Partisan pettiness only hurts farmers -
2009-06-23
Partisan pettiness only hurts farmers
The Owen Sound Sun Times
Sat Jun 13 2009
Editor:
I wanted to respond to Larry Miller's letter to the editor of May 16 from the frustrated perspective of a family farm operator in Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound.
I am frustrated by the lack of enthusiasm that agriculture receives from governments, from the media and from the public.
It seems that agriculture is only in the news when there is a crisis like BSE or the H1N1 virus. I am also frustrated when I see politicians bicker in print -- stuck in an endless partisan loop. Words are twisted and taken out of context resulting in debate that is tainted and dishonest -- and the only ones who suffer are farmers. This is maddening especially when we have seen successive governments struggle with agriculture policy -- and as Mr. Miller stated "we are not there yet."
Agricultural programming in Canada is a complex web of provincial and federal programs. A quick snapshot of recent agricultural history in Canada shows that programming has been "fixed", "replaced", "re-branded" and "re-profiled" usually following failed programming and/or a change in government. The net effect has been negative on agriculture.
We have experienced national programs that respond too slowly and ineffectively to crisis -- with aid arriving too little, too late and often into the wrong pockets. We have witnessed successive federal governments jump from one crisis to another and this ad hoc behaviour becomes a far more expensive solution in the end.
In the years 2004 to 2006, the federal government spent on average $1.5 billion per year on emergency ad hoc aid. That is a lot of money to throw around in an ad hoc fashion.
I think we can all agree that we would rather see government resources going towards food production and not bureaucracy. Elimination of duplicate bureaucracy between provinces and the federal government is something that I agree with and, moreover, I am certain that Mr. Miller would agree that programs are best delivered by those closest to them -- and not from a far-off office in Ottawa.
It was for this reason that farmers through organizations like the Canadian Federation of Agriculture developed AgriFlex. AgriFlex was intended to compliment the newly developed federal Growing Forward agriculture program by filling in the gaps that national programming does not address.
The "flex" in AgriFlex was intended to allow for the business risk management model so that the provinces had the "flexibility" to offer needed programs. In the case of Ontario, this "flexibility" would allow the province to support the Risk Management Program.
It is noteworthy that RMP was supported by the provincial conservatives in the last election along with the provincial liberals.
I agree with Mr. Miller's sentiment that things are not perfect when it comes to federal/provincial programming. Over the years, agriculture programming has proved to be a complex and difficult policy file for successive federal governments. For federal policy-makers the challenges are many: from World Trade Organization considerations - to disease and weather issues - to rising costs of production - to currency exchange issues. These issues can be overwhelming on their own but together can be crippling.
While we are encouraged at the federal government's efforts to seek out new market and trade opportunities we are also disappointed that little focus has been on the challenges that Ontario grain and oilseeds farmer's face. I would like Mr. Miller to consider including business risk management in the Agriflex framework. This is an opportunity for the Conservatives to open up the Growing Forward framework to business risk management in partnership with the provinces.
I also agree with Mr. Miller that the minister should review programming in consultation with the provinces and industry stakeholders.
We, in the agriculture industry, are the ones who utilize agriculture programming and we are the ones who are intimately familiar with the successes and failures of each program.
In the case of Ontario, RMP has worked and this should and must be considered when the minister reviews agriculture programming. I just hope that one day we will be able to move beyond the review process and actually allow farmers to focus on farming.
I also hope that the politicians that we elected set aside their differences and focus on solutions. The partisan pettiness will only hurt farming at the end of the day.
