The Canadian Federation of Independent Business, claiming to represent close to 6,000 farmers and more than 1,000 agribusinesses, says Ottawa’s attempt to reform farm safety net programs misses the mark on several counts.
It concentrates too much on support programs and too little on bottom line-enhancing measures such as tax cuts and deregulation.
Even accepting the need for some safety net program changes, the government’s proposals for a new Net Income Stabilization Account program are inappropriate, said the CFIB after a survey of its agricultural members.
“The agribusiness members we have see themselves as entrepreneurs,” federation national affairs director André Piché said in a July 17 interview. “They don’t want to lurch from crisis to crisis, looking for a handout. They believe in policies that allow them to prosper in the market.”
Read Also
Phosphate prices to remain high
Phosphate prices are expected to remain elevated, according to Mosaic’s president.
In a July 9 letter to federal agriculture minister Lyle Vanclief, Piché said his members do not believe enough consultation has been held on the agricultural policy framework or that the government listened enough to what they heard.
“While agribusinesses are receptive to the idea of a new policy framework for agriculture, they often have different priorities than those put forward in this process,” he wrote. “In particular, CFIB agrimembers believe one of the most effective ways governments can support agriculture over the longer term is to provide a reduction in the total tax burden. A reduction in the federal excise tax on fuel tops the list of proposed tax reductions cited by agribusiness.”
Provincial governments should pitch in by reducing property taxes on farmland, property and buildings.
In the brief to government, the federation also called for an end to “unnecessary” regulations, including the export sales monopoly of the Canadian Wheat Board. “The current regime of antiquated and interventionist legislation and regulation hinder growth opportunities.”
It cited as a supporting argument a controversial recommendation from the Liberal-dominated House of Commons agriculture committee last year calling for a test period of ending the CWB export monopoly.
When it got to the details of the APF, the federation’s criticisms reflected many of the same complaints that the traditional farm lobby has expressed.
It recommended that Ottawa address key concerns:
- That the new programs are not subject to trade challenge.
- That provinces should be allowed to operate their own programs designed for local needs to run along with the APF. Ottawa proposes to end federal funding of companion programs after three years.
- That implementation be delayed until program designs are improved.
- Ottawa should provide proof that the new program is better than the old.
- Farmers must be better educated about the new programs.
- The Net Income Stabilization Account program be improved to allow more flexibility in withdrawals and better benefits for beginning farmers.
