Loading...
The Rural Voice, 1992-11, Page 121/ p p00R FACT pR y ,�k.P For Li Lid Q` Fiberglass/Aluminum Doors IIIManufacturing, Installation, O Sales & Service —,t Expert Installation Crews Free Estimates EASY LIFT DOORS LTD 515 JAMES ST., NEAR HWY. 7 ST. MARYS, ONT. N4x 1C7 FAX: (519)349-2144 TEL: (519) 349-2355 STRATFORD: (519) 273-7200 ''1 IJ • Insula ed steel doors • Fibreglass aluminum doors • Service station doors • Commercial wood doors • All residential garage doors • Residential windows & doors • Electric openers • Weatherstripping • Door hardware in stock /tt <t, ALFA— LAVAL Christmas Catalogue Specials Our clippers are a cut above the rest The ultimate in convenience, these new lightweight cordless clippers give you portable grooming power anywhere you need it Quiet and efficient, these versatile clippers run on rechargeable batteries and use the same quality blades as our standard electric clippers. Chnstmas Special: Receive a free extra set of blades, a $34.95 value, when you purchase our cc'dless clippers or electric dippers. SUPPLY L UD. Neustadt, Ontario 519-799-5366 8 THE RURAL VOICE Adrian Vos Dreaded words: efficiency & compulsion I was often surprised that some dairy people go broke despite a guar- anteed price for their product. It still surprises me, even while I realize that some lose because of other enter- prises on their farm, e.g. field crops, or through unavoidable herd disease or family illness. Yet oth- ers fail because they cannot pay the loans incurred to buy quota. I've always accepted without question the assertion by dairy producers that their cost of production (COP) weeds out the inefficient pro- ducers by excluding them from the final COP. Canadian dairy people then must be, by definition, the most efficient producers in the world. Re- cent figures released by OMAF, how- ever, show that this is a myth. It is the American dairy producers who are efficient. They milk more cows with less labour.. A Canadian farmer with 60 cows uses one worker per 20 cows. The American farmer with 55 cows uses one worker per 25 cows, a better labour efficiency of 25 per cent. Is it any wonder that Canadian dairy producers are in the forefront in the battle to keep, and even streng- then, Article 11 of the GATT. If you can't beat them, at least exclude them from your market. I invite any dairy producer to explain the above on these pages. I've been tossed back and forth on the question of "stable funding", a euphemism for coercing farmers to add to the coffers of the three GFOs. First, let us set the record straight. The idea of the farm tax rebate did not originate with the OFA. It was thought up by the NFU in the early '70s. However, only when the OFA took the cause and threatened a tax revolt was it accepted by the govern- ment of the day. The NFU was, and is, far too weak to enforce anything. The unexpected strength was my reason for supporting the "yes" side in the referendum on one GFO. As it turned out the NFU was severely weakened after the dust settled and has never regained its importance. Now, however, the situation has changed. For all intents and purposes the OFA is the only dominant farm organization. Many ideas for agricul- ture come from the CFFO, but almost all of these are supported by the OFA. The only reason for a compulsory contribution to the farm organization is the undeniable fact that far too much valuable time is spent by dedi- cated farmers combing the conces- sions to try to convince farmers that it is in their interest to join a farm organization. I know. I have spent many days arguing with stubborn farmers, using my own vehicle and my own gasoline. The main reason given today is that the organizations need funds to lobby and to do research. I believe that a levy for research is legitimate. I also believe that a levy for lobbying is not. That should be completely voluntary. I would have liked to see all funds from a levy go to the separate fund from which research into farm politi- cal issues would be financed. The board of directors would be the main GFOs who would consider projects proposed by commodity organiza- tions and GFOs. I have proposed this to the government, to the OFA, to the CFFO, and to Joe Daunt. They all rejected it, so it appears not to be a good idea. Having looked at it as outlined above, and having read all letters to the editor in various farm publica- tions, I still lean to accepting the proposal. Anyone obligated to pay should take out a membership in the organization of choice and change the system from within. If the objection remains and is strong enough, the new members can cancel the whole shebang if it doesn't work as expected, or change it.0 Adrian Vos, from Huron County has contributed to The Rural Voice since its inception in 1975. He is a writer and raises exotic birds on the farm where he raised pigs for many years.