|
|
 
|
Saskatchewan Party wants to end single desk selling
by Paul Beingessner
(Tuesday, Oct. 21, 2003 -- CropChoice guest commentary) -- With the notable exception of a few specific parts of the province,
Saskatchewan's rural areas have tended to vote for right wing parties in
recent provincial elections. This has gone on for about as long as the
farm economy has been in the dumps. (This time can now be measured in
decades.) The discontent many farmers feel translates itself into voting
against governments, rather than for opposing parties. Whether or not
farmers clearly understand the source of their problems, governments are
convenient targets, sometimes with good reason. Take Ag Minister Lyle
Vanclief (please someone take him!). Were Vanclief to hang around for
one more federal election, it is difficult to imagine any farmer voting
for the Liberal Party.
Nevertheless, farmers are often no better informed about politics that
their urban counterparts. I remember a farmer expressing surprise after
the last federal election when he found out that the Canadian Alliance
party was campaigning to get rid of the monopoly powers of the Canadian
Wheat Board. Now, perhaps not all farmers lack such basic information,
but my informal survey indicates that many farmers are not very clear on
the policy platforms of various parties.
The Saskatchewan election currently underway is no exception. The farm
community is rather bedraggled and bewildered, in the midst of the mad
cow crisis, drought and the return to low grain prices. While those
issues are controlled largely by God, world markets or the federal
government, the provincial government's financial response to the crisis
will be something of an election issue.
However, Saskatchewan's financial means are relatively limited in the
wake of last year's drought devastated crop and this year's below
average one. This is reflected in the relatively modest proposals from
all of the parties concerning education taxes. Saskatchewan farmers have
complained for some time that the education component of property tax
leaves them paying too much, relative to other taxpayers in the
province. While all parties are saying there will be some relief from
this, the proposals are pretty paltry.
One controversial issue came up recently in the policy platform released
by the Saskatchewan Party. The party says it will "negotiate a dual
market for wheat and barley". The wording is interesting because it
implies the Sask Party believes the federal government is still in
control of the Canadian Wheat Board. This is disappointing for a party
that sees itself as rural-based, since two-thirds of the directors of
the CWB are directly elected by farmers. It is also disappointing that
the Sask Party believes it is appropriate to interfere with the
governance of the CWB. The federal government has made it clear that
farmers will make the decisions where the mandate of the CWB is
concerned.
The Sask Party should also know that the idea the CWB could in any way
be effective within a so-called dual market is nonsense. As a marketing
agent, the CWB derives its strength from being the only seller of
Canadian wheat and barley in export markets. If there are multiple
sellers, prices will necessarily drop. Farmers recognize this because
they continue to elect directors to the CWB who support single desk
selling.
Perhaps the Sask Party can be excused for making this mistake.
Politicians tend to listen more to themselves and their inner circles
than to the electorate. The inner circles in the right wing parties are
influenced by the radical element in the farm community. Thus they tend
to overestimate the support for destroying single desk selling. If the
Sask Party succeeds in winning Saskatchewan's election, it will quickly
find this out.
When Saskatchewan farmers cast their ballots in early November, they
should be sure they understand the policies of the party they vote for.
To do less is to shirk our duty as citizens.
(c) Paul Beingessner (306) 868-4734 phone 868-2009 fax
beingessner@sasktel.net | |
