The House of Commons agriculture committee has demanded that the federal government restore the
Canadian Farm Families Options program to its original rules.
Agriculture minister Chuck Strahl announced changes on April 20 that restricted the number of poor farm families eligible for help.
That change caught many people by surprise because it specified that only farmers who had received help in the first year of the two-year program would be eligible for help in the second year.
The committee vote pitted the opposition majority against the Conservative minority and the motion moved by Liberal Wayne Easter carried.
Read Also
Going beyond “Resistant” on crop seed labels
Variety resistance is getting more specific on crop disease pathogens, but that information must be conveyed in a way that actually helps producers make rotation decisions.
Strahl will not reverse his decision and the vote will have no impact on program rules for the 2006 income year.
However, it was a significant vote, ending what had been several weeks of gridlock at the committee as Conservative MPs filled the time with long speeches to avoid votes on a number of motions the government knew it would lose.
This week, the committee was expected to approve a motion from New Democrat Alex Atamanenko to support a request from the National Farmers’ Union that auditor general Sheila Fraser investigate a plebiscite held earlier this year on the future of barley marketing at the Canadian Wheat Board.
Conservative MPs were expected to allow the vote late in the afternoon on June 5 after more than two hours of arguments against it.
If that vote was held as planned, it would clear the way for MPs on the committee to approve a report offering recommendations to the government on how the next generation of agricultural policy framework policies should be designed.
The confrontation between government and opposition MPs over the anti-government motions threatened to delay consideration of the APF report until autumn when Parliament returns from its summer recess.
That would have made the report irrelevant because federal and provincial ministers are to sign an agreement-in-principle in June and negotiations on design details will continue through the summer and fall.
Summary of hearings
The report is meant to reflect the result of months of hearings that the agriculture committee held in Ottawa and across the country.
The prospect of a report delay because of political stalemate led the Canadian Federation of Agriculture to issue a plea to committee members to get on with the work.
“The current government timetable will see the major work on the new policy framework taking place this spring and into the summer,” wrote CFA president Bob Friesen. “If the committee’s report is not released until the fall of the year, its ideas, conclusions and recommendations will come too late to be included in the development process.”
He asked MPs to make the APF report a priority.
“We believe it is in the best interest of Canadian farmers.”
Opposition MPs would not relent, insisting that the motions by Easter and Atamanenko be dealt with first.
On May 30, Conservative MPs agreed to allow votes on the motions.
