|
|
 
|
Wheat Growers victims of self-inflicted wounds
by Paul Beingessner
(Monday, June 16, 2003 -- CropChoice guest commentary) -- The death notice issued by the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association on its own behalf last week was short on analysis. In a letter to members, the Wheat Growers announced the end of the organization and stated it was due to declining membership, now reported at less than 1000. A few vague reasons were given for this - changing demographics, declining wheat acres and "changes to the farming landscape."
The truth is the Wheat Growers Association died from nearly a decade of self-inflicted wounds. These resulted not only from a failure of vision, but from a profound failure to understand the farm community in western Canada.
The failure of vision became increasingly apparent over the last decade as the Wheat Growers' attacks on the Canadian Wheat Board became more frequent, more strident and less rational. The CWB was blamed for trade disputes, falling grain prices, increasing freight rates, the failure of canola shippers to load in a timely manner, and much more. The barrage
of press releases with a single focus and overblown hyperbole damaged the Wheat Growers' credibility with news organizations and farmers alike. The old joke about the blockheaded farmer blaming the lack of rain on the CPR was updated to the Wheat Grower blaming the Wheat Board for everything from grasshoppers to SARS. While there were very real
issues to examine, the Wheat Growers brushed them aside to maintain that all problems would disappear if the CWB did likewise.
While all this appeared foolish to many farmers, a more disturbing
aspect to the Wheat Growers' behaviour became apparent. The Wheat
Growers were far more comfortable with positions taken by agribusiness
than those of other farm organizations. This led to some inexplicable
behaviour. Farmers who attended the Kroeger process, examining grain
transportation issues, were often taken aback by the stands of the Wheat
Growers' representatives, especially their firm backing of the railways'
position against open access.
The dividing line between the Wheat Growers and other farm groups was
clearly illustrated at the end of each day of hearings. While six or
seven farm groups headed off one direction for a supper caucus, the
Wheat Growers would team up with the railways' representatives and go
another.
The Wheat Growers seemed to go out of their way to create enemies of
farmers while trumpeting the railway or grain company line. When groups
like West Central Road and Rail fought rail abandonment, the Wheat
Growers declared that branch lines had to go. When farmers organized
short line railways, the Wheat Growers attacked these as relics of the
past. When the Canadian Grain Commission tried to force producer car
loading facilities to license as primary elevators, the Wheat Growers
supported this, to howls of outrage. When farmers organized the Farmer
Rail Car Coalition to purchase the government owned hopper cars, the
Wheat Growers withdrew, saying these groups were not sufficiently
commercial. When the CWB challenged the railways over inadequate service
in the winter of 96-97, the Wheat Growers tried to undermine the case
before the Agency. When the CWB victory restored millions of dollars to
farmers' pockets, the Wheat Growers could only scoff.
Perhaps most significantly, the Western Canadian Wheat Growers, and
their sister group, the Western Barley Growers Association have
supported Monsanto in its bid to release genetically modified Roundup
Ready wheat. This caused a huge split in the organization and earned the
puzzled contempt of farmers across western Canada. With no other farm
groups supporting this move, accusations flew that the Wheat Growers
were bought and paid for by Monsanto and other corporate friends. The
disclosure that the Roundup Ready panel, convened by Monsanto with a
mandate to promote the introduction of Roundup Ready wheat, was heavily
weighted with Wheat Grower members only reinforced this view.
Clearly, the Wheat Growers failed to understand the sophistication of
modern farmers. The simplistic notion that a market freed of the tyranny
of single desk selling would solve all problems simply is not credible
in an age of grain company consolidation and the massive power of
multinational grain traders. Nor is a blind adherence to the religion of
deregulation likely to gain many converts.
The Wheat Growers failed dismally to see shades of gray. As economic
power in the agriculture industry becomes more concentrated in fewer
hands, the role of regulation in ensuring that markets are truly free
and competitive becomes more, not less important.
Canadians, farmers included, are prone to reject extreme positions. The
Wheat Growers marginalized themselves by fanatical adherence to an
extreme right wing agenda. Just as Canadians appear to have rejected the
extreme political right wing, so have farmers rejected the extreme views
of the Wheat Growers. It is worth noting that membership in the National
Farmers Union is increasing while the Wheat Growers fade away.
Nevertheless, as a friend of mine pointed out, supporters of the Wheat
Growers should be commended for one thing. They have taken an active
role in trying to influence agriculture policy. This desire to promote
change is positive, no matter how wrongheaded the direction. But those
who fear that the demise of the Wheat Growers will leave a void in
policy debate should not worry. Last time I looked, the corporate
sponsors and financiers of the Wheat Growers -Cargill, Monsanto, CN, CP
and others - had not done away with their own organs of propaganda. They
simply need to find another mouthpiece in the farm community. Nor should
one underestimate the ability of the Wheat Growers to morph into another
form as the need dictates.
(c) Paul Beingessner (306) 868-4734 phone, 868-2009 fax | |
