It's more than four months since Laurent Pellerin, chairman of the National Farm Products Council, warned the national chicken marketing agency that STATUS QUO IS NOT AN OPTION.
The capitals for emphasis are Pellerin's, taken from his notes to address the annual meeting of Chicken Farmers of Canada.
Since then I see no evidence of any change from status quo.
Yes, there are plenty of proposals for change, but the large-scale processors seem determined to block change.
For example, Pellerin called for allocations so the provinces can grow chicken to meet demand for specialty markets. The Ontario board developed a proposal for specialty markets.
The processors have blocked that proposal by filing an appeal with the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food Appeal Tribunal. And then they said they wanted time for further negotiations with the chicken board, so the appeal is sitting on the shelf. Meanwhile, specialty markets are not being served.
That would, of course, include the Ontario kosher and Hong Kong dressed markets, to mention only two big ones.
It seems the chicken industry is more worried about some processor-competitors gaming the system than they are about meeting consumer demand. That's a lovely way to treat customers!
Then there's Pellerin's mention of negotiations for "differential growth" and "comparative advantage".
Both are important proposals. Neither seems to be going anywhere fast.
Alberta has served notice it's leaving the national agency. Pellerin sees that as a challenge.
The real challenge will be to keep other provinces in a national system that no longer serves either the public or chicken farmers. It's large-volume processors who seems to be putting the clamps on both production volumes and change.
Now we have a revolt by chicken farmers in Quebec underway. Will that unravel the ban the Ontario and Quebec chicken boards have implemented on inter-provincial trade in live chicken?
Pellerin also suggested the chicken industry take advantage of legislation to set up a national agency that can garner funds for research and promotion. He suggested everyone could benefit from research into market potentials.
Is it the big processors who are also blocking this proposal? After all, they don't seem to be spending any of their own money on market development and research, so it's reasonable to assume they oppose any proposal to force them to contribute to this type of national agency.
When it comes to genuine ideas about how to reform the system, the only common sense ones I've seen have come from the Ontario Independent Poultry Processors association.
But the chicken-industry establishment seems to automatically oppose any and all ideas that come from John Slot, who is the driving force in that organization.
It is, as I learned in Philosophy 101, a glaring example of an ad hominem argument.
C'mon guys! Shoot the messenger, if you must, but at least examine the messages to determine their merit.
As for Pellerin, he might as well stop speaking to the chicken industry and start drafting a advice to Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz to terminate this agency.
