OTTAWA – In 1992, the Conservative government of the day decided to use more than $17 million of Agriculture Canada funds to help Manitoba pay some 1989 forest fighting bills.
It did not go to Parliament for authorization.
Six years earlier, it had announced a $1 billion farm subsidy without a legal program in place to support the spending.
Both incidents were noticed by then-auditor general Denis Desautels and criticized.
He complained the Agriculture Canada legislation gives the minister the power to create new programs without going to Parliament. By 1992, close to $4 billion had been spent this way.
Read Also
Alberta crop diversification centres receive funding
$5.2 million of provincial funding pumped into crop diversity research centres
He called it inappropriate.
Now, a high-profile Ontario MP would like to take that discretionary spending power away from the agriculture minister.
Last week, Kingston MP Peter Milliken introduced a private member’s bill to change Agriculture Canada’s legislation.
“This bill … will require the minister to come to the House if he seeks to establish a new agricultural program, rather than create it on his own without the proper authority,” Milliken said April 19 in the Commons.
As a private member’s bill, it only will make it into law if the government, or at least a majority of MPs, agree to support it.
Opposition Reform and Bloc QuŽbecois MPs likely would, but support from the governing Liberals is far from guaranteed.
Traditionally, Agriculture Canada has opposed any attempt to remove that discretionary power from the minister.
Ag Canada lawyers disagreed
When the auditor-general recommended in 1989 and again in 1992 that the power be taken away, departmental lawyers responded that they disagreed with the suggestion and considered the use of the power appropriate.
The background to the 1992 use of agriculture funds to pay provincial forest fire bills is complex.
The Manitoba government refused to make its $37.7 million contribution to the federal-provincial drought assistance program in 1988 unless Ottawa helped it pay forest fire bills that resulted from the same drought.
In 1992, Ottawa agreed to send $30 million to Winnipeg for forest fire costs, in return for Manitoba’s agreement to sign the drought assistance program agreement.
Bill McKnight, the agriculture minister, used his discretion under section 5 of the Department of Agriculture Act to contribute $17.3 million out of department funds for the forest fire bill. In effect, the department paid $17 million to get $37 million from Manitoba.
