One of the most basic principles of economics is that the economy and society both benefit when protectionist priveleges are taken away from the favoured few - that, by definition, means that supply management is always net-negative, and an inefficient way to transfer wealth from relatively-poor consumers to a relatively-few rich farmers.

In other words, even though dairy farmers, and/or anyone else who enjoys legislated priveleges, constantly claim that you can't bring people up by bringing others down, that is exactly what the lessons of economics have taught us we must do.

It's always interesting to see those who, simply because they may have been born with quota under their pillow, are so-quick to invoke the "race to the bottom' mantra, even though they care not one iota that their farm gate price gouging policies drive consumers to their own "bottom", or alternatively drive them across the border to shop.

What is it about deliberately screwing consumers, driving companies like Chobani right out of the country, and being financial bullies in the farm community, that supply managed farmers refuse to understand?

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

It baffles me that someone can be so angry at all dairy farmers. Stephen, perhaps you could share your story with us. Has a neighbor rubbed you the wrong way? Did a dairy farmer outbid you on a piece of land? I have friends in both pork and crop production that have done very well in their professions. They do mention that they believe quota holders have helped play a role in pushing up land prices but they still continue to grow their operations in spite of this. Do you want to dairy but don't have the opportunity? How about looking into the New Entrant's Program?
Everyone has an agenda when you are debating a point. I understand Bill's agenda. He is angry about the past. You seem be concerned about our consumer and that's good! We dairy farmers must learn to do a better job of that. You mention in a lot of your posts that dairy has negatively impacted other farmers. Can you share more about that? Do you have specific examples or a personal experience? Perhaps this is where you're at. What is it you would stand to gain if quota were to be done away with? I realize the dairy industry and its' members aren't perfect but I also don't think all of us are the evil villains you have us made out to be.
Peter Koobs

are you ready for the onslaught!!!

I'm too old to care much about myself, but I do care about the horrifying divisions supply management has caused between generations. I have a lot of under-40 non supply managed farmers as tax clients, and they detest supply management with a passion because they've never known anything but the unequal division of incomes and purchasing power supply management gives to dairy and poultry farmers.

And, I'm sorry, but there's no way you could not see that the unequal incomes and purchasing power generated by supply management are increasingly turning our farm community into a powder-keg of resentment which is eventually either going to explode, or get quite-nasty.

Furthermore, I've done the numbers on the New Entrant Program, and it's little more than a legitimized Ponzi scheme because of the after-tax cash flow issues in the last half of the program.

More to the point, any dairy farmer who thinks they're going to get a quota buyout is going to get a LOT of resistance from the non-supply managed sector of agriculture.

Finally, I wouldn't gain anything from the elimination of quota except for the satisfaction of seeing a level playing field for all farmers - the next generation deserves it, and we have a responsibility to give it to them.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

I would think that the pork industry will be behind a buy out full heartedly because they will want yet another in the near future .

So many anonymous posters are so quick to point fingers at the pork industry yet the supply management sector has been on a continuous buy out program from consumers known as price fixing since its inception, 365 days of the year, for the last forty years. If supply management is not a form of government support, then take it away. Raube Beuerman

Suck it up sunshine . The truth hurts when it comes from a non SM farmer . Pork has been living on gov hand outs for years . You can't deny that true fact . So why wouldn't you support a buy out that your industry asked for and got ? Why would you not agree that some one else deserves the same ? You can't disagree !

Then just bring in the amount of money that Pork spent on countervail that they were told was going to happen time and time again .

Why is not o.k. for the SM producers to support their own industry when Pork has been doing the same ? I guess we now know which end of the pig the mouth is at !

Almost all farmers, Canadian and/or American, demand so much government support in whatever form. I am stating that while supply managed farmers always like to wag their finger at other sectors of agriculture recieving taxpayer bailout and/or government support, they always seem to forget that they also are always on gov support, and have always been, while pork farmers have had many years where they recieved little or no support at all, which is something the sm sector can not say. Also, the price support that the sm does recieve from consumers thanks to tariffs, ends up as dead money in the form of quota. Raube Beuerman

There's a reason why the Directors of Ontario Pork voted 68 - 13 at their annual meeting in early 2013 to "urge government to place trade ahead of protectionism" - and the reasons can easily be seen by how quickly supply management points all sorts of accusatory fingers at the pork sector in an attempt to portray the pork sector as being even bigger leeches than supply management.

I mean, really, if the best reason dairy and poultry farmers can proffer to defend supply management is that subsidies to pork farmers are even worse, then things have deteriorated to arguing about who is the "least-worst", and that serves nobody well.

The above posting demonstrates exactly why there is no love lost between the pork sector and supply management, and given that there are now less than 4,000 dairy farms left in Ontario, ultra-pampered dairy farmers need to be a lot more cautious about whose toes they so-deliberately step on - but they won't. Too bad for them!

Furthermore, even though supply managment piously spouts the mantra that "we're all in it together", supply managed farmers seem to be the first to want to step on the fingers of anyone below them on the "ladder" - just another reason why supply management is not well-liked, and will not be missed.

This type of inter-sectoral acrimony is only going to get worse, and won't end, nor should it, until supply management is dead, dead, dead.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

Are you so thick between the ears to not know that getting your dollars from the market place is far and away better than pionting fingers at those who do because you are jealous ?
Lord help you .

It is fiction, and a fallacy, to claim that supply managed farmers get their enhanced incomes from the marketplace - while it is true in only the narrowest possible sense, supply managed farmers derive their extra incomes because of 200% tariff barriers imposed by legislation, and which allows them to distort the marketplace for their own benefit.

Therefore, it is, at best, a half-truth to claim supply management derives its income from the marketplace, because without legislation, the marketplace wouldn't exist. Unfortunately, supply managed farmers have become quite-adept at distorting basic economic principles for their benefit, and this sort of mis-representation needs to stop because while old-timers might believe this nonsense, younger, and better-educated farmers, do not, and never will.

There is a fundamental difference between incomes earned because of legislated entitlement, and incomes earned because of underlying economic fundamentals.

While I'm not too sure that the Lord is going to help me, I do remember that Jesus objected to the supply-management practices used by the money-changers in the temple, by overturning their tables - I suggest, quite seriously, that if we were in Biblical times, he'd have the same view of supply management.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

More like pork price has nothing to do with the market place price since they always are ready to have their hand out looking for yet another payment from the Gov . Price means nothing when you just have to cry a little and get another cheque .

I mean really now how can you honestly say that gov support is a market place ? If it is then lets get the support equal to and the same way the USA supports it's livestock . Through their grain support programs !

If we were in biblical times you would have been cast out a long time ago . You are just lucky that HE forgives all . Even economist's for their mistakes !

Are you serious? Linking Jesus to SM? Really?

"And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves, And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves."
—Matthew 21:12–13

When Jews came to Jerusalem to pay their Temple tax, they could only pay it with a special coin, the half-shekel. This was a half-ounce of pure silver, about the size of a quarter. It was the only coin at that time which was pure silver and of assured weight, without the image of a pagan Emperor, and therefore to the Jews it was the only coin acceptable to God.

Unfortunately these coins were not plentiful, the money changers had cornered the market on them, and so they raised the price of them to whatever the market could bear. They used their monopoly they had on these coins to make exorbitant profits, forcing the Jews to pay whatever these money changers demanded.

Jesus threw the money changers out as their monopoly on these coins totally violated the sanctity of God's house. These money changers called for his death days later.

Some one really needs to make a visit to a church and remember the second commandment, "Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself"

In your own cited reference, "the money changers had cornered the market on them (the special coins) and so they raised the price of them to whatever the market could bear. They (the money changers) used their monopoly they had on these coins to make exorbitant profits, forcing the Jews to pay whatever these money changers demanded"

As I see it, this reference supports my case entirely, in that the money changers were doing to Jewish worshipers exactly what supply managed farmers are doing to Canadian consumers. In addition, by controlling the supply, and the farm gate price of milk, supply managed farmers are very-much a modern-day "den of thieves".

More to the point, how could anyone not see that my comparison of supply managed farmers to biblical-era money changers in the temple, is accurate, fair, and entirely appropriate?

Finally, if supply managed farmers had any concept of the second commandment, they wouldn't be so eager to hide behind 200% tariff barriers which serve only to gouge consumers. It's really too bad that supply management, by definition, violates the second commandment.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

Wow are you for real? One, you can,t even look at the price of hydro , heating oil or gas and the price of gas for their car which they need for everyday survival which is forced to pay for . Two, You don,t need the SM produce to survive on go Vegan. Three, if you want some of the SM products buy some when on sale and it is a reasonably price when it is on sale. Four, don,t bring religion in on the SM debate because not every consumer has a religion, so it doesn,t pertain to everyone.

Let's define this bible you are quoting. Isn't really a manual that sets out rules for living according to a series of beliefs?
Isn't it possible that many populations live equally happy and productive lives without subscribing to this particular set of beliefs.
Why does it matter what the bible says about supply management?

I used the biblical reference because some anonymous poster wrote, in response to me, something to the effect that "may god help you", and I decided to respond in kind, as was entirely appropriate for me, or anyone else in my position, to have done. Or, to look at another way, anytime somebody seems to think God is on his/her side, I have an obligation to point out the flaws in his/her logic.

Too many farmers, and especially too many supply managed farmers, have the ability to overlook the damage they are doing to consumers and even to their fellow farmers, by wrapping themselves in the belief that it is entirely appropriate to do so, because, in their minds, farmers are inherently endowed with more of their share of saintly virtues - it's called "agricultural fundamentalism".

Farmers, especially supply managed farmers, generally detest being shown that they are no better than biblical rogues and/or members of a modern-day den of thieves - and they always seem to go "over the top" in their responses to what is the unvarnished, and apparently-unpalatable, truth about how we farmers see ourselves.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

You have many times on this forum made reference to the Good Book in trying to make yourself and others believe you a

The Bible is a guide . The only two things that are absolute in life are death and taxes .

Unsigned comment modified by editor

There are three eternal verities in life - death, taxes, and anonymous dairy farmers ignoring both common sense and biblical teachings, by calling for protectionist legislation which benefits them, and no-one else.

I'm not wrong.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

According to your standards you forgot one . Economists !!

Why single out the second commandment. The book you are quoting from has countless rules. People argue about what the rules mean. In fact the rules sometimes contradict each other--just like farmers.

Hard to get this one past the OSPCA.

“And Samson went and caught three hundred foxes, and took firebrands, and turned tail to tail, and put a firebrand in the midst between two tails. And when he had set the brands on fire, he let them go into the standing corn of the Philistines” (Judges 15:4-5).

Ahhh but I fear you have contempt in your heart and have not turned the other check for the wrong you begat from the SM managed land buyers. For without forgiveness in your heart you poison your soul and will find no peace.

The only contempt felt by anyone in this matter, is the contempt supply managed farmers have for consumers, and their fellow farmers.

I'm not the problem - I'm merely identifying the problem which is the elitist and aristocratic attitudes of supply managed farmers who sneer at consumers, and who taunt non-supply managed farmers for "not seeing the light".

And, while the above posting tries to coast on any number of turn-the-other cheek platitudes, it's not the way to deal with a bully, which is what supply management most-definitely is.

the best way to deal with a bully, is to pound him/her so far into the ground they have to dig uphill for three days to find sunlight - then you can forgive them because they won't re-offend.

Turning the other cheek solves nothing, never did, and never will.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church" (1 Corinthians 14:34-35).

Now people will bring Religion in on the SM topic , WOW must be a banging a different drum to get people to listen. Maybe its the water or whats in the water that makes a few people resort to using anything to try and get a point across , doesn,t matter if its right or wrong. Look at the Hydro and Heating oil ,Propane and gas how it affects the whole population not just a SM eater ( which by the way is not the whole population). Let the people young and old sit in there house at night with no heat or hydro and say well there,s no more SM farmers you can now have your egg and glass of milk , get real.

Thanks for bringing religion into the supply management debate Stephen. Like it or not both are imperfect belief systems. At their best there are plenty of benefits. At their worst people suffer. We can live without either one. It's just a question of what you choose to believe in.

Some believe in working together, others in unrestrained capitalism.
Both sides seek ways to prove they are right.

If you can't get something as simple as a bible interpretation right, what else are you so misguided about? Supply management?

Give a book to a thousand people and you will come up with 100,s of way the book is interpret , why do you think there is so many religions and wars over it. It has nothing to do with SM and if it does you better go to class and learn how to read.

I think that everyone can see that this discussion has run its course. We all can see that the lines are drawn, but this is not the battle that we need to fight. We dairy guys need to stop putting energy into justifying ourselves to the politicians. The questions is "Do we have something to offer the consumer?" "Why should they be willing to pay for a litre of milk what they do?" People will buy Coke Classic for .70 more a bottle when PC Cola is right beside. We are the Coke Classic. We just need the consumer to understand this. Without the consumer on our side we will loose. The consumer holds the politicians future in their hand. We need to reach out to them. That is the bottom line.
There is nothing to gain by cutting up or fellow farmer or justifying ourselves by pointing our fingers at our neighbors. Our communities have already been ripped apart by our provinces energy policy.
Peter Koobs

Mr. Koobs is trying to divert attention away from the obvious fact that the dairy industry is the guilty party in this tragedy - and, contrary to what he contends, there is absolutely everything to gain by cutting up our fellow farmers when they are allowed to be financial bullies in the farm community simply because they have exclusive rights to the income and purchasing power derived from 200% tariff barriers.

We owe it to ourselves to point fingers at those who, like the dairy industry, so-willingly, and so-eagerly, take advantage of consumers and their fellow-farmers, and we absolutely owe it to the next generation to do far-more than just point fingers.

Mr. Koobs obviously doesn't seem to believe in the wisdom of the adage - "evil (supply management) prevails when good men do nothing".

Finally, Mr. Koobs is dreaming in some sort of milk-shake induced fairy-tale if he thinks the consumer is on the side of supply management given the ever-increasing number of shoppers going to the US to buy dairy and poultry products.

Wake up, Mr. Koobs, you're part of the conspiracy to take advantage of consumers, and your fellow-farmers, and if pointing fingers at this conspiracy on the part of Canada's dairy farmers is what it's going to take to get rid of it, so-be-it.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

Too many hog farmers have sore ears from listening, for almost 40 years, to supply management types berate them along the lines of - "if you had only been smart like us, and adopted supply management, you'd be on easy street".

Revenge is a dish best-served cold, and after having to tolerate that type of boasting by supply management for almost four decades about how wonderful supply management is, there are going to be a lot of hard hearts in the hog business when supply managed farmers start whining about needing a quota bailout.

I don't think I'm wrong because my opinions are regularly re-inforced by farmers who seek me out at various meetings and events, and proceed to tell me things like - "something has to be done about supply management".

The point is that supply managed farmers are dreaming in technicolour if they think supply management is well-liked in the farm community, because it's definitely not, and as baby-boomers move into nursing homes, and as Generation Y becomes the mainstream group of farmers, supply management is going to be liked even less than it is now.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

If the pork industry is the role model that you say it is then why do the banks generally dislike it?

40 years is more or less the length of a typical working career. Just think if those hog farmers you mention had actually listened and been smart. With SM they could have enjoyed stable incomes instead of stiffing suppliers and holding out their hands for taxpayer bailouts.

Yes steve but if suppy management goes we will all pay pay them out so they have more money and power to drive up land prices and bully themselves around thinking they r king

There is no mood in the farm community, especially among younger farmers, for any sort of quota-buyout which will, in the event of the demise of supply management, simply substitute land for quota in the capital asset portfolios of 15,000 quota-owning millionaires.

The Achilles Heel of supply management is the belief that not only will government support supply management forever, but that supply management is well-liked in the rest of the farm community. Both beliefs defy logic, and will eventually have a rude, and undoubtably nasty, end.

On another matter, I am advised that Conestoga Packers operates an evening shift, albeit not a full double-shift, in that by receiving hogs to 11PM, they can increase the daily kill from 3,000 to 4,400. With supply management in hogs, they'd likely not be in business at all.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

With Supply management Conestoga could be like Saputo, with processing plants across this country and around the world but l guess another increased half shift should be looked at as exhilarating in the Canadian Pork Industry these days.

With SM for hogs the industry would have consolidated to a few rich producers with even fewer processors...there would have been no need for producers to form their own CO-Op to increase share of the price...innovation would be next to need for it!
The quota price would effectively lock out any new producers with new ideas...the job creation would be minimal...except for lawyers and lobbyist hired to protect the few rich producers. No new ventures (Chobani) would be allowed in.
In the case of pork, consumers would turn to other meats if the price went too high, therefore demand would slide or disappear.
Boy! That sure sounds great...for a few elite chosen ones.
The more I think about it, the more scary it becomes!

without any exports at all, and given what would undoubtably be a rip-off price at the farm gate to cover the cost-of-production for a ratcheted-down volume of domestic sales, the hog industry in Ontario, and Canada, would be a skeleton of what it is, even today. The biggest, and only, winners, if we had supply management in hogs, would be beef producers.

That's because the only products which have any response to supply-management style price gouging, are those which, like milk and eggs, have few, if any substitutes, (salt is another example) and those products which, like chicken, are still cheap when compared to pork, and beef, the two most-identifiable substitutes.

Therefore, given pork's rather-high price elasticity of demand (the amount people will not choose to buy given a certain change in price) and also rather-high cross elasticity of demand (the change in the amount of pork purchased by consumers given a certain change in the retail price of beef, for example), the absolute-worst alternative for pork would be supply management.

By way of comparison, people would still buy eggs at $6.00 per dozen, and milk at $10.00 for a bag which now costs about $5, and that's because of the lack of readily-availble substitutes - there would be, of course, a lot more cross-border shopping, but there wouldn't be an almost total elimination of domestic retail sales the way there would be if the price of pork doubled, and the price of beef didn't.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

A ‘Troll’ is a person who posts a deliberately provocative or abusive message to a newsgroup or message board, with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument.

These people are essentially a type of ‘Cyber-bully’, who get off on other people’s pain or distress.

Post new comment

To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
We welcome thoughtful comments and ideas. Comments must be on topic. Cheap shots, unsubstantiated allegations, anonymous attacks or negativity directed against people and organizations will not be published. Comments are modified or deleted at the discretion of the editors. If you wish to be identified by name, which will give your opinion far more weight and provide a far greater chance of being published, leave a telephone number so that identity can be confirmed. The number will not be published.