So long single desk

Well, the results are in. For anyone still stopping by this old haunt, you can find them here. The big news is that Strahl has confirmed that we will be marketing barley in and outside of the CWB starting August 1, 2007. Think I'll have a barley sandwich at lunch to celebrate.

Your three options: Reverse weighted?

Further to my last post regarding the number of ballots sent out in the barley plebiscite, you have to wonder if the eligibility rules actually reverse weight the vote. By allocating the same vote to anyone who has produced barley in the last five years, those who produce barley year-in and year-out have the ballot weighted against them. Similarly, large producers or farms that consolidate their production under a single individual or corporation are punished. Hopefully no one has considered changing their incorporation structure simply to receive more votes in future plebiscites.

Your three options: One in 84000?

I have been meaning to comment on the plebiscite itself for some time, so here goes. The three option ballot was the right way to go for reasons I mentioned here. But in issuing ballots to 84000 producers, the government abandoned some of the fundamental principles that ought to guide it in dealing with the CWB. The most important of these is that consultations should be conducted with farmers who have a continuing commercial stake in growing wheat and barley. Translation: You have to make your living as a farmer. There is simply no way that 84000 people in Western Canada make their living as farmers, considering that there are only approximately 8000 grain farms with revenues of more than $250000 according to Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. In the end, it is the result of the plebiscite and not who voted that will carry the most weight, but it would be a shame to have the process marred because farmers did not have their voices heard.

Your three options: A continuing series

I would like the option to market my barley to the Canadian Wheat Board or any other domestic or foreign buyer.

So reads the second option of the upcoming barley plebiscite. The CWB calls it intellectually dishonest. Any editorial in favour of the single desk suggests that it should be struck from the ballot because a dual market cannot exist. A dual market is simply a rhetorical device that is right-wing conspiracy code for the destruction of the CWB. Sounds pretty scary.

It made me wonder: What has happened when other government agencies have transitioned from single desk powers to independent competitors in an open market? Did they fold like a cheap lawn chair?

The single desk for pork marketing was removed in the mid 1990's, but Manitoba Pork Marketing still has a website, so I thought I would check it out. The history page is really interesting:

Changes to the Natural Products Marketing Act resulted in the end of the single-desk status, effective July 1, 1996. Today, Manitoba Pork Marketing is a member-owned co-operative, governed by an elected board of directors that are hog producers.Manitoba Pork Marketing continues to be the marketer of choice for the majority of Manitoba's independent hog producers.

Manitoba Pork Marketing is the provinces premier marketing agency.
Working on behalf of approximately 900 producer members that produce 1.5 million hogs annually, we represent the single largest volume of hogs in the province.

"The marketer of choice." They are operating in a dual market and by their own admission, they are not only surviving, but thriving. It makes you wonder what the CWB is afraid of.