On October 7, 2011 in Regina, Canada’s Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board, Gerry Ritz, announced the end of the Canadian Wheat Board’s (CWB) monopoly on the sale of wheat and barley. For the first time since World War II, Western farmers will be legally permitted to sell their wheat and barley to any buyer they choose. The Canadian Chamber of Commerce has been instrumental in calling upon the federal government to allow farmers to sell their products openly, including by ending the CWB monopoly.

The issue
The Canadian Chamber has been calling upon the federal government to amend the Canadian Wheat Board Act to provide Western Canadian farmers and value-added processors the voluntary option to participate in the Canadian Wheat Board. This would provide all farmers the right to market their own production of wheat and barley to any buyer of their choosing.

What we got for you
The end of the CWB monopoly will increase entrepreneurial freedom and expand market opportunities for Western Canadian wheat and barley farmers by allowing them to sell their grains directly to buyers of their own choice. At the same time, the CWB’s facilities will remain in place for those farmers who find them beneficial and wish to continue using them.

How does this benefit you?
Wheat and barley are important components of Canada’s dynamic agri-food economy, generate significant export revenue and sustain local economies and communities across Western Canada. Ending the CWB monopoly provides new opportunities for farmers who do not wish to use the Board while allowing those farmers who do wish to use it to continue doing so. It is a win-win for farmers, processors and Canadians.

Last week, Minister Ed Fast embarked on a trip to China in order to push the economic partnership between Canada and that East Asian giant forward.

At a time of global economic malaise and given the slow recovery of U.S. demand, it is more important than ever for Canadian businesses to seek new outlets for their products by diversifying their cross-border trade and investment. China, like India, Brazil, Europe and Japan, will be an increasingly important economic partner for Canada going forward. While our country’s trade and investment with China are growing briskly, the access afforded to Canadian goods, services and investment is limited in some areas, and Canadian products continue to face competition on an unlevel playing field there and in third country markets. IP protection is also a concern.

Canadian businesses deliver many products and much expertise that have and will continue to contribute to China’s rapid economic development, and many companies have long been active there. However, we need to better level the playing field and enhance market access for a truly win-win Canada-China economic partnership to emerge.

Minister Fast’s trip to China, just months after a visit by Minister Baird, is an important step forward in the government-to-government dialogue being pursued with Chinese leaders in view of enhancing access to opportunities for Canadian companies. We welcome the announcement of progress on the negotiation of the Canada-China Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (FIPA), which will ensure high standards of protection for investors from both nations upon its conclusion. The Minister has visited cities both on and off the beaten path where a number of successful Canadian businesses are active, to showcase the excellence Canada has to offer.

-Perrin

Today, the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC), a U.S. agency that regulates ocean bound shipping decided to begin the process of launching an investigation into the “diversion” of U.S. cargo through Canadian ports.

The Canadian Chamber of Commerce issued the following statement:

The Commission has a major task to examine the administration and impact of the U.S. Harbor Maintenance Tax. This is a domestic U.S. issue, and should remain one. Canadian ports and users are required to pay the full cost of the infrastructure they use. The Canadian Chamber will oppose any protectionist measures that will penalise Canadian ports, railways and all cargo carriers and make North America’s freight system more costly.

- Perrin

While President Obama and Prime Minister Harper pursue plans to open up the Canada-US border for legitimate travelers and commerce, protectionists remain hard at work building new barriers. If they succeed, the result will be higher costs for both consumers and North America’s businesses.

This new protectionist assault takes place in Washington this Wednesday when the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC), a U.S. agency that regulates ocean bound shipping, considers its Chairman’s call to investigate the “diversion” of U.S. cargo through Canadian ports.

Today, U.S. ports and railroads compete for Canadian cargo, just as our ports and railroads compete for theirs. The shippers who choose how to move their goods welcome the marketplace competition that allows them to transport their cargo more efficiently. By speaking of “diversion,” the Chairman implies that American ports are entitled to a specific proportion of North America’s cargo and that it is unfair for Canadians to win the business.

A group of U.S. ports and railroads is pressuring Washington to apply a major new levy to cargo containers entering the United States from Canada and Mexico. That levy would drive up the cost of shipping through Canada and the proceeds would be used to make improvements to U.S. ports. In other words, the business won by Canadian ports would be taxed to subsidize their competition.

Measures to penalize competition from Canada might not even stop there. In recent speeches, the FMC’s Chairman has said he wants to look at whether Canadian rail rates for US cargo are subsidized and has questioned whether security at Canadian ports matches U.S. port security.

Last Friday, I wrote Trade Minister Ed Fast to ask him to fight attempts to penalize Canada’s ports and railroads. As our two governments collaborate to strengthen our economic and security cooperation, there could not be a worse time for U.S. regulators to build yet another wall along our border.

- Perrin