Welcome and thanks for tuning in to this Friday edition of RealAg Radio with your host Lyndsey Smith!
On today’s show, Smith is joined for the Beef Market Update with Anne Wasko of Gateway Livestock Exchange for a Beef Market Update. Smith is joined for the RealAg Issues Panel by Tyler McCann of CAPI and Kelvin Heppner of RealAg!
Thoughts on something we talked about on the show? Connect with host Lyndsey Smith at [email protected], on X/Twitter by using the hashtag #RealAgRadio, or give us a shout or text on the response line, 1-855-776-6147.
Trending
As planting season gets underway in the southern U.S., growers are weighing fertility decisions against another year of tight margins and high input costs. In this RealAg Radio interview from Agronomic Monday, Mike Howell, senior agronomist with Nutrien and host of The Dirt podcast, discussed the risks of trimming fertilizer rates too far and what...
Read more »
This Reel Ag Radio podcast is brought to you by nutrivalis Complete Herbicide from fmc. The hardest working in crop cross spectrum solution now adds Trusted Group 1 Grassy Weed Control delivering broadleaf and wild oat control in one convenient co pack. More control, less compromise. See your local retailer today.
It's time for RealAg Radio on rural
radio channel147 on SiriusXM. RealAg Radio and RealLifeCulture.com is your home for insight and analysis of the issues
that are impacting your farm business. Let's get real and get connected with RealAg Radio.
Hello and welcome to RealAg Radio here on rural radio channel 147, Sirius XM. It is Friday, March 13th. I am your host Lindsay Smith. Shaun Haney is on the road, but don't worry, we've got Tyler McCann with Capi and Calvin Hepner with Real Agriculture to join me for today's issues panel. There is a lot to unpack. So much has happened this week. We are ever so closer to a majority liberal government. Of course there is the war in the Middle east that rages on and we've got tonnes to cover as far as fertiliser prices, food, fuel prices, how farmers are managing all this risk and so much more. So stick around for that. But in our very first segment, yes, and Wasco is back with the Beef Market Update. So she and I will have that conversation right in the first slot. And of course stick around if you're on the podcast, if you're watching on YouTube, if you're listening on the radio show, you should head over and listen to the bonus just for our podcast downloads. So just for our podcast listeners, we will have a bonus at the end of the show. All right, we're going to take a quick break and I'll bring. I'll be back with Anne Wasco of Gateway Livestock Exchange right after this with the Beef Market Update. And then of course we'll have the issues panel with Tyler McCann and Calvin Heckner in our third segment.
Ah, the lovely signs of spring until take on hard to kill weeds early on with what they fear most fierce EC and new Volterra cereals. Up to eight weeks of extended weed control in pulses and weight less in season pressure, more flexibility when a it counts before the crop, before the chaos. Spray Fierce Easy and Volterra cereals own the ground. No mercy. Visit nufarm ca Soilactive this time for
today's Product Spotlight, Liz Pham, the chief growth officer for Grainfox. How would you describe what Grainfox does And why Sonoa has become such a huge part of the platform.
Grainfox really helps producers and agribusinesses make clearer, more confident grain marketing decisions. We've been doing this for over 20 years and the focus has always been to cut through the noise and really help people make that practical decision they can really stand behind. What we're seeing is clients are using Sonoa to get more clear answers on the key issues driving the market today. For our producers, that might be a question specific about their crop, a pricing opportunity or whether it's the right time to make a sale. And sometimes that question comes at 2am whether you're staying awake thinking about the markets, wondering should I pull the trigger now? Instead of second guessing yourself, ask the Noah the question and get a clear branded response based on real data and analysis.
For those who are interested in looking into what Grain Fox offers and of course, using Sonoa, where can they go?
Grainfox CA reallife
Welcome back to RealAg Radio here on rural radio channel147, SiriusXM. It is time for the Beef Market update with Anne Wasco of the Gateway Livestock Exchange. Ann, how are you?
I am good.
Good day, Lindsay, good to see you. Yes, it has been more than a little while since we've got to do this, but I feel like you're not going to necessarily have a rosy outlook because there are just so many things going on. But before we dig into all those, let's start as we always do on the cash side and just sort of catch us up where we're at. Yeah.
So markets this week in the US Were lower and again a lot of that outside news is influencing some things along with and we'll talk about this in a second, but a strike that's going to start at a very large packing plant on Monday. And so that plant didn't operate this past week. So cash cattle in the US down $4 to $5 in the that's Texas and Kansas when we talk about south and that's 235 to 236. So lower than last week. The north, that Nebraska area also $5 lower this week at 235 live 372 delivered dressed, which is 8 bucks lower than last week. So the market, you know, feeling some of the punches getting thrown at it now because of the strike and the fact that that plant didn't operate this week and plants have been operating at small kills anyways, all that means smaller production coming out the other side. And so the cutout that wholesale price was actually up $10 this week. So if anybody thinks they're going to see cheaper beef because of what's going on, it's actually the opposite. So it closed last night. The Choice cut out at 397, ten bucks higher than last week. The select is six and a quarter back. But again, this is largely to do with the smaller production levels that the US Is running out now. Having said that, Lindsey, Shaun and I have talked since the start of this year about the big negative margins packers have been looking at through all of January, February and even to start off this month. But with this big jump in the wholesale price and the fact that cash cattle prices are lower, guess what? Next week's Packer margin is going to be back in the black. So that's how much things can change when you get these big, big swings to what's going on. Yeah, bringing it home to Alberta. That market was able to hold, kind of hold it together. So we're calling it fully steady with last week. That means the dress market in Alberta was 538 delivered. And just again as a reminder, Shaun and I talked about this a week ago, but Campfax is average for Alberta. Fed steers is now 321. That's the highest in history. So we have now hit, you know, we had record prices back last September. We've hit them again. We've taken them out and now we're at new record highs for fed cattle in, in western Canada. I did want to update because we did get some stats.
Can yes.
Export live cattle export data for January. So it's our first kind of test of some 2026 data. Fed cattle exports down 38%. Feeder cattle exports down 59%. Slaughter cow exports up 28%. I wanted to just make a comment about what's going on with these fed and feeder cattle exports being such, such a big change from a year ago. Remember what was going on this time last year, Lindsey? We were all, all cattle producers in Canada. We didn't know what was going to go on with the tariffs that were going to be announced in April of 25. And so when you don't know, you start changing your marketing plan. So cattle producers were moving fed cattle as much as they could, whether it was to Canada or to the US Same for feeder cattle. That's not the case today. We kind of status quo. We have what we have. We know what we know. I don't know how long that lasts, but we know what we know. And so it's not impacting these Big decisions. And we're kind of back to what I'll call normal. Last year was the not normal in terms of how many cattle were getting move.
So, okay, so. And just, just to exactly that. So these are big numbers, but it's in comparison to 20, 25, numbers that were way out of line. So this is. So the actual absolute number is more in line with, with what we would.
And just a really good reminder about how these, you know, these outside, we'll call them outside forces can really impact those decisions that we try to make as producers day to day, week to week. Right.
So, yeah, absolutely. Now they change.
Yeah, go ahead.
Yeah. Well, I was going to say it is one of those, like, it's like, I don't know, throwing something at the wall, see what it sticks. There's so many aspects of volatility to this. One of the questions that will always come up. And you said, you know, we've got pack emergence on there, cash kettle down. But what about carcass weights? Because this is one of those ones that can really shift supplies depending on where those.
Well, a couple. Yeah, exactly. So we are both, the US And Canada, running a big weight. The Canadian steer carcass weight. Right now we're running at the levels the same as the record numbers we saw in the first quarter, 2024. So last week's weight was up 22 pounds from last year, 25 at 976 on the steer. That's Canadian average. And again, we're in Canada, we're running our fed cattle slaughter about even with last year. Whereas the US because of this strike and because of smaller numbers and because of negative margins, packer kills in the US and fed cattle are actually down 9%. So two very different scenarios going on. Canadian kills running about the same as last year, but with those bigger weights, guess what that means. We're actually. Our fed cattle production is up 3%. So that's not the case in the US and I think what I want to do is close on Lindsey. I know we're, we're a little short on time today, but, you know, I think we talk a lot about supplies and cattle numbers. And we just had the big inventory report out and we know, you know, so we kind of know what we know on supplies, but the big unknown, especially with these outside influences that are going on, whether we're talking about the Midwest conflict or whether we're talking about this, this is a, this is a strike at the JBS Greeley plant. That's a big plant that starts Monday, this Monday the 16th. But they haven't operated for the past week just to clear out their coolers and whatnot. So those things are hugely impactful and they can shift around that supply piece. And now you're going to push some cattle into different areas that maybe would have normally gone to the Greeley plants. Right. So we're into some new ground. We don't know how long the strike lasts. We don't know how long the crisis lasts. So just lots of unknowns as we enter. And so then that's the futures market volatility that we see day in, day out.
And I think it is interesting in that we don't hear about, I feel like we're used to in Canada hearing about labour disruptions at ports and rail and all that, but it doesn't feel, we hear that nearly as often. So it does feel somewhat more significant in that we don't see it nearly as often.
Yeah, well, I mean, we have. And I should have had this number at the top of my head, but it's been quite some time since there's been a strike at a large packing plant.
Yes, yeah, absolutely. And of course. Okay, so one final thought on exactly that you mentioned off the top. You know, will we see from a consumer perspective any sort of relief on beef prices at the grocery store? But we keep buying, so maybe we don't need to, I don't know. We keep buying.
But again, Shaun and I talked about this last week, you know, this push, especially on fuel, gas prices and whatnot. The consumer only has so many dollars. So you're right. Beef, beef demand has gotten away extremely well over the last several years and right up to the records we saw in 2025 and so far to start off, 2026. But we're all, we're watching that one closely because with the numbers that I've just given you, it doesn't look like we've got any relief in sight in terms of any change in terms of retail prices at the counter for consumers. They're going to stay high.
Okay, we'll leave it there. And Wasco, thank you so much for joining me here today on the show. Okay, thanks, Lindsey.
Have a good day.
You as well. Okay, we'll be back with more RealAg Radio right after this.
Looking for expert insights to power smarter decisions on your farm. The dirtt podcast features industry voices diving into what matters most. Soil fertility trends, agronomic strategies, and practical tips you can use in the field. Get the information you need to stay ahead in today's evolving ag landscape. Search the Dirt, an economic podcast on Apple podcasts, Spotify or YouTube. Or visit nutrien-economicswithak.com to tune in Peter Johnson at wheatpeatrealagriculture.com I'm the host of the Word and I love doing the Word. I love the questions, I love the challenges. I love having to apply agronomics to all over the globe and areas outside of my normal jurisdiction. Also, I love the feedback the most. Where growers challenge me, tell me about their plot results, help me to learn the Word. Absolutely the best part of my day. As you look ahead to the next growing season, there's a lot to consider when it comes to your crop. You need every possible advantage available to you. The Pulse School on RealAgriculture.com has everything you need to make the best choice choice for you and your Farm on Demand videos with leading industry experts available anywhere, anytime. Go into the season confident and ready with the Pulse School on RealAgriculture.com.
Welcome back to RealAg Radio here on rural radio channel 147, Sirius XM. It is Friday, March 13th. It is Friday the 13th. Seems fitting, really. I am your host, Lindsay Smith, and before I bring in the issues panel, quick note. This segment brought to you by FP Genetics. FP Genetics brings new seed genetics to Canadian farms, empowering growers to thrive in ever changing conditions. Visit FPGenetics CA and join thousands of Canadian growers who trust FP Genetics to deliver innovative, reliable seed genetics season after season. Experience the next wave with FPGenetics at FPGenetics CA. All right, let's bring them in. As promised, we've got Tyler McCann with Capi. We've got Calvin Hepner with Real Agriculture. Tyler, I'll start with you. It's been a few weeks since you've been on the show. What's been keeping you busy? Where you been?
Well, it's great to be back with everyone. Lots of news going on. Happy to have a chance to comment about it again. Have been touring a bit of the country talking about things like risk management, which is an easy conversation to have. We were in Toronto working with Fire Management Canada and a working group we've got on risk management programmes and boy, I think it's a lot easier to convince people that we could do a lot better when it comes to our approach to risk management in this country these days than it would have been two years ago.
Okay, we'll dig into more of that as we go forward because that'll be a big Topic today, Kelvin. How goes southern Manitoba in mid harsh.
We're doing well here. We had a bit of a blizzard last night. Just a little bit of a reminder that we're still in winter, but otherwise things are good. I had the chance to attend the Manitoba Chicken Producers Annual general meeting this week, so I had a little bit of time on the road. Not as much as Tyler. I'm curious though, if Tyler says risk management is an easy topic to talk about, what's not an easy topic to talk about?
There is that environment. Like, let's. Let's be honest, that is, if you look at how things have switched, certainly in the kind of the policy world, like two years ago, it was all about sustainability. Nobody seemed to care too much about the risky world that we live in. Man. Very different world than today, Calvin.
Okay, so easy to talk about, but not maybe not to come to consensus on solutions.
That's it. Well, I mean, again, we want to get into it, but like our pitch, our message almost on risk management these days is that we just need to acknowledge that we need to have a more serious conversation about it. Like the lack of willingness of, certainly at the political level, governments in this country to talk about risk management in agriculture, I think is a challenge. But the people that live in it every day seem to understand how big of a deal it is and how important it is. We think a lot differently about it.
Okay, so from that, though, do we even have consensus on, like what we should be working on? Like, I think we can all agree it's riskier. We are dealing with significant risk, we're dealing with things we can't control. But then there's things that are in our purview. Do we have consensus on like a top five, a top six?
Well, so part of what we've tried to do, we've kind of tried to lump our work into how do we better define the problem, kind of make that case for change? Why do we need to be having the conversation? If you get into there, there's some more consensus, like there is a consensus like around the fact that, look at the risks have changed in the last 25 years that we've had. The programme space that we're in today, but the risk management programmes really haven't. I think that there's consensus around the fact that there are some gaps. You talk about the pressures that farmers are looking at this year. They're probably not production pressures. The margins that, especially if you're a western grain farmer that you're worried about are caused by input Prices going up and commodity prices softening. That is the type of thing that agristability should be there for. But there's lots of complaints about what's there. So you've got that margin exposure, you've got revenue exposure, you've got input price exposure. Production insurance doesn't necessarily help with those. So the kind of the. There's not the right coverage there. All sorts of issues with how these programmes are delivered and administered that aren't there. I think a recognition and this has been a theme on your show for the last couple of weeks around not enough support for the proactive risk management side. You know I think Evan did a pretty good job talking about some of the things that they're doing, some of the approaches that are there not enough focus around how do we better empower farmers in that space. So I think that there are some consensuses, some kind of broad agreement on those issues. Doesn't mean people agree on what the solution is though. And that's kind of the next phase. But you got to admit that you got a problem first.
Okay, so Kelvin, we are, this is Tyler. You have fallen into the trap of every Canadian it seems of let's talk about and identify the problem. And that's about as far as it goes. I'm being somewhat facetious. It is important that we name the problems. And Calvin, to Tyler's point, you know a 25 year span is a long time to essentially use the same types of programmes in that risks do change. What I didn't hear Tyler say was things like increasing drought, extreme weather, etc. And I know it's not, you know, sexy to talk about environment but like we deal with weather and we have to deal with potentially extreme weather. The other things I didn't hear about is maybe access to tools. And when I say tools like from my perspective as a sheep producer and I know that's my own fault but like I'm losing access to things like dewormers and these sorts of things. Like there's so much more that is bigger picture than just say you know, production risk management or financial risk management. Kelvin, from your end, what would you add to this list or maybe take away as far as what maybe has changed in the risk sphere in 25 years.
I'm not sure that we need. Well to me our safety net programmes should be somewhat risk agnostic. They shouldn't be ad hoc based on individual risks that are coming along because then you get into politics and governments having to pick winners and losers and that type of thing. So I'd rather have programmes that stay the same for longer, just work well that aren't constantly being adjusted or changed or bailout type programmes. Where are you going to get the bailout or not? And in the meantime, your business hangs in the limbo based on a government decision, that type of thing, and lobbying efforts. I'd rather not have it be that way. So, to me, this. And of course, right now we have consultations underway on the NAXDAG policy framework, which. Which business risk management programmes are a huge part of those discussions. Often, ultimately, that's the stuff that is hard to come to an agreement at the end. And that's why we've often just had the status quo and just tweaks instead of major changes. I think there is, as Tyler's alluded to, more discussion, more appetite now about both the need and recognition about the need for these programmes and for them to work well. So maybe we will see some more change coming out of the next ag policy framework here. But, yeah, that's. That's yet to be seen. Yeah, the risks are always changing. And of course, what we've seen happening overseas the last couple of weeks now, further, it just underscores the magnitude now of our cost increases and market volatility and all of that that we deal with in agriculture, where we are exposed to global prices and increasingly everybody here in North America is realising that even our gas prices are of course based on global prices and global market volatility.
And Lindsey, I should say that we have a 10 page document right now outlining the challenges at a high level with this. So I gave you very much the Coles notes. There is kind of a very, again, I think, a long list of issues that don't mean that we need to tear everything down and kind of revolutionise how we do these things. It means that there's an opportunity for us to do them better and we need to do a better job having a more serious conversation about that. But, Kelvin, you said at the beginning that you would just want programmes that work. Do you think that the programmes today work as well as they should work?
That's a loaded question, because where should the bar be and how much safety net should there be for keeping farms afloat? That when risks happen, that potentially maybe there's a reason that that farm shouldn't be doing what it is or the practise shouldn't be happening or something like that? So, yeah, that's a tough question. I think often when we say that programmes should work better, what we mean is government should put more money into it. And that's, I think, a difficult argument in our. Considering our fiscal situation. We of course think agriculture, and I agree agriculture should be. Be a higher priority in terms of federal spending and not a target of cuts and that type of thing. But it's real difficult to argue government in deficit situations that we are seeing at the federal and provincial level should be putting more money into agriculture or to expect that to be happening. And so, yeah, I think they are. I think we do have some. You look at crop insurance and even agristability in a lot of cases, I think it does work. But yeah, you got to navigate the red tape paperwork of it all. And that's not a fun process and it's not as fulfilling as the lost opportunity that you always see with the crop or the sale of your production. Instead you'd always rather have that. So we're never going to be made whole. I don't think we should expect that exactly.
Like these are managing risks, not guaranteeing profit. Right. I mean we shouldn't be expecting a government programme to grow our business or a government programme to somehow deliver on profitability. It's about managing risks that potentially are not within our own purview. Now I would challenge, and this is something if anyone listened to yesterday's radio show I had four farmers on, ask them about, you know, the volatility right now. And all of these farmers were using tools like having pre bought fertiliser, trying to manage their diesel costs as far as trying to buy at certain times. But of course that's, I mean that's a decision you have to make. But when it comes to like the cropping side, like there are risk management tools available but you have to actually not just understand them, but use them. And that is something that is well within every single farmer's control to actually use those tools now, whether or not you're successful at it, that's a different storey. But there are those tools available. For me, this is where the risk management of the other level has to come in. And we do know that. Tyler, to your point, some of these programmes work better in say like a straight grain operation. Diverse operations tend to have a bit more of a challenge of seeing the value in them. Perhaps that was before, you know, maybe less so now that cattle prices have really improved. But I do like, to me there is this point of, you know, are there existing non government things that, you know, as an industry we could be doing to manage our risk a bit better and then that way that leaves those Very large picture, you know, very out of our control. Things up to, you know, our risk management programmes to do. There are things like. And everybody loves to talk about red tape and then not say what it is, but, you know, those sorts of things are things that are also within the Government's purview that could definitely help to manage some of this risk as well.
Tyler and Lindsey, I think you mentioned tools, losing tools. That is. That is an example of red tape.
Exactly.
For example, strychnine and gophers eating up land in western Canada right now. That is a loss of a tool there.
Yeah. And that's not. That's not a government expense that they have to necessarily, like, they can just change that rule and we have access to the tool. Right. It doesn't cost them anything. Tyler, go ahead.
Well, so. So two things. First, as part of this work, we've been. I've kind of gone back down a trip down memory lane looking at what happened. What was this like 2003, 2005, when kind of the current framework was developed? One of the things that was different is that the risk management programmes fit better as part of the broader framework of things that Government was doing. Like, I think that there was this sense, if you look at the language that they were using, the way they designed things, was that the risk management programmes played a role in the growth and kind of the other components of the policy framework. There was this, I think, a more conscious linkage between the money we're spending on BRM and the money we're spending on innovation and how do you kind of make these things all fit together? And that seems to have really broken over the years, where BRM is kind of off on the side. We don't understand the role that plays. We don't understand the role that it should play from a growth perspective. That kind of. So part of what I. We're talking about is how do we put these things together? That's very much my own personal opinion. I think the other issue is the fact that part of the risk landscape changing is that farms have changed in this country. And the growing inequity between the different risks that different farm types face and the different tools that are available to them, whether or not they're government tools or private sector tools or you get into kind of marketing options, all of those things are pretty wildly different. And at least at kind of that national scale, we still largely treat all farmers in the country the same. We give them largely the same tools. Again, crop insurance may not work for everybody. The Same way they like them, they don't work for farmers all the same way. But we're in this world where we expect that one set of tools are going to work for wildly different farms. And I think that there's this point that I think it gets talked about more but doesn't get talked about enough, that we have a set of commercial farms in this country. Kind of depending on how you do the math, if you've got 180,000 farms in this country, there are about 40,000 of them that are kind of the commercial businesses that kind of live and die by the farm that they work and they manage. And there's about 140,000 that are different, that are more like how things are at home with us, where we've got 60 cows as a hobby. We need to recognise that those two different categories of farms need different things and need different solutions. And we do no one a favour when we try and develop one set of policies and programmes that work for the farms that are the commercial farms and those that are small farms.
I would also add to that though, or even push back on that a little bit, is that of that 140, let's say there might be another 20 or 30,000 of them that want to graduate to the bigger and are trying to. And we don't always necessarily to that point of this, you know, homogeneous programming, but not necessarily the same farms like. And, and this is. It is a generational difference, right. Like it is no longer. It is now the norm that there is off farm income or, you know, two off farm incomes plus farm income. And. But that doesn't mean that these farms, and because ours is one of them, it doesn't mean that that's, you know, ultimately the goal is to stay, you know, a side hustle or a small scale or whatever. Like there is. There are those that want to also grow. Teller, we're out of time, so you have 10 seconds.
So I think you can call commercial farms and those wanting to be commercial farms.
Okay. Yeah.
Are different than everybody else.
Okay, there you go. I'll accept that. Okay, we got to take a quick break here on Real Life Radio and we'll be back with more of the issues panel right after.
As resistant kochia, large cleavers, wild buckwheat and grassy weeds like wild oats spread across the prairies, Cereal growers need stronger in crop weed control. New Barricade 3 herbicide features, a higher rate of fluoroxapure delivering the power needed to take down kochia and other tough, broadleaf weeds. Entrevalla's Complete Herbicide delivers cross spectrum control of grassy and broadleaf weeds including wild oats in one convenient co pack. See your local FMC retailer today.
If you're applying a low rate end stabiliser, you might be falling for a losing strategy. Low weight products promise great results but may lack the potency of higher active ingredient concentrations. So great isn't always what you get. Don't put yield at risk, put your trust in proven solutions. Anvol Nitrogen Stabiliser, Super U Premium Fertiliser and Tribune Nitrogen Stabiliser from Koch Agronomic Services. These products offer higher active ingredient concentrations imitator brands can't match. See the difference at defendyourn CA. Welcome back to RealAg radio here on Rule Radio, channel 147 SiriusXM. It is of course Friday. It is the issues panel a reminder and this is an important one. Fill up with your local co op this seating season. With full tanks you can avoid the rush and start start your field work at the earliest moment possible. Plus with the spring early delivery programme you can save time and free up cash flow. Receive early on farm delivery of high quality fuels and delay billing at participating co ops. Talk to your local co op fuel team member today to arrange for early on farm delivery and ensure you are fueled up for seeding. That may be the most important phone call you make this weekend. Okay, bringing in the issues panel, we've got Tyler McCann with Cappy. We've got Kelvin Hepner with Real Agriculture. Kelvin, let's start there. Of course we are now through two weeks, is it. We're into our third week as of tomorrow of this war in the Middle east that just every day seems to be a new either escalation or something else. And all of us are starting to become well versed in the geography of the region and of course trade flows, oil reserves, etc. We had Jacob Shapiro on earlier this week on the Frontlines episode. It is on RealAgriculture.com or on YouTube or on your podcast feed if you want to go and listen to that again. But Kelvin, catch us up. As far as today from the farming lens, it certainly has created escalating costs but also potentially some pricing opportunities on the grain side.
Yeah, we've seen the grain markets move along with the energy market and of course tied in on the on the energy side of things quite closely. We know that and so there are some positives here, especially if in terms of marketing I should say and margins. Going back to last segment not when it comes to the war. Of course, I will clarify that it's brutal what's happening out there, but still don't understand the why the Trump administration and what the. I'm curious when the storeys come out, what the moment was like where they decided, yes, let's go for it, let's do this. Because to me, the logic and rationale, as we heard from Shapiro and many other people over the last couple weeks here, it's not been popular at home or in his party. It's driving inflation as we've seen gas prices. And of course, when it comes to the farm side of things, diesel and fertiliser up substantially here, if you haven't pre bought that going into the growing season. And of course, when we look at new crop or next year farming, often we book our fertiliser for next year in summer type of thing. And so are those prices still going to be inflated from the war? And I think the big question now is how long this goes and whether short term innovation probably wants it to be because the Iranians now have realised the power that they have in blocking the Strait of Hormuz when it comes to the energy market. And so, so even if Trump has a George W. Bush moment where he says mission accomplished, or unfurls the banner and says mission accomplished, is the war actually going to be over? Is the energy market going to return to normal? And I think that's the question. Now, when you look at it from a farm business perspective, how long will this go? Well, traditionally this isn't the best time of year to be selling a crop. You'd rather, if you've hung onto it this long, you might wait until May June timeline where you get the weather rallies and pricing. That along those lines, should we rather be selling now or should we be booking those either old crop remaining inventory or new crop forward sales now versus in that spring weather rally time or early summer weather rally time. I think there's a lot of questions like that to be considered right now and not sure there's a lot of clear answers for a lot of these questions surrounding the whole conflict.
So Tyler, speaking of risk, here's one of them that, you know, I guess to Kelvin's point about the why and the when, I mean, this, this I think took a lot of people by surprise. And so this becomes one of those. If you hadn't been managing some of the price risk on this, yes, the, the grain side has, has had some opportunities. But you know, if, if you didn't have fertiliser priced well. Eesh. Now, the second part is, of course, supply and there are differences there. But Tyler, when you look at this from that risk management piece and not knowing how long this goes on, how does this shape this risk conversation going forward?
So I think the biggest impact in a lot of this is that I think it puts that extra pressure on farm incomes this year. And again, I think if you go back to our kind of year, look ahead that we did at the beginning of the year was probably saying that I think that this dynamic, this political dynamic in Canadian agriculture when farmers aren't making money is different. It's not really kind of something that we've seen in a sustained way. And so I think all of this makes all of this pressure worse. But I think it also really highlights and makes kind of a good case for why farming is different and why you do need different tools and public support in the sector. Because arguably, farmers that hadn't booked fertiliser yet may have been doing the right risk management thing. They might have been under tighter cash flow. They might have seen margins tightening up. They might have wanted to have a better sense as to what was going to happen on canola and canola pricing and canola futures before they made decisions on what their prop mix was going to be. They might have wanted to better understand what they could lock in and how they could use these different tools. They might have thought that they were being prudent and responsible and being thoughtful from a risk management perspective by maybe waiting a little bit more than normal in hindsight. Obviously it doesn't look like the right decision, but at the time there was probably some logic, some good logic around why they were doing it. And yet it's blown up in their face, not because of anything any farmer in this country has done. And so I think it underscores, like, look at that Hindsight is always 2020. Jacob on the Front Lines episode talks about how he didn't see this coming. When you get sophisticated observers like him that can't predict it, what about any of the rest of us? And then and now we kind of wait and see as people try and predict when is this going to end? And again, I don't think anybody knows. I think there's a sense that Trump will walk away soon. But as is often the case with what the US Administration does, the long term consequences of these kind of ad hoc decisions that they make are really quite substantial. And you really do wish that they would maybe think a little bit further ahead before they launch another War in the Middle East.
So Calvin, on that note, there's also significant tariff changes being floated, announced. That's a moving target as well. All of this in the face of exactly that. Inflation, inflationary issues, which, you know, Trump was just on the cusp of saying, you know, like, oh, prices are coming down, whatever, and now this has blown that literally right out of the water. So the timing of that really does make us shake our heads. But I do want to touch on. So we had the Supreme Court ruling a few weeks ago. Now we are hearing sort of how the US still plans to move forward. Of course, tariffs are a big part of their economic platform. So what is the latest on using? I think it's section 301 now that's been announced.
Yeah, Section a couple weeks ago or within days of the Supreme Court announcement. That's when President Trump announced the, the global tariff of 10%, soon to be 15% potentially. Now they announced this week a couple rounds of Section 301 investigations. So on Wednesday, I believe it was the U.S. trade Representative's office announced that 16 countries are facing investigations over different criteria that I think are questionable. The probes have to do with, with domestic production and whether these companies are overproducing, have excess industrial capacity across these 16 countries. And then last night the USTR announced 60 countries, including Canada, as well as the European Union, China, India, Mexico are all facing new 301 investigations. A second batch that is looking into whether these countries have failed to kerb imports of goods made with forced labour. So this is where Canada a couple years ago passed legislation to have businesses have to report on whether there's forced labour used in their supply chains. The US may potentially have an argument here that Canada isn't going far enough to its commitment under CUZMA under USMCA to prohibit goods made with forced labour, which there is some irony here when you look at an economy here in, well, not just North America, but the world that is driven largely on iPhones and where iPhones are made and the circumstances that they're made under when it comes to this. So, yeah, these investigations, again, I think are also an insult to US allies that feel like they have a close relationship and we've had a close relationship with the US and here it's kind of like the fentanyl accusations of last year where the US is raising this kind of guilty before, before you get a chance to, to prove your innocence, that kind of thing. When it comes to implementing these tariffs as they, they look to backfill the tariff revenue hole that was created by the Supreme Court ruling on ieba.
Yeah. And we will hear, I believe it's today what the plan is for repayment which I can't imagine that's going to be tidy. I can't imagine we're going to get any sort of anything other than a long drawn out legal process which seems to be the American way, which hey, be a lawyer, you will never want for much. So I mean it does though, it, it, it is, this is what we will be dealing with, right, going forward is that we knew that if the IPA tariffs were struck down that you know, the, the US government had other options, they were less absolute. And, and as you've outlined Calvin, like there are, they have to do investigations, they, you know, these sorts of things and they, some of them have timelines of course that can only go on for a certain amount of time, so they're less tidy. But I mean, and the end result is the same. It interferes with trade, it interferes with commerce and therefore it adds costs and it's inflationary. So Kelvin, the US really just seems bound and determined to be inflationary.
Yeah, well one thing countering there is a little bit of stuff that's happened that is countering that one would be the US dollar appreciation this week with the Iranian war. That could potentially counter inflation. But yeah, the markets, when you look at expectations of rate cuts, those have almost disappeared or largely there was talk of 2, 3 rate cuts before the end of this year and now we're down to maybe one. And so that right there shows that people are expecting central banks to be concerned about inflation as a result of escalating energy costs. And what's happening in the energy market, that's one of the things that has mask some of the tariff inflationary effects in the US is that Trump has benefited from declining gas prices and the whole drill baby drill mantra and unleashing American cheap energy. That type of thing has. And again this has us questioning why now and the why of this whole invasion of Iran or attacks on Iran. So yeah, I think a lot of these tariff practises just create uncertainty because a, they're built on weak arguments or wishy washy arguments. So everybody knows that they're going to be challenged in court and that they could potentially be, they have limited timelines, they could potentially be removed. And so businesses have to kind of go into a holding pattern and when you're in a holding pattern you're not investing and so and you're not cutting your prices, you're keeping your prices high to cover your risks and your and your potential costs in the supply chain because of these tariffs. And so, so that's where this is inflationary, creating all this uncertainty and chaos on the tariff trade front. And so yeah, curious how long people continue to put up with this or whether the Trump administration, as they were on an affordability agenda before invading Iran, realise that this is detrimental to affordability with the midterms around the corner.
That is the big one that we will of course be talking about in the coming weeks. I did want to point out because Shaun will eventually listen to this and so tip of the hat to him on looking at the currency side, that yes, the US dollar stronger. Looking at that, that usually means, you know, the Canadian dollar shifts, but Canada's dollar may increase based or against other currencies, but of course not against the us so that's one of the things that we'll point out there.
We'll see it has strengthened a little bit there though too, based on our energy. Like we aren't a petrodollar that we used to be. But, but high oil prices will be good for investment in LNG and Alberta and Saskatchewan's energy sectors here. If this is sustained again, that's the question how long will this period last?
But it also is like to me it sort of complicates what we the rule of thumb of like, you know, as the US dollar goes, so does the Canadian dollar, the opposite direction kind of thing. But it isn't necessarily that right now which is complicating things. Okay, we have to take a quick break and when we come back, we're going to talk about farmers relationship with their lenders and also of course, the US Ambassador speaking this week in Toronto. So stick around, we'll be back right after that. And they're off.
It's Wellington Canola on the inside, followed by hemp nettle flit, sweet buckwheat and narrowleaf docksbeard. This is one tough field, folks. But hold the phone here because here comes Prospect Herbicide making a move on the outside and eliminating the competition one by one. And now, way out in front, it's Canola for the win. With two powerful modes of action. Glyphosate friendly Prospect provides exceptional control of broadleaf and grassy weeds. To get your canola off to the best start possible, ask for it at your local retailer. Co Op has been beside local farmers and ranchers for generations. With Western Canada's largest fuel network and a team of local agronomy experts, Co Op is Built to keep your operation moving, moving forward. With deep local knowledge of the factors affecting your farm, we're ready to provide trusted advice in the field and on the ground. Count on co op to support your entire operation from season to season. Co op here for your farm, here for your family. Visit your co op agro centre to talk to a team member today.
Welcome back to Real Life Radio here on real radio, channel147, SiriusXM. It is of course, the Friday issues panel. I've got with me Tyler McCann and Calvin Hepner. Before we hop to that, though. For generations, Virgo has led the world in air seeding technology built on innovation and agronomy. First design Brego delivers precision placement, smart data integration and the productivity farmers demand. Borgo Advancing farming one acre at a time. Visit B O U R G a u l t.com all right, we head next. Now back to our panel and Tyler, we've got some jobs numbers out and it's bad.
It is surprisingly bad. You know, I think if you're going into the report this morning, analysts were expecting 10,000 additional jobs to be created in this country and Instead Canada lost 83,000 jobs, one of the worst monthly job losses in months. And I think, Lindsey, this is the early indications seem to be, this is the impact of everything that Kelvin was talking about earlier. These are the consequences on the Canadian economy of that trade uncertainty. Such a good reminder of how export dependent Canada is. And when the US Sneezes, right, we catch the cold or whatever that analogy is. And so it's something that as you look about what governments are doing and kind of the impacts and the priorities and the focus of what the government's going to be trying to navigate, the consequences of the trade uncertainty, the impacts on Canadian businesses is going to be absolutely top of mind. You know, you just did that readout for Borgo. You know, I think, I think it's worth acknowledging, you know, Canadian short line equipment manufacturers are probably on the front line of this again. Hopefully we don't see any job losses there. But it's such a good example of a manufacturing industry in Canada that's not appreciated. Such an important part of the broader ag ecosystem that I'm sure they are under pretty significant pressure these days. Maybe a good, good reminder for anybody listening, if you're looking to invest in farm equipment this year, look for those Canadian businesses and think about supporting them because they're, you know, I don't think life's easy.
Well, and yeah, Calvin, go ahead. This is one of those I Think examples that we often turn to and say, like, look, this is a successful aspect of Canadian agriculture where we have these short line, we have lots of innovation and then they end up against headwinds that really are completely out of their control. But Kelvin, go ahead.
And they're totally on the front lines when it comes to tariffs. So whether it's on general goods or on the steel and aluminium side of things too, in and out of the country. But to me, the jobs numbers in Canada and the US has also had real poor job numbers and a lot of adjustments lower post reports over the last year as well. The job numbers are kind of the flip side of the inflation discussion where sure, inflation hasn't gone as high as people expected, but that's also because businesses, when you've got tight margins or are losing money because of tariffs, you either raise your prices or if there's pressure to not raise your prices, you cut your costs, you cut your staff. And so that's where the employment numbers and weakness in employment is hand in hand with inflation and the impact of adding all these costs into our supply chains. And so it's in Canada and the U.S. that we're seeing these soft job numbers. I don't think it's just a Canadian issue, although it sure speaks to the importance of having some certainty in Canada. We have benefited compared to a lot of other countries that have these napkin deals with the Trump administration. We do still have the USMCA CUZMA deal that is largely applying to our exports other than in the sensitive steel, auto, aluminium, softwood sectors. Of course that's where there's contravention happening, but it speaks to the importance of maintaining some certainty and normality that businesses can invest around and hire people around when it comes to the upcoming review of CUZMA USMCA in July and Ambassador
Hoekstra was at the crops convention in Toronto this week talking to a room full of grain industry people. And one of his messages that he gave that room was that the review will happen, but tariffs are going to happen too and don't expect tariff free access coming out of it. And so Kelvin, again, I think that that's just this reality that, that people need to bake in. Hopefully it addresses some of the uncertainty. But that idea of duty free access in the United States does seem like it's going to go away eventually.
I disagree. Why should we bake in our negotiation? The people across the table's negotiating position, why should we bake that in? So I'm ahead of the negotiation again,
I think that there's a couple of things that are like, through different outcomes, I think Canada can still face tariffs under USMCA and still have a tariff advantage compared to the rest of the world. So I, I don't think, I think that when people think that there's going to be tariffs in it, they assume this kind of doomsday scenario that's going to be very, very disruptive. I don't think that that's necessarily the outcome. I don't think that the US wants that outcome. That does not mean that we won't see a 5% tariff across the board. That's just going to make kind of add that extra cost pressure on the businesses. So, so, but, but it is important to understand what the, what kind of the, the opponent, what the other side of the negotiating table is saying. And they're saying that tariffs are being baked in. One of the other messages that apparently was said from the stage this week was that you can't be smart when you're angry or you can be smart or you can be angry. And I think that, you know, understanding what is the smart approach here is something that we need to think about.
Yeah, emotion is one of those ones that realistically and to this point, Calvin, of the baking something in or whatever, I mean, we are, you know, in this negotiation even if we're not actually negotiating at the table. And so I would hope that our negotiators are going in for a review and a renewal, but the chances of there being absolutely no changes are slim to none.
Yeah. I'm just saying we don't need to pre accept because then that leaves you vulnerable to further movement. If we're going into the negotiation accepting where they want to end up, then, then we're vulnerable. That like, that's, that's not how, how negotiations and the US and Pete Hoekstra know this well and that's why I, I definitely think it's, it's interesting and, and we need to pay attention to what he's saying and what the messaging is. And it is important. It's just also understand the context of what he's saying and that he is clearly a mouthpiece and a messenger from, from the White House. He's not, it's, it's not like an honest, nonpartisan, third party, independent assessment of the situation. He's, he's completely a messenger.
Yeah, he's negotiating already. Right. Like that's what he's doing. And I will tell you, I've had my full of rumours this week and trying to Track them down and people trying to like, you know, change the outcome of something based on something that was said. It really does pay to stick to facts and exactly that. Be smart or be angry. Sometimes you just need to be smart and be patient and stick to your guys.
That is actually Jacob Shapiro has noted this. Sorry we're running out of time here. But yes, we are Canadians. One of the things Hoekstra was critical of was that Canadians are not alarmed by the possible end of Kuzma or we don't understand the importance of Kuzma to our economy based on polling. And I actually wonder whether that isn't a card that Carney can play in that Canada. There are many Canadians who are elbows up and are emotional about this and that gives the Canadian government more Runway to negotiate and have some pain in the meantime than what the US side may have when it comes to the northern states. Concerns about business relationships north of the border.
And I'm glad you brought it back. Yeah, exactly. And I'm glad you brought it back to this because I did mention in the open of the show that we would at least like touch on Canadian politics. And so I do want to round out the show with we have three by elections that were called. However we had a floor crosser from the NDP join the Liberal caucus. It does mean that Carney is. Is that ever bit closer to an actual majority government. Tyler, I'll start with you. We. We have like a minute on this but what say you? Does Carney win all three seats and actually have his majority or does he lose Terriban? What do you think?
So it's interesting the block of Terriban is saying Carney's going to get his majority through the floor crossers so don't worry about it. It's interesting seeing them to try and neutralise that we need a majority government argument there. The Terre bun seat is not naturally a liberal seat. It's. It's hard to know the moment that we're in. So I don't know. I'm not betting money on it. The other two I think are very safe but I'm not confident enough about
where, where Tarabund goes.
Okay. And Calvin, it would.
It would get that only some at 172. Yeah, they would have a majority but the speaker would have to vote to break a tie and the speakers always supposed to vote for the status quo and that would make it tough to for example change the committee structures and that type of thing. So they would really like 173 and and. But then that gives Every backbencher power to to negotiate with the, with the party head office too.
That is, that is the part that will be very interesting is like it does look like we're in for a majority but the slimmest of in which case exactly that some of those factions within the Liberal Party that have maybe been very quiet in the last year may find their voices once again. So interesting times. Okay, we've got to leave it there. Tyler, have a wonderful weekend.
Yes, you too, Lindsay. Enjoy the cold weather we're getting again.
Yeah, exactly. Okay Calvin, you as well. And everyone stick around if you're on the podcast feed on YouTube. We've got a bonus coming up right after this.
Otherwise, thanks for downloading this Real Egg radio podcast brought to you by nutrivallid's complete herbicide from fm. The hardest working in crop cross spectrum solution now features Group 1 Grassy Weed Control delivering broadleaf and wild oat control in one convenient co pack. More control, less compromise. See your local retailer today.
I've got with me Tyler McCann. Calvin Hepner. We're in the bonus for the show. Tyler, what do you want to throw in there?
Well, when you were talking about Canadian politics, I missed the show the week that when the opposition leader Polyav gave his speech about Canada U.S. relations. And I did want to connect that back to, to President Hoekstra's remarks because I believe the conservative plan these days is we're just going to get tariff free access to autos to the United States. And again I think the message from the US Ambassador was that that may be a naive approach to think that's that's a likely outcome. And again it speaks to kind of like this odd world that we're living in when I know that the kind of the prime minister has been kind of very talks about these ruptures and uses the language that maybe I wouldn't use but he at least seems to have a bit of more clear eyed sense of the world that we're living in and, and kind of understands what's, what's, what the consequences are going to be.
Okay.
All you have said it to Detroit and New York though and meeting with
automakers us and down to Texas too, I think.
Yeah, Texas. Okay. Are we like what happens there? Because what happened. He keeps saying he doesn't, he doesn't want to get in the way of negotiations. But yeah, to go to the U.S. it is, that is potentially a can of worms that he's opening there in terms of of what the role of the leader of the opposition Is and, and what, what he can accomplish to that.
I did find it interesting. Hoekstra did, because Berndtoben was there and did, did listen to the ambassador. And the ambassador pointed out that Doug Ford is not helping. So I don't know, for some people that would mean keep doing what you're doing. Right. But he did point that and he
was also, again, I'm trying not to be defensive when hoaxer speaks, but it is hard. His style of communication is a little bit condescending, I believe, to a little.
Okay.
My understanding was that he was pretty warm, Calvin, and that he does seem to be kind of comfortable in a room full of agriculture people. I think that that was maybe not quite as bad as he has at other things.
And I think he is, yeah, like, in person, I think he is warm that way. But it's the message that is still like, one of the things he talked about was that the US Administration is wondering why no substantive conversations have taken place since October. And as if it's like, come on, Canada, you should be coming to D.C. and you should be wanting to talk to us. Well, what happened in October? Who ended the substantive conversations back in October when we were enjoying that Blue Jays playoff run? Sure, there was an ad run by Doug Ford, and again, Doug Ford not being helpful. But. But it was the US Side that it was the truth social post that lashed back at Canada on that. And so who ended that and what about Dominic LeBlanc was just in D.C. a week ago, meeting with Jameson Greer in person. Carney and Trump spoke at length on Sunday. So I don't know whether it's fair to be critical that there aren't substantive conversations taking place. I think that's a bit of a strawman argument that Hoekstra is throwing up, I think.
And the next topic we're going to talk about is sort of in line with this, this the U.S. ambassador to Canada. He's doing what he's supposed to be doing in a lot of ways for a Trump government. Right. In that he's here essentially laying the groundwork or whatever of just carrying the message from Washington of what Trump wants, of what of these sorts of things. And you're right, Calvin, in his delivery and his way of doing it is maybe it's hard not to get your backup because he is incredibly abrasive and can be very, you know, there's more than a few times where I've just been like, you've got to be joking that this guy expects, you know, all this discussion or all this Pomp and circumstance. But then he offends us, like right in the next sentence, and it's like, so. But I mean, he's. He's Trump's representative here. So what are we surprised by? Okay, so that brings us to my next point, which we posted this week at Real Agriculture, some of the CFSI data on how farmers view their lenders, their bankers and lenders, and if they view their lender as a partner in their farm. I have feelings about this one. And with full deference to our lending institutions and the people in them, and very good people, our banks sell money. That is what they do. They make money off of lending you money. And while they may be useful in that, ultimately banks don't lose. And so I struggle with this one of being able to say that a banker is a partner. Calvin, I'll start with you.
Do you agree?
Because a lot of farmers say that they are.
Well, I think ideally, yes, they are a partner. Both sides would like that. But we don't always. Our businesses aren't always running in ideal situations. And so I think, especially when we're in a downturn and that's when the tough conversations happen. And I do wonder what this data point would show when we were in more of the boom times. Or maybe we should look at just the livestock sector right now, Whether there's a higher relationship factor there. Maybe it's not. I'm not. There's probably some lag there too, in terms of building trust. But, yeah, I wonder whether this is also a sign of things being tougher right now. And sure, when it's easy to get loans and we're growing and everybody's excited about going further into debt and borrowing you more money, that's a different storey than when we're looking at cash flow and whether we'll make payments and that
type of thing, I don't know. I've always been told that you invest in banks because then you'll make money. So there you go. Tyler. Should farmers.
So I think.
I think the Data point was 40%. So they view their banker as a partner. Is that good news? Do you believe that number?
So I'm surprised that the number's not higher, to be honest, because no agriculture business in this country, or very few, I should say. There's always going to be some exceptions, but no business is getting by without credit. Credit is an important tool for managing the businesses that are there. Again, in the Risk Management working group, we've got some bankers or some people at the special career there, and one of them was saying that especially in this landscape where we're in, where for the most part on interest rates, there's not much spread between the banks, the rates are pretty competitive. It actually is through that services, that kind of that partnership piece where banks can build a competitive advantage that they've got and add some value. So I think that that speaks to, again, the good bankers probably are positioning themselves as partners because they see that as what. What can make the difference and what can keep somebody's business that's there, but it is, you know, it's interesting when I was in the minister's office, because Farm Credit Canada, a crown corporation, we would get complaints from members of Parliament who had a constituent that was running into issues. And every now and again you would hear this storey about some farmer that FCC had taken, had gotten to the point FCC was calling the loans in. And the farmer would go to the mp and the farmer would say to the mp, you know, boy, I've been hard done by the banks not being a good partner. And I would have to say to the mp, look at fcc. Of all of the, of all of the banks have. It's gone to the point that FCC is doing this. Like, like this is bad news. And because again, I think as much as banks are in it to make money, no bank wants to own farm. Banks do want their clients to be successful. Banks want to see their clients growing. That's how they make more money. And so, you know, I think it's easy when things go bad to kind of of get angry at the banker. But I don't know, I think sometimes we're too hard on them.
Tyler is in the pockets of big banks, everybody. I just. No, I'm just kidding. Okay. So. But I would, I do want to add. It's an. It's an excellent point, Tyler, is that realistically they are businesses, but they're businesses that do better when their clients do better. Right. And so, I mean, I think in that sense that is incredibly important. I guess what I would. What I would like to see more of. And I think maybe we're having some of these conversations. And I had just this past weekend, we had a young farm family stop in on their way through. They came to visit and, you know, they're sort of in a similar. They're younger than we are, but they're sort of in a similar situation with like off farm income, trying to grow the farm, whatever, and running up against, you know, when you get to a lender, all of the programming or a lot of the programming, etc. Is still sort of based on this. You've got a whole bunch of equity and you've got, you know, all this cash flow and you got all this whatever. And, and this is where I guess I sort of hold up a bit of a light and say, okay, but we also have. And, and some of our lending into institutions will tell you we've got this programme, we've got that programme. When you drill into them, they're all basically the same. You've got to have a big chunk of money to put down. You're going to pay competitive interest rates and you need to make your payments either monthly, quarterly, biannually, what? And so like ultimately there isn't as much flexibility as maybe that there could be all of that to say you still have to be financially viable. I'm not saying that banks need to lend money to everybody and that there doesn't need to be some sort of financial bar. But I definitely hear from people, let's say the 45 and under crowd that, you know, don't have generational wealth to leverage off of that. It's not easy to necessarily see a lender as a partner. They are very much providing you capital or, you know, a loan, but it is transactional, it's not necessarily a partnership. So that's my two cents. Calvin, go ahead.
Another factor to consider here, I think, is that a large portion of our farming population, and also people that took this survey, remember a day when there were four times as many loans officers at their local branch as what there are now, and you had a personal relationship with somebody that a loans officer that knew your farm and they knew what kind of equipment you had on the farm and when you last bought a new tractor and that type of thing. And now there's been so much consolidation and movement towards technology to enable those banks to have those returns and so they have less staff and there's less of that personal relationship, trusts factor there too when it comes to this. So I think, I also wonder if that hasn't soured the level of feeling of, of being a trusted partner on some of these fronts.
And I think, Lindsay, on the young farmer piece, give me an opportunity to shout out to how we do things in Quebec where the government does do a better job with loan guarantees to kind of try and address some of that piece. And again, it changes the nature of the financial institution. Doesn't mean that they're going to land to bad business cases, but a government backstop does a loan guarantee. It can be a low Cost tool for governments to do more to support the next generation. And I think that that part of the other reality goes back to the conversation about kind of the commercial farms or those wanting to be commercial farms and the small farms that are today. Because I do think that, to Kelvin's point, I think it used to be everybody had kind of the person that they dealt with all of the time. I think that that's still true for those bigger businesses out there. They're going to have a very different relationship to their banker than some of the smaller farms that aren't turning over them. Millions of dollars in business that others are. And that is a consequence of that very like growing divide consolidation at the top and kind of this kind of larger number of smaller farms at the bottom. Bankers are adjusting to that. That's part of the new world that they're already in.
I feel like this topic deserves like three columns out of just this conversation. So I'll leave that with you guys. That's your homework for this weekend. Please write those. I will publish them. Okay. We're going to leave it there. Thank you, each of you, for your thoughts and your insight today. This was a lot of fun. Did we miss Shaun? I don't know. You let me know. Everybody sent me an email.
Is this our shout out, our chance, Lindsay, to say if anybody's got ideas for the most remote event.
Oh, yeah.
Shaun too. This is real life. Yeah. New. A new contest. See how far away we can send Shaun. Yeah, not far away. Remote. We want to see.
Yeah. He needs to.
Yeah.
How hard can it be to get there?
I think I suggested Zoda Manitoba. Right. Kelvin Zoda would be relatively remote. Yeah. Anyway, that's what would be. Send them all over the place. He was up in Grand Prairie this week.
He's all over the place in northern Alberta this week. So that is already a couple.
Which I would really. If someone wants to invite me to Grand Prairie, I will come. But I would like to come in June. I would like. I would like the very long days. That's what I would like.
Shaun was. Shaun was saying he enjoys places where there's no direct flights. That's something that really.
Oh, yeah. That's really nice. Okay.