WINNIPEG – The 1993-94 version of the debate over the Crow Benefit subsidy will be a weak echo of the battles of a decade ago, says Saskatchewan agriculture minister Darrel Cunningham.
Changes seem inevitable. The battle will be over the amount of money involved and who gets it, he said.
“I think it’s fair to say the major concern has shifted,” said the Saskatchewan NDP minister traditionally known for opposing a change in the method of payment. “The real issue this time is money.”
In the wake of release of the Producer Payment Panel report late last week, Cunningham’s comments were mirrored by other industry players from various sides of the payment debate.
Read Also
Agriculture ministers agree to AgriStability changes
federal government proposed several months ago to increase the compensation rate from 80 to 90 per cent and double the maximum payment from $3 million to $6 million
Meanwhile, agriculture minister Ralph Goodale wrestles with the question of what to do about the Western Grain Transportation Act and who gets how much benefit from the solution.
Recommendation not supported
The Producer Panel report ignited widespread grumbling when it recommended that most of the $560 million Crow Benefit be paid directly to farmers but that as much as $85 million be diverted to a safety net ($70 million), to research and development ($10 million) and to administration ($5 million).
Some of that money would benefit eastern producers.
“I fail to understand why it’s necessary to divert part of the benefit to anyone outside the Prairies,” United Grain Growers president Ted Allen said in an interview July 4. “When the Liberals changed it in 1984, I thought they wrote it in blood that it would remain a benefit to Western Canada.”
Prairie governments opposed
Manitoba agriculture minister Harry Enns said all three prairie governments oppose the dilution out of the region.
“This is supposed to be an historic prairie benefit and it will be a major issue of concern,” he said.
Goodale will face other criticisms of the report when he meets provincial agriculture ministers here.
Manitoba and Ontario both object to the pooling proposal that would increase costs of using the Seaway and send more grain westward. It would cost Manitoba grain farmers tens of millions of dollars.
Saskatchewan objects to a proposal that more than $80 million in railway subsidies for high-cost branch lines be diverted into producer payments. It would mean sharply higher freight rates on those lines and their likely abandonment.
As the most grain-dependent province, Saskatchewan would also see a sharp decline in grain revenues and farmland values if the method of payment is shifted, said deputy agriculture minister Hartley Furtan.
