Just a couple of observations.
I'm a farmer as well, like Ken. I'm from Frontier, Saskatchewan.
The Canadian Wheat Board issue is well known in western Canada and it was actually a major issue in the election. We ran on the platform to allow farmers to participate in a voluntary Canadian Wheat Board and were elected in virtually every rural riding across the west. I think we only missed one or two of them in all of western Canada, in the area where the Wheat Board operates. Farmers have told us consistently that they want to be able to make their decisions, and as Ken said, they want choice. They tell us they want the individual choice to be able to make their own business decisions, and we agree with them on that.
The Wheat Board did a survey fairly recently, and last year, I think by mistake probably, they called me at home, and I had the opportunity to go through the survey. It was a survey that in my opinion would lead to some very pro-Wheat Board answers. We had people calling us this year while the survey was being conducted, saying they were frustrated with the survey because they didn't feel they could do anything but answer yes, they support the board.
In spite of that, we got some very interesting results. Fifty-four percent of the farmers who were surveyed want either dual marketing or independence from the single desk. Sixty-five percent of barley farmers want to have an open or dual market in western Canada. Only 20% felt the Wheat Board did a good job of marketing barley, 30% malt barley, 30% durum, and about 50% wheat. So it wasn't exactly a ringing endorsement of the present system. Eighty-four percent supported having more companies compete and said that would increase the value of the grain. Fifty percent did not want their grain pooled. The pooling system has been part of the Wheat Board structure for a long time, but half the farmers would like freedom from that, and 40% believe private companies could get more for our grain than the board gets, and that was higher than the percentage that disagreed with that statement. As I said, 65% of barley growers wanted a dual or open market. Sixty-nine percent thought the board should have more competition.
So there is tremendous support out there for changes to the system. To begin the process, we really feel farmers should have the opportunity to make their own business decisions, and at least to begin to be able to process their own grain. Mr. Ritz, as the chairman, has introduced a private member's bill that will allow that to take place, and we think that's a good beginning.
To reiterate, we believe farmers should be free to make their own business choices individually. We also believe the board can survive and thrive. As we bring that about, we have a couple of examples of voluntary or semi-voluntary wheat boards. One of them is in Ontario and obviously deals with less volume than the Canadian Wheat Board, but the other one is the Australian Wheat Board, which has been able to survive and has a limited monopoly.
I'm sure there will be some questions about the similarity between supply management and the Canadian Wheat Board. I'd just like to point out what I see as the differences there. With supply management you've got a voluntary national system. People can buy into it. They have the choice of participating in it or not. It's supported by the vast majority, if not the total number of producers who are involved in it.
On the other hand, the Canadian Wheat Board is a regional government agency. It's involuntary. If you grow wheat in our part of the world, you have no choice of whether you are involved in it or not, and 50% plus of farmers want a change and would like out of the single desk.
So we think we're representing producers in western Canada by taking the position that we have taken, and I look forward to questions.