The Farm Industry Review Board (FIRB) has just announced once again that they are delaying of the implementation of any changes in the marketing board system that would accommodate certified organic producers or any other niche marketers of a supply managed commodity. The date for their decision is now not before mid August. This is the second one-month delay of implementation of the Lereux Report. I was going to write a June report announcing that the proposed June implementation was delayed to July 17th but fortunately I did not waste the effort in June.
I feel that the delay in the implementation of any meaningful change in the marketing board structure could mean one of three things;
1.
The FIRB realizes how hard it is to write regulations that would protect a minority of producers within regulations that give such over whelming power to a majority of producers that believe they own the whole market and have opposing philosophies on how a product should be produced and marketed. It is arrogant and naive of George Lereux and others who think that this is an easy task or that it can even be done. At best the writing of regulations within the existing marketing board framework would accommodate a few producers currently on the outside and make them instantly rich and part of an expanded old boys group. The rest would be forced out of business. FIRB appears to be stuck.
2.
There is a new minister of agriculture and he has to be brought up to speed on the issue and where it is. You can bet that the marketing boards are lobbying him hard to try to stop any change from happening. The consumer and organic producers should take this time to lobby on behalf of those left out in the cold. I have attached a copy of a brief letter that you can down load and send to the Minister of Agriculture so that he is aware that there are two sides to this issue. The change in Ministers of Agriculture could also be a good sign. John Vandongen, the outgoing Minister of Agriculture was a strong supporter of marketing boards and very popular with conventional producers. A change in Ministers could signal that the government is serious about changes to the marketing board structure.
3.
The government and FIRB want to put yet another report on the inadequacies of marketing boards on the shelf and hope that the issue goes away.
The only possibility that provides a glimmer of hope that there is light at the end of the tunnel is the fact that the new Minister of Agriculture, once briefed, will try to introduce meaningful changes into the marketing board structure. This would mean more than merely changing the regulations and leaving the power in the hands of the large conventional producers. The actual marketing board schemes would have to be amended to create some distance between organic and conventional producers. This could be done by recognizing a certified organic class of product and designating a block of allocation to be reserved for organic production and administered by a committee of organic producers. OR, My preferred option which is exempting organic production from the regulations of Marketing Boards through an Order in Council. This is the simplest and most straightforward way of handling the issue with fairness to all.
I do not see light at the end of the tunnel without another outcry from the public. Currently I have a feeling of deja veux. We have been here before. In 2000 after the mediation process undertaken by the previous NDP government we were left with two options proposed by the government itself. These were a block allocation of quota within the existing structure of marketing boards or exemption of organic producers from the existing marketing boards and a creation of an organic marketing board. The marketing boards rejected these options and in 2000 we were left dangling in the wind as we are now. We were lead to believe that a policy on marketing boards would be implemented that would be fair to organic producers. This is the impression that FIRB left us with in June. In late 2000 the NDP changed the minister of agriculture and the new minister, after months of waiting, denied us either option and threw us into another round of open battling with the marketing boards. The situation feels eerily familiar. We are given hope, left dangling in the wind for months, and the minister of agriculture has been changed. Do we wait to see if this government shows more resolve than the previous NDP government or do we actively lobby now to try to ensure that the process does not end up like it did in 2000?
A few interesting sidebars to the issue are.
George Lereux who so dutifully pointed out the inadequacies of marketing boards handling of niche markets has gone on to be chair of the Vegetable Marketing Board.
Ross Husdon who was chair of the BC Marketing Board (now FIRB) in 2000 has gone on to be a lobbyist for a biotechnology company that is trying to introduce a genetically modified coddling moth into the south Okanagan. If the moth were introduced into BC it would be devastating for the marketing of organic apples into Europe.
Olera Farms and others are continuing their class action against the Egg Marketing Board. This case is still scheduled for late 2005. We are currently in discovery.
The Saskatchewan Organic farmers that are suing Monsanto for lost markets of certified organic canola due to the introduction of genetically modified canola have had to appeal to the Appeal Court of Saskatchewan to get their class action certified. A lower court judge denied the Class Action. To these valiant farmers I say do not despair. Even if you had won the right to certify your class action in the first round, Monsanto still would have appealed it and you still would have had to argue in the Supreme Court. The BC Egg Board Appealed the certification of our Class Action and it was upheld in the BC Court of Appeal. It is a costly process you would have had to go through in any case.
