The House of Commons agriculture committee has tabled 18 recommendations in a report to the federal government on what the next agriculture policy framework should contain.
The federal, provincial and territorial ministers are expected to sign the next five-year agreement in St. John’s in July, although Saskatchewan minister Lyle Stewart said they are still in the early stages of negotiation.
“We are still a long, long ways (from an agreement),” he said in an interview last week.
Saskatchewan has conducted its own survey of what producers want to replace Growing Forward 2 next April 1. A report is in the works.
Read Also
Lethbridge Polytechnic receives major donation
Multimillion-dollar donation by Hranac family aids Lethbridge Polytechnic’s research in integrated food production systems, irrigation science and post-harvest technology in Alberta
While short on specifics, the federal committee report offered five recommendations for business risk management programs, including that they be transparent, quick to respond, simple and predictable, and better meet farmers’ needs.
The committee said the government should review the threshold for AgriStability payments to make sure the program provides adequate protection and flexibility to encourage greater participation.
“To restore producers’ trust and draw them into the program, AgriStability must provide a level of support that enables producers to manage their risk,” the report said.
“That is why a large number of witnesses called for the restoration of the 85 percent protection level. However, others said that returning to the former eligibility and coverage criteria would probably not be enough.”
Livestock producers have called for the pilot Western Livestock Price Insurance Program to be made permanent, and the committee recommended the government support the program and consider extending it to the entire country.
It said the government should support the private sector to develop and implement pilot projects that would work better for pork and grain producers.
The committee heard from witnesses during 11 meetings on the six priority areas identified by agriculture ministers in Calgary last summer: markets and trade; science, research and innovation; risk management; environmental sustainability and climate change; value-added agriculture and agri-food processing; and public trust.
The report acknowledges that given these priority areas, particularly the addition of processing and climate change, there should be better collaboration by all government departments and agencies “to ensure a whole-of-government approach.”
In his presentation to the committee, Canadian Meat Council president Troy Warren noted: “An agriculture policy framework confined to the mandates of the minister of agriculture and agri-food is not sufficient for a sector that is impacted broadly and deeply by other government departments and agencies.”
Conservative agriculture critic David Anderson has said an expanded framework requires more money, but the Liberal government is uncommitted.
The Conservative committee members filed a dissenting report with their own recommendations, while NDP member Ruth Ellen Brosseau submitted a supplementary report of five recommendations, including asking the government to study the impacts of a carbon tax on competitiveness and productivity of agriculture before imposing the tax on farmers.
The Conservative report calls for a full cost impact analysis of the environmental tax proposals.
The committee report acknowledges concerns about the carbon tax but did not make a recommendation other than that the government help the sector adapt to environmental regulations.
The reports can be found at www.parl.gc.ca/Committees/en/AGRI.
