—— ee oe
ae —_

FOR
PRAIRIE
WHEAT

FARMERS:

By WILLIAM BEECHING

: Timed for the Liberal leadership con-
ention, as well as for the benefit of
Apuld-be prime minister Robert Win-
ets, came the announcement that this
abe final wheat payment is the

ghest on record. The Canadian Wheat

ard has begun distributing $314,958,-
; 1, of which Saskatchewan wheat
armers will get $210 million.

This record will “be hard to follow”
a Mr. Winters. Speaking a short
ime ago, he said, “I anticipate sales
Of 350-400 million bushels, but it will
take hard selling and some favorable
Circumstances to enable the Wheat
Board to achieve the 400 million bushel
figure.”

Saskatchewan Farmer’s Union Presi-
dent Roy Atkinson welcomed the final
Payment, but warned, “I would like to
emphasize that the honeymoon is over
for the farmers . . . we are running be-
hind last year in wheat sales, and the
Short-run outlook is not too optimistic
in this crop year . . .” He said he ex-
Pected next year’s final payment would

extremely low. :

As spring seeding approaches, the
change compared to a year ago is dra-
Matic. The mood of optimism—a result
Of several years of record exports and

dwindling stockpiles — has been re-
placed with an air of uncer
among farmers groggy from rapitly
mounting costs of production.

Prairie wheat farmers have ex-
perienced a 58 percent decline in wheat
and flour exports the first five months
of the current crop year. It is reported
that, in the same period, both U.S.A.
and ‘Argentine exports are off.

Loss of export markets specially
threatens Canadian wheat farmers be-
cause Canada exports between 65 and
80 percent of its wheat production.

The decline of 200 million: bushels
at today’s prices means a drop of $400

milion, ‘two-thirds of it in Saskatche--

wan. It is also of national concern
with significance to Canada’s balance
of payments and full employment. It
could further speed up the expropria-
tion of the smaller farmer.

During the last crop year, 400 mil-
lion bushels of wheat went to socialist
countries. During the 1965-66 crop
year, 765 million bushels went to them.

Suddenly, in the latter half of 1967,
Canadian farmers were shaken with
the news that the United States, des-
perately seeking to remedy its balance-
of-payments, worsened by the Vietnam
war, was dumping wheat on world
markets at cut-rate prices.

The selling price for Canadian wheat
tumbled. Angry farmers protested. The
Canadian government announced that it

wwould guarantee a floor price . of
$1.9514 a bushel for Number One Nor-

thern.at the Lakehead. :
Farmers immediately protested this
as too. low. A November, 1967, study

conducted by the Winnipeg firm of:

Hedlin-Menzies into the costs of pro-
duction of a bushel of wheat, in the
County of Vulcan, Alberta, fully con-
firms their claim.
: e

For purposes of the study, the farms
in Vulcan County were divided into
large, medium and small. A large farm
was a farm of more than 1,280 acres,
capitalized at $147,000; a medium farm
was between 641 and j,280 acres, capi-
talized at $92,000; and a small farm
was up to 640 acres, capitalized at
$65,000.

The average cost of production of a
bushel of wheat was found to be $1.47
on a large farm, $1.63 on a medium,
and $1.90 on a small one—averaging
$1.57 per bushel for all of them. On
certain large farms with other favor-
able factors, the cost of production was
as low as $1.16 a bushel. But, at the
other end of the scale, the cost of pro-
duction for the very small farm is esti-
mated to be over $2.00 per bushel.

Last year in that area the average
grade paid for was Number Three—
at $1.60 per bushel. From the Hedlin-
Menzies figures, this was 3 cents: below.

the average costs of production on a
medium-sized farm, and 30 cents be-

_ Jow the costs on a small farm. Farm-

ers have been, for a long time now,
justifiably demanding a new grading
system.

The worsening price situation direct-
ly reflects declining markets. When
sales to socialist countries burgeoned
(and not as a result of any policies
followed by the Canadian government)
the warning was sounded that the con-
tinuation and expansion of such trade
depended upon the development of re-
ciprocal and mutually beneficial trade
relations with them.

Time and again the socialist coun-
tries asked Canada to purchase more
from them in return. Arguments were
advanced in this country intended to
“prove” that the socialist countries
had nothing to sell us. These argu-
ments emanated from those who con-
sider their main benefits come from the
heavy dependence on U.S. trade.

In direct contradiction to these state-
ments, trade between socialist and
capitalist countries has soared into the
multi-billion-dollar area, and continues
to grow.

A much bigger market, in both
socialist and non-socialist countries, is

available on a long-term basis if pres-

ent trade policies were unfrozen from
the economic and political policies
which originated in the Cold War and
continue to act as a stumbling block
to resolving many social and economic
problems.

Are there world markets? When the
problem of hunger in the world is
taken into account, it becomes ludi-
crous to speak of surplus food. The
problem of obtaining enough food is as
old as man. Grain is the foundation
food across the world, consumed di-
rectly as it is in calorie-short coun-
tries.

‘Paul, Martin, speaking to the Young
Wcrld Food and Development Seminar
ir Toronto (Sept. 1967) said:

‘The statistics of the world food
crisis read like a gospel of despair. We
have been told that more lives will be
lost through starvation in the next ten
years than in all the wars in history.
’ . , For the first time in history we
have the potential to solve this age-old
problem. . . . Our solemn duty is to
devise ways and means by which the
bread of this world can be put into
the mouths of its people. To this task
all human endeavor must be applied
for, if we fail, all our endeavor will
be pointless. . . . The world has no
place for neutrals or bystanders in this
war on want...”

°

Brave words. What stands in the

way? Men like Mr. Martin, and those

whom he represents.

- Dr. Ford Stinson, head of Kempt-
ville Agricultural School of Ontario,
said Africa could produce more food
than North America if it weren’t for
politics. D. N. Huntly of Guelph, Di-
rector of Research and Education for
the Ontario Department of Agriculture
and Food, said, “. . . politically, people
may starve, but technologically they
don’t have to.” :

The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
(Dec. 1967) says, “The average person
ina developing country has even less
than he had to eat 10 years ago” and
“this problem of economic develop-
ment, of providing foodand manufac-
tured products needed. to. eliminate

- hunger and misery is truly the great —

problem of our age.”

But the war against world. poverty
has met the same fate as the so-called
war against poverty in Canada and the
U.S.A. Parasitic militarism and the war
in Vietnam have stood in the way. If
one Vietcong so much as moves an
eyelash there’s a fleet of U.S. super-
bombers there to blast him with na-
palm. But no money to finance long-
term credit for the export of food.

If Canada used one half of its mili-
tary spending to ‘sell wheat on credit,
it could sell 300 million bushels an-
nually at $2.50 a bushel—and the
money would be refundable.

We do not have to go abroad. In
Canada studies reveal appalling
depths of poverty among the Indian
people and the lower-third of the popu-
lation: A team of doctors, financed by
the Field Foundation of New York,
found hunger approaching starvation,
and serious untreated diseases among

hundreds of Negro children in Missis-

sippi.
@

Farmers ate busy discussing what to
do. A mood of anger is rising. There’s
a big push on in farm organizations to
organize and struggle for new policies.

The Country Guide takes it upon
itself to scold them, by saying “Threats
and bluster won’t frighten the politi-
cians or the people today, with farm-
ers now numbering less than 10 per-
cent of the population, the day is past
when they can march on Ottawa, de-
manding subsidies and _ threatening
political retaliation or strikes to starve
out the people if their requests are
denied.”

Every worker who has been out on
- stubborn strike is familiar with this
ine. :

One of the stated aims of World
War II was freedom-from want. The
technological and scientific advance
since then has indicated the limitless
capacity to meet people’s needs. Under
these circumstances, it is hard to be-

lieve that the Country Guide expects —

to be taken seriously.

APRIL 13, 1968—PACIFIC TRIBUNE—Page 7 ©