From the provinces, there was some confusion and resentment about Ottawa’s latest unilaterally designed $1 billion farm aid package.
From opposition politicians, there was largely scorn over what they saw as pre-election gimmickry.
Farm groups were divided but largely supportive.
And some farm economists questioned whether the promised help to offset rising farm production costs was anything more than window-dressing.
Prime minister Stephen Harper announced March 9 in Saskatchewan that Ottawa will set aside $600 million to create a new version of a popular income stabilization account program to cover the first 15 percent farm margin decline.
Read Also
Man charged after assault at grain elevator
RCMP have charged a 51-year-old Weyburn man after an altercation at the Pioneer elevator at Corinne, Sask. July 22.
He also promised to set aside $400 million this year to cover retroactive production cost increases and $100 million a year for the next five years for cost-of-production compensation.
As usual, the announcement drew mixed responses.
The Canadian Federation of Agriculture has lobbied for a program resembling the Net Income Stabilization Account program and it praised the announcement. The National Farmers Union panned it as a weak response while the government is trying to dismantle the earning power of the single desk Canadian Wheat Board.
Grain Growers of Canada executive director Richard Phillips said it is a welcome gesture of support from the Conservatives and agriculture minister Chuck Strahl. Cost-of-production compensation is crucial because already input prices are moving up to take away the farmer benefits of higher grain prices.
“The early optimism of better prices was quickly being dampened by the rapidly rising price of crop inputs in the grains and oilseeds sector,” he said.
“This announcement is timely news for farmers and will give them a badly needed boost of confidence as they finalize cropping plans this spring.”
At the University of Saskatchewan, agricultural economist Murray Fulton said in a March 12 interview the recognition of cost-of-production issues first promised during the Conservative election campaign last year is important but the financial commitment of $100 million annually is relatively minuscule.
“Given the huge increases in production costs through fuel or fertilizer, $100 million across the country is a drop in the bucket, really window-dressing,” he said.
Opposition MPs smelled election.
“The help is welcome but it seems timely as an election announcement,” said New Democratic Party agriculture critic Alex Atamanenko.
Liberal Wayne Easter called it cynical pre-election promises that will not help farmers quickly. The Conservatives tied the cost-of-production aid to passage of next week’s federal budget and Easter said existing legislation could have been used to get money quickly to farmers.
“The idea of recognizing the need for NISA and the problem of production costs is good but the way they are doing this is just cynical politics,” he said in an interview.
In provincial capitals, there was some confusion.
Strahl said March 9 the federal contribution of $600 million as seed money to a new farmer contributory stabilization fund would require provincial agreement during negotiations on new national farm programming. That implies the provinces will contribute 40 percent to the federal 60 – an additional $400 million.
But Strahl did not discuss this with provincial ministers, other than a heads-up telephone call just before the announcement.
In Regina, agriculture minister Mark Wartman bristled at the unilateral federal announcement that could end up costing the provinces money. He also complained about the lack of detail.
In Winnipeg, provincial minister Rosann Wowchuk said she appreciated the federal help for farmers and had been assured by Strahl that none of the $1 billion was a 60:40 split.
“Mr. Strahl said this was all federal dollars so I don’t see any impact on the province, although we will have to negotiate the program details,” she said.
