EDMONTON (Staff) – In an age when voters are clamoring for more direct democracy, Alberta Agriculture figures it’s on the cutting edge of giving its constituents what they want.
For the past several years, the department has joined other branches of the Alberta government in trying to tap into public sentiment as a prelude to forming public policy.
There have been focus groups of randomly selected farmers, public meetings to discuss issues identified at those focus groups and then government policy to reflect the views bubbling up.
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
There has been “dotocracy” when farmers at focus groups marked their policy preferences with dots on a visible sheet on the wall.
There have been regional meetings when hundreds of farmers spoke, supposedly devoid of any farm group affiliation.
They have talked about the future of agriculture, a business plan for the department and most recently, appropriate safety nets policies for Alberta.
“I think people are evolving their powers to talk to government and their desire to talk to government,” says Gerry Parlby, a member of the Alberta Agriculture planning secretariat that has organized the consultations and expects to be called upon to organize more. “We are helping the government process evolve to meet that desire.”
The result has been a system of tapping farm opinion beyond traditional farm leadership consultations.
It has Reform MP Leon Benoit raving about the results and insisting that the federal government mimic the process.
It has Alberta agriculture minister Walter Paszkowski claiming assurance that when he speaks for Alberta farmers, he is saying what they believe.
It even has Alberta Opposition agriculture critic Ken Nicol (Lib – Lethbridge East) offering a measure of praise.
“Of all the ministries in the Alberta government, agriculture has the longest history of consulting and the government has a good image of consulting.”
Then, he adds the first hint that there are rain clouds over Alberta’s consultation parade.
“These days, increasingly, I am thinking that is what it is, a public perception exercise. I suspect they are going to the grassroots because individuals are easier to control and manipulate than farm leaders.”
While the government and many farm leaders swear by the results as a reflection of what “average farmers” are thinking, others question if it is not simply the latest way that the Alberta government directs and moulds farm opinion to fit its agenda, as it has since 1971.
“Clearly, the Alberta government has defined positions,” says Ed Tyrchniewicz, dean of agriculture at the University of Alberta and no stranger to consultations. “When they start a process of consultation, they send information out. The analysis will appeal to people with certain policy leanings. Does this influence the opinions they get back?”
