by BARRY WILSON
OTTAWA — In a fiery speech to farm leaders attending the Canadian Federation of Agriculture annual meeting Feb. 24, New Democratic Party leader Thomas Mulcair promised the NDP will be vigorous advocates for the industry in the new Parliament.
Despite the party’s diminished parliamentary presence after losing more than 50 seats in the October election and falling from Official Opposition to third party status, the Montreal lawyer and grandson of a Quebec dairy farmer promised to hold the governing Liberals accountable for how they treat the industry.
He promised his MPs will:
- Push the government to make certain that a fair share of the promised billions of dollars in infrastructure spending make their way into rural communities through stronger broadband service, improved transportation and other rural priorities;
- Advocate for increased funding for business risk management programs that saw funding cuts when the current Agricultural Policy Framework took effect in 2013.
- Defend supply management in the face of trade deals negotiated under the Conservatives and not repudiated by the Liberals that would weaken some system protections against imports;
- Advocate for compensation for supply-managed farmers if the trade deals are implemented. During the election campaign, the Conservatives promised $4.3 billion in compensation over the next decade or more but the Liberal government has yet to indicate if it would honour the promise;
- Support Prairie farmers who are calling for a re-creation of the Canadian Wheat Board monopoly dismantled by the Conservative government.
Mulcair called his NDP caucus the “progressive” opposition party in the House.
“I won’t abandon my promise to stand four-square behind supply management,” he said.
While free trade advocates and their political defenders criticize the protectionist system as a drag on the Canadian economy “this is just economic theory. It doesn’t hold water.”
Many CFA members, who earlier had sat through a wooden and tightly-scripted performance by new agriculture minister Lawrence MacAulay, praised the NDP leader for his vigorous promises.
However, Mulcair did find himself in trouble when he bemoaned the loss of “30,000 small- and medium-sized farmers during the past decade” while the presence of corporate farms grew in the industry.
Norm Hall, president of the Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan, called out the politician on the issue.
Hall told Mulcair he took exception to the NDP leader’s characterization of the sector as increasingly corporate at the expense of family farms. He argued it reduced consumer confidence in the industry and unfairly diminished the image of producers.
Hall asked the delegates how many had incorporated their operation. Most raised their hands.
And how many of those operations were family farms? Most raised their hands.
“Corporate farms are family farms,” the Prairie farm leader said. Most farmers incorporate for tax reasons.
Mulcair quickly backtracked. He said he understood the advantages of incorporation for tax purposes and did not intend to tar farmers with the party’s anti-corporate brush.
“I take your point,” he said. “I did not explain myself well.”
Mulcair also appeared to promise that an NDP government would support re-establishing the CWB monopoly, even though World Trade Organization rules forbid the creation of new trading monopolies.
Canada would have to renounce its long-standing WTO membership to accomplish the promise.
“We would return collective bargaining to farmers,” the NDP leader promised, arguing that the end of the monopoly is costing Prairie grain farmers “billions of dollars each year” and farmers “unanimously” have called for a return to the monopoly.
He was referring to a recent meeting of approximately 50 farmers in Swan River, Man., organized by the Canadian Wheat Board Alliance, that voted unanimously to return to the monopoly.
The assets of the former CWB have been sold to a company controlled by American agrifood multinational corporation Bunge and a Saudi Arabian company.
Tory agriculture critic Chris Warkentin, MP Grande Prairie-Mackenzie, addressed meeting goers earlier in the day. BF
Comments
That the leader of the NDP, the party that is supposed to be, first, last and foremost the savior of poor people, would so-completely and so-willingly abandon their interests in favour of the quota-owning rural aristocracy, speaks volumes about the NDP's astounding lack of principles and deplorable understanding of basic economics.
In addition, by claiming that the harm caused to poor people by 200% tariff barriers is merely "theory", Mulcair places himself four-square in the camp of:
(A) flat earth believers
(B) evolution deniers
(C) people who believe Elvis is still alive
Unfortunately, by proving, once again, that the NDP is completely out of touch with reality, Mulcair makes ag Minister Lawrence MacAulay's "wooden and tightly-scripted performance" look masterful by comparison.
The sorriest part of it all is:
(1) 150 years after the evils of protectionism were made abundantly clear from the Corn Laws fiasco in England
(2) in spite of there being 150 years of well-documented economic history validating the lessons learned in the Corn Laws experience
(3) in spite of there being no economic textbooks written in the last 150 years agreeing with Mulcair's claim that it is all simply "theory"
that someone with Mulcair's neanderthal-level understanding of economics gets invited to express them anywhere in 2016 is bad enough, it's even worse that a group of so-called agricultural professionals actually praises the piffle being offered by Mulcair.
It's no wonder agriculture is seen to be a backwater in the national "conversation" about sectors with economic potential.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
I have never understood why some people believe they can win a debate by attacking the opponent instead of the idea.
The problem is that a figurative handful of the very wealthiest people control most of the world's wealth and the tendency is to perpetuate anything that safeguards this. The result is modern day slavery. Unions are a response to that, so are coops and government and so are systems like supply management. It's all about an effort toward fairness.
When a well-educated leader of a national political party delivers a prepared speech opining about things that are the economic equivalent of claiming that evolution is just a "theory" and/or that the earth is a globe is also just "theory", that leader and his/her message deserve no respect at all - and Mulcair got none because only a world-class idiot would claim that the damage caused by protectionism is only a "theory"
Furthermore, while supply management is constantly portrayed by its fawning propagandists (see above posting) as being a response to modern-day slavery, it is, for all-intents-and-purposes, the cause of economic slavery imposed on consumers rather than a response to it.
For example, when the above poster writes:
"The problem is that a figurative handful of the very wealthiest people control (sic) most of the world's wealth....."
he/she ignores the reality that Canadian agriculture's problem is:
"....that a figurative handful of the very wealthiest farmers controls, by means of enabling legislation, most of Canadian agriculture's wealth."
thereby resulting, of course, in modern-day enslavement of not just Canada's consumers but also non-supply managed farmers who cannot compete with the unfair economic clout given, through 200% tariff barriers, to dairy and poultry farmers.
More to the point, there is absolutely nothing fair about supply management - it gouges consumers, it pits farmers against one another and it creates vast bureaucracies doing nothing but creating and proffering half-truths (as does the above poster) for the sole purpose of defending the legislated ability to regressively transfer vast amounts of consumer wealth to a relative handful of rural aristocrats.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
I do agree with most of your post but will say that the NDP is really telling farmers what the Liberals are and have been saying . More to point is the fact that BF has done the story in all reality beating up on Mulcair and the NDP is quite telling of BF wearing it's red liberal shoes !
The recent fuss over trails and property rights in Ontario are pretty good evidence that farmers need to hang together to develop policy that is fair to producers and consumers. The strong Rhetoric used by some supply management detractors hints at a certain level of desperation. The fact is that supply management isn't perfect but if it is managed properly it is a sensible way to avoid farmers exploiting consumers and vice versa.
Supply management is, by definition, the legalized exploitation of consumers by dairy and poultry farmers and no amount of waffling and obfuscation by supply management supporters can make it anything but exploitation.
The only way to stop supply management from exploiting consumers would be to end it.
Therefore, the "exploitation" case against supply management as much "strong rhetoric" as it is unpalatable truth.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Indeed it is truly a stain on Canada that a certain group of farmers must pay dearly for the legislated 'right' to produce food for fellow Canadians and Mulcair who's party supposedly represents the poorest of society is cheerleading these policies.
Raube Beuerman
Bump your head did ya ? NDP are for Unions . Union workers hardly work for peanuts .
When is the fact that SM is going to become sensible again. Since about 2005 it has been totally out of control, and god forbid the consumer and the other freely traded ag sectors
Supply Management is only looked upon as a bargaining chip by your supposedly "free-trade" agr sectors, while at the same time looking for increases in risk management programs.
What good did free trade do for consumers when beef and pork retail prices increased over 20% the last few years.When a "free-trade" Country like the US imports far less dairy imports than Canada is it no wonder why many call free trade a Myth!
The above poster makes the basic scientific mistake made by all protectionists, but made especially-often by the National Farmers Union, of ignoring by how much more the price of beef and pork would have increased WITHOUT free trade.
Come on now, really, people, is the farm community's understanding of economics and statistical procedures really that abysmal?
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
It doesn't really matter what this man says or believes
He should have stepped down as leader after his dismal performance.
As O'leary would say, Mulcair is a 'nothing burger'....and he's right.
Canadians were not smart in electing tax and spend liberals, but they knew better than to elect a party that would set Canada back 40 years.
Raube Beuerman
The NDP would be the party in power if Jack would still be with us . No one could replace Jack Layton as the federal NDP leader and garner the respect he did . I would bet that Mr. Nice Hair would not be leading the country today
Thomas needs help he was lost and wondered in on a Ag meeting and thought he was still in an election! How funny it is to here him spout off about what a NDP government would do, Please Vote for me and my party we need a job! I will give you all the free tax payers money and protect all you farmers and Supply Milk management! I ran away from my Grampa's farm because I hate work and those dam cows, but I love money, so I became a crock, O ,I mean a Politican. If you would like the truth ,I hate every dam dairy farmer in Canada and that rip off of a system called Supply rip off consumers! The fact is every elected official tells farmers one thing when they are in front of them and when they are in a public forum with no farmers they say what they really mean. The truth is the Dairy Farmers have shoot themselves by willing to implement a class of milk at World price ,that WILL over time pull all milk classes to world price! With NO compensation from any Government! That is the facts all dairy farmers now are facing, a drop in returns of over 50% in the coming months! Bill Denby IMPORTER/ EXPORTER
Very recently Mr. Denby was praising the move to world pricing for class 5 or 6.
Now this is seen as bad.
Mr. Denby, what gives?
Raube Beuerman
Do you not understand that we pushed for world pricing when we set up the NON QUOTA EXPORT PROGRAM for milk! We exported for 2 years under our program Legally, Until the DFO got nervous about us taking over the export market from them for ever ,until now! This now opens the door again for exporting NON QUOTA milk again ,we have been in touch again with FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS to start up again! Only this time we are a lot smarter, DFO has NO JURIDICTION over milk for EXPORT,That is under the FEDS! We all got shut down by DFO in Provincial Courts ,when we should have been in FEDERAL Courts! They got away at the time because most of us did not understand and the Lawyers we all used milked us, I can promise this time will be different! Their is opportunity in the world to fill huge markets because of NEW TRADE AGREEMENTS, DFO'S new class 6 does not allow them to supply one more drop of milk for export growth. Now is the time to LOBBY the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT with Processors for the right to Ship Non Quota Milk only for exports! It has always been LEGAL for NON QUOTA EXPORT MILK PRODUCTION ,the DFO & the ONTARIO GOV are going to pay out large to producers and businesses that they ILLEGALLY SHUT DOWN! WE are all back in BUSINESS thanks to the DFO! Bill Denby International Dairy Direct Exports
Mr. Beuerman was questioning an apparent contradiction in your recent postings in that:
(A) several weeks ago you were praising Class 6 milk as being somehow a saviour of the dairy industry and you also seemed to be simultaneously praising DFO and urging young people to start dairy arming with quota
(B) yet now you seem to be taking the opposite tactic - and seem to be taking issue with DFO as well as encouraging people to start dairy farming without quota.
Does this mean that, let's say:
(1) if Saputo and/or Agropur file a lawsuit against DFO asking for an injunction against DFO establishing Class 6 pricing
(2) if Saputo and/or Agropur win the injunction
(3) if the Skotidakis company continues to import a double-handful of truckloads of US dairy product daily for processing and sale into the Canadian market, thereby increasing the amount of Canadian surplus and/or the dumping of Canadian milk into lagoons.
(4) if you are right in assuming that if DFO exports milk at the world price, it contravenes trade agreements but if you export milk at the world price, that somehow it doesn't.
(5) if enough dairy farmers can convince Saputo and/or Agropur of their sincerity to produce milk at world price in order to persuade Saputo and/or Agropur to make the feds do what you want.
(6) if you're prepared for hand-to-hand combat with Quebec dairy farmers over any and all aspects of even the slightest diminishment in supply management
(7) if you're prepared for hand-to-hand combat with Ontario dairy farmers who stand to see the value of their quotas plummet.
(8) if you're prepared to see FCC default (I like this idea better already)
then there could be some considerable support for an "end-run" around DFO leaving them, in effect, without much, if any, marketing power whatsoever, sort of like the metamorphosis of Ontario Pork from what it once was into what it is now.
Is this what the milk exporting community foresees?
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Tom Mulcair is the only national leader who can be trusted to support Supply Management.
How true Thomas is the only one people can think they can believe because he WILL NOT BE around when the next FEDERAL ELECTION IS CALLED! He can promise anything because the NDP will never form a Government in Ottawa. It is like say Liz May supports SMP to the end and the GREENS will never form a government. I can say one thing with knowledge that the DFO will be paying more claims to people that got stopped exporting non Quota milk for exports into the USA , before Carl Adams claim is finished their will be more filed across Canada because of the nature of the claim. In our case ,the big one is still to come and the DFO know they will have to deal with it again! 2017 will be an interesting year for some of the staff after Peter Gould is finally gone! Their is only a few left from the old guard, their replacement are like kids in a sand box, waiting to be challenged! Bill Denby , International Dairy Direct exports
To answer Raube's Questions ,I was just having fun ,anyone that knows me well KNOWS that I dislike Supply Management and the control the ONTARIO Government has through DFO! This is not a marketing Board ,it is a CONTROL BOARD, way back that is what it was called pre 1965! It was called the Milk Control Board of Ontario, But they only had power over inspections and licencing! It has grown into the MONSTER of to day where it controls everything, Farmers, Processors, Further Processors and Consumers! Anyone that looks at the system from outside has no idea what this MONSTER is, they think it is farmer controlled! The only time that farmers have had a choice in marketing their own milk since 1965, was when the Milk export system was running and for a lot of farmers in this Province they enjoyed selling their own milk to Milk Brokers like ourselves. History always repeats it self if you live long enough to see it and in this case the GOVERNMENTS at all levels are going to have to set the farmers FREE again! The trade deals that are signed are going to make that happen over time, Farmers will get fed up with being controlled at limited domestic markets! The world and demand for Dairy Products has changed quickly over the last few years with countries that used to be able to supply them ,now cannot even meet their own counties needs! The climates around the world is having a huge impact on these counties, and now Canada is poised to fill those markets ,Only if they get rid of SUPPLY MANAGEMENT! It is only a matter of time, The people we are talking with in Ottawa would end it tomorrow! But the Trade agreements and the climate changes will do it for them, the SMS days are numbered! The legal challenges coming forward will speed up the process, I hope I answered your questions this time! I am and will always be a person that believes in freedom of choice without GOVERNMENT CONTROLS!There are NO TARIFF walls right now ,we can import everything duty free, and cannot be stopped! We have proven that to the Dairy Farmers of Ontario! Bill Denby International Dairy Direct
You posted a large number of comments over a lengthy period of time supporting supply management. Now ar you saying it was all a lie? You seem to be saying say that's ok because anyone "who knows me well" would know that you were just kidding or had your fingers crossed or whatever. You seemed to be saying that you just wanted to stir up a reaction? Are you really meaning to say that?
Given that:
(A) relations between Ontario dairy interests and Quebec dairy interests have always been fractious.
(B) Ontario's proposal to implement a class of milk based on world price will only make the Ontario/Quebec divisions and mutual distrust even worse
(C) if DFO fines John Skotidakis $45 million for processing imported milk and re-selling it into the domestic market, he could declare bankruptcy, re-emerge under a new name and keep doing the same thing over and over again.
(D) the real reason the feds haven't moved against supply management is the problem of quota values
(E) Saputo and/or Agropur (and maybe also others) may have reason to want to stop the implementation of Class 6 pricing and, if so, it will probably have a lot to do with their own cost/volume/profit equation even though they may claim otherwise.
(F) Canada really does want to see supply management not be able to impede the achievement of our larger, export-oriented trade goals.
there may be any number of people at the federal level (but probably not the current Ag Minister) who have long-since figured out that the easiest way to deal with the problem of quota valuations and/or export restrictions would be to simply sit on their hands until after Quebec and Ontario have had their inevitable "leave-no-man-standing" dairy civil war.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
I am not even going to reply to someone who does not have the guts to print their real NAME! That is so childish to blurt something on here and AFRAID to sign your Name! Bill Denby IDD
There is no rule that says anyone has to print their name here.
I think that you have been asked a reasonable question Mr. Denby and I also would like to hear your answer because you had a lot to say in favour of supply management.
This comment will be published if resubmitted and signed
When someone is so grossly-immature as to anonymously and snidely offer dismissive comments about someone's maturity by the use of a "sand box" reference, the sand box comment is ironically appropriate, but only insofar as it reveals the poster to be what a cat does, and then covers over, in a sand box.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Stop being a child ,and print your real name, I find that's the way most dairy farmers are like little children that have to be looked after by someone. That is why the farmers that will survive the transition where Non Quota Holders at the time. I feel sorry for all the ones that think big brother is going to give you millions of free tax payers money! Also all the ones that owe Millions of dollars in debt ,think they should get a free ride off the backs of tax payers and consumers! Just ask Tobacco farmers how government treated when they dismantled the monopoly over TOBACCO! We have a number of investments in farming on both sides of the border! You would be surprised what we own! Bill Denby IDD
Comment will be published if resubmitted and signed in accordance with our guidelines.
As for the sandbox reference, it was not anything to do with cats, but Mr. Denby himself likes to refer to ppl as children who don't play nice in the SAND BOX. I don't understand why a man who doesn't even own a farm any more comments on here? He retired and sold his parents farm years ago and washed his hands of dairy farming. He gives himself what ever title he wants. Sometimes he's an importer/exporter and now he's International Dairy Direct. Does that mean that Mr. Denby has now bought a farm?
James Bullen
I've always found it strange that:
(A) dairy farmers seem to think that anyone who doesn't currently own dairy quota is unqualified to express any opinion about dairying other than a glowing opinion.
(B) farmers in general seem to think that anyone who doesn't own a farm and/or doesn't "operate" a farm full-time is equally-unqualified to express any opinion about agriculture, even from the point of view as a consumer.
If Mr. Bullen's so-called "logic" was to be extrapolated,
(1) nobody but corpses would be able to express an opinion about pathology
(2) nobody but children would be able to express an opinion about child psychology.
(3) nobody but illiterates would be able to express an opinion about literacy
Mr. Bullen doesn't seem to understand that this forum gives people who know what they are talking about and who have something to say (even if they are supply management supporters who, by definition, neither know what they are talking about nor have anything to say), a platform to express their opinions, a guideline Mr. Bullen would be wise to heed instead of expressing no ideas of his own while squandering considerable quantities of electronic bile in the process of castigating Mr. Denby.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Actually Mr. Denby has proven in the past that he has considerable insight into the dairy export/import business. He is the one that accurately predicted the coming import of the products that caused DFO to try to match world prices with the class 6 price...whatever that is. I don't pretend to know the dairy export business, but when someone that actually does...and has proven that insight, then anyone (with an interest) would be wise to pay attention...even if you don't like what he is saying.
D. Linton
Wikipedia defines Groupthink as:
"a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people, in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an irrational or dysfunctional decision making outcome."
Even though Groupthink perfectly describes socialism of all sorts, it completely-aptly describes agricultural socialism in the form of supply management. No one-word term better describes:
(1) the irrational postings of supply management supporters on this site
(2) the dysfunctional policies of the Dairy Farmers of Ontario
(3) the dysfunctional policies of the Dairy Farmers of Canada
because everything about supply management, from top to bottom, is irrational and dysfunctional to the point where no criticism of the Humpty-Dumpty harmony and conformity is tolerated.
Mr. Denby is merely pointing out why the Canadian dairy industry's "Humpty-Dumpty" shell is already cracked and that Humpty doesn't need to even "have a great fall" before he can't be "put back together again".
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Actually Mr. Linton it's not clear which of Mr. Denby's statements were sincere or represent his beliefs. In one post he explained that those who know him well would be able to sort this out. I have never seen a comment like this on the Internet. Mr. Denby has been asked to clarify and because I am not one of those people who know him well I am waiting for him or someone who does know him well to explain.
When someone signs their name to something they've written, they've indicated a willingness to be taken to task, and even to court, for what they have written.
It's a willingness, a sincerity and a publicly-expressed representation of one's beliefs that is impossible when one remains anonymous.
Mr. Denby is perfectly entitled to not respond to anyone not possessing the willingness, the sincerity and even the demonstration of any particular belief by remaining anonymous.
Let's put it this way - when somebody posts something on this site and signs their name to it, NOBODY who remains anonymous has any right to challenge the message or to castigate the character of the poster, period.
In law it's sometimes called having the right to face one's accuser, but anonymity denies that fundamental right to those of us who sign our names to our postings.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
That's an interesting opinion Stephen. It's just that though, an opinion.
Others may have a different opinion. The site's owners seem to recognize that not everyone is in a position to comment publicly. This has been discussed here before.
So my opinion, for what it's worth is that people who visit here should be able to ask questions anonymously. You or Mr. Denby can decide which questions you can plausibly answer and those which you can't. Then everyone can decide on who is credible and who isn't and I don't think you will find that credibility is ultimately decided only by whether or not someone signs their name. I think it's great that you have decided to sign your name. But I respect a number of opinions that have been expressed her anonymously.
Everyone has the right to ask questions anonymously but that doesn't mean they have any right to receive, or even any expectation of receiving, a response from anyone, anonymously or otherwise - therefore, why do people persist in posting anonymously?
BTW, get over it already, all anonymous postings lack credibility (OK, they're garbage) because the poster cannot be questioned the way they would be questioned when giving opinion evidence under oath.
Credibility is established by use of signed statements which can be challenged by other signed statements, or, in other words credibility is established by the rules of evidence and not by a popularity contest judged by laypeople who, as is often the case on this site, don't have the talent, the qualifications and/or the experience needed to be able to identify what is true and what is false about any particular claim, particularly the anonymously-made claims.
More to the point, anyone who would "respect" any anonymous claim/opinion is not just a fool, but a damn-fool.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
It's the idea that's powerful not the person.
As for anonymous vs signed I think visitors to the site can decide which comment is more rational and credible.
Well it sure seems to have struck a cord with you . Seems some one tells others to not answer but can't resist himself . If those who don't sign are so low in your scale of deserving why then does it bother you so much that you still reply ?
Just so ya know .
No I will not be leaving my phone number to post a comment, and this will be my last post and the last time I visit your site. I gave you my name and apparently it wasn't enough. I don't have a university degree in anything, I do have some community college. I am a city born and raised boy who married a rural lady. She wanted out of the city and to keep my wife happy we bought a small place for her to have a horse, a few beef cattle and some chickens. I work 50 hrs a week, so my wife takes care of most of the farm. I started reading your publication about a yr ago trying to learn enough that I didn't come off as a complete idiot. That being said, how am I to know when someone is joking or having fun? I simply wanted to know why people are all supportive for supply management (which I don't even really understand and trying to learn) and a few weeks later do an about face and say just kidding? I am not the only one asking him to explain his position, which he still has not answered.
You ppl go around calling each other fools, idiots and comparing adults to children playing in a sand box, which is okay until someone you don't know questions it. Mr Thompson should go back and re-read his comments from earlier in Jan regarding one of Mr. Denby's post. Then he might understand why us simple farmers are confused.
I took your advice Mr. Thompson and googled Mr. Denby. Perhaps you should do the same, only leave off the dairy part of it.
People who sign their names here now seem to have come up with an excuse that makes sense to them for not responding when they get on thin ice or caught out completely.
Anonymity in postings generates half-truths and distortions that cannot be easily detected by laypeople. For example, the following anonymous quip demonstrates that something can be technically possible yet preposterous, but still be believed by many.
"Have you heard about the new supertanker that's so long that, because of the curvature of the earth, both ends stick out of the water?."
And, go figure, the above posting berates me for this, that and whatever from behind the shield of anonymity, thereby once again reducing the poster's credibility to zero.
More to the point, how does anyone know if:
(1) the above anonymous poster is, or is not, the same poster who proffered a name previously?
(2) the above poster is a high school student from Nunavut trying to have some fun by creating a sob-story about a city boy who moves to the country?
(3) the above poster is doing some sort of class project in a post-secondary course in communications and/or sociology and who is creating fictional scenarios in order to gauge how people respond?
However, I've long-since learned (does anyone on this site remember another "simple farmer" falsely claiming to be Frank Burt?) that anyone who anonymously identifies himself/herself to be a "simple farmer" is almost always no such thing.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
I have two thoughts for you Mr. Thompson.
1) I don't see where the above poster berates you. Perhaps you could read this again.
2) It's all about ideas not personalities. Ideas are way more powerful than people.
Wikipedia defines berate as:
"Scold or criticize (someone) angrily."
Therefore, when some anonymous individual writes:
(A) "Mr. Thompson should go back and re-read his comments from earlier in Jan(sic) regarding one of Mr. Denby's post(sic)"
(B) "Perhaps you should do the same thing, only leave off the dairy part of it."
I claim I am being berated, and if I'm not being berated, why would:
(1) the person criticizing me need to hide behind the cloak of anonymity?
(2) the person who can't see the berating feel the need to hide there as well?
More to the point, ideas without authors to explain and/or defend them are dangerous and foolhardy nonsense because nobody knows what sort of untold danger awaits anyone who believes these ideas.
For example, people who've never heard of trains could be easily persuaded by an anonymous author that walking along a railway track is a "powerful idea", yet it is a profoundly-stupid idea.
Anonymous postings on this site are just as one-sided and just as stupid as claiming that walking along a train track is a good idea, simply because the author of the "idea" can't be held accountable for the 95% of the story that proves it to be a bad idea.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Anonymous comment deleted
That you can't resist an anonymous post .
Much like ... Bet you can't eat just one ! Lol
Editor: Comment was signed but is being held until we receive a valid phone number in accordance with our guidelines.
I would like to thank Mr. Linton for his kind words, we exported 100's of tanker Loads of Raw Milk across the Border in those 2 years of exporting non Quota Milk. Our program resembled the Sugar Beet one ,where producers in Canada where licenced growers for plants in Michigan! That International agreement has operated successfully since it's implementation, and still is in operation to day without any interference by Governments. Their is a clause under NAFTA that allows producers under contract to grow, ship, duty free into the USA, Inspections, licencing, transportation and U S chemicals are used just if the crop was grown on U.S. soil. Our legal program was exactly based on those same principles only it was RAW MILK produced for U.S Dairy Co-op's or privately owned processors like Burns Dairy out of New York. We are licenced, inspected, transported and even use U.S. vets for herd health just as if we where producing milk in New York or any other state. We also held our graders licence, USDA Import permit issued to International Dairy Direct, with unlimited volumes that could enter the USA from Canada and where members of the co-op's or a interest in the private run processors! Now that you know all this. Did Dairy Farmers of Ontario or the Ontario Government have any authority or right to shut us down or interfere with our business in exporting NON QUOTA MILK? None of our shippers help any Ontario Dairy Quota and where not licenced under the DFO , most had never shipped milk before. We are now in the process of getting our USDA IMPORT PERMITS ,the FED'S are on side because of what DFO has done by implementing class 6 at world price for domestic markets only. We have customers on the US side that we are in negotiations with that need milk, A strong US dollar which makes our milk more competitive for them! What more would you want , it is like the perfect storm brewing! It should take us a little while longer to work out some of the details, You will know when we are OPEN for business to sign producer CONTRACTS for export only milk! Bill Denby IDD ,
What happens when the Canadian consumer asks why an American consumer can buy non-quota (ie-cheaper) dairy products grown down the road from them for less than they can? We have to buy quota inflated dairy products.
Raube Beuerman
Answer: Cross-border Shop
You can buy any number of Canadian made products cheaper across the border . Why should milk and other SM products here be cheaper ?
Guess you have not priced any farm equipment or farm parts for many years .
I believe most people that do any sort of traveling can tell us what the price difference is between a steak dinner here in Canada and the same dinner in the US and quota's have nothing to do with it.
I am always amazed at how little competition there is in dairy products south of the border and this is in a country with a supposedly free market system....ha!
Many farmers in Canada would be very interested in producing milk for the us with Quotas. I know of at least 10 farmers with empty barns that could hold almost a 1,000 cows all together.
Sure there are but are you sure you can ? Export and quota does not fit in the same sentence in this Country .
Raube, you make a point but consumers do not know now that they are buying dairy product made from USA milk and by products, also most if not all frozen pizza come from the US. All candy bars ,anything containing chocolate, icecream & novalties , flavored drinks, spread cheeses, dips ,cookies, all processed foods , the total list would shock you! Even Turkey ships in dairy products duty free, under new trade agreements. Their is NO tariff wall ,We can bring in every dairy product including white milk duty free as a health food right now. The biggest challenge we face is buying shelf space and having major chains selling USA dairy in their stores. Their is still a lot of support for Canadian dairy Products by consumers but Price will bring them on side over time. The real challenge is the misinformation about quality & standards on the US side by Dairy Farmers of Canada and the fact they have convinced consumers if they do not support Canadian Dairy farmers they will go out of business and we will have to rely on some other country to supply our needs! Prices will go through the roof in retail stores, Years of telling the consumer is hard to over come that message. But as more people travel to the US to shop and travel they learn that they are being lied to and RIPPED OFF! Bill Denby IDD
Editor: this comment will be considered for publication if resubmitted and signed.
Who would answer a question from someone who doesn't have the principle to sign their name and provide their phone number! Who are you trying to hide from, most of us who take a position on here have the guts to print our names because we stand by what we say and post. We may not always agree with other posters but at least we know who we are talking to. If people like to post attacks against Steven ,Raube,,Mr. Linton & Me for the stand we take against Supply Management then have the GUTS to print your name and provide a phone number to the host. If not keep your opinions to your self and look for other forums where you can attack each other from the closet! We all like a good debate on issues but with people that do not act like children playing in the sand box wearing masks! Bill Denby ,IDD , Kawartha Lakes
With all due respect Mr. Denby I believe the owners of this site make the rules.My guess is that most name calling and bullying comes from people who sign their names.
I and any one else will and can post any thing any time . If BF wants to continue to edit posts to protect people and groups that is fine . I don't see any where that says you must sign to post . Whats is with some people wanting to control that which is not theirs ?
Here Here! I agree. This site has deteriorated to a point I do not want my name on any page near the likes of the signing double standard sinning few that are afforded altitudes beyond good taste and decorum.
Maybe those that prefer to have these closed loop conversations could just email to each other, and save us all the bother. If you don't have each others email maybe BF can supply it. If not I CAN
That makes sense. The one fellow has already explained that those that know him well would know that many of his posts were not true or not his honest beliefs. So it is kind of closed shop or secret language here that only those who sign their names know about.
If the western farmers want to return to single desk selling then that is u their choice . The biggest problem might be that the rail lines are not moving grain fast enough and have taken to moving other products which pay better .
There is no doubt that shipping grain in the west is whole other animal than what it is here in Eastern Canada .
It would be interesting to know how many farmers who now want back to single desk selling voted to get rid of it in the first place ?
The response by some CFA annual meeting delegates to the address given by Mr. Mulcair would seem to validate the following quip by comedian, George Carlin.
"Never underestimate the power of stupid people to influence large groups."
What's next - a claim by Mulcair that gravity is also only a theory?
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Post new comment