Saskatchewan people should expect few new policy initiatives coming from the recently re-elected NDP government, says University of Saskatchewan professor Christine de Clercy.
That’s especially true when it comes to agriculture.
De Clercy said if premier Lorne Calvert wants to keep his rural and urban caucuses happy, his party’s one-vote majority leaves him little room to maneouvre.
“Things are tight for him. Particularly because the majority is so slim, I’m not expecting any bold new directions in any policy area, particularly in agricultural policy,” predicted the political studies professor.
Read Also
Who owns farm data?
Data privacy is one of the noted issues blocking adoption of digital agriculture on Canadian farms as farmers worry about where their data is going and how it’s being used by companies.
De Clercy cited Ottawa’s agricultural policy framework agreement as an example. The Saskatchewan NDP government opposes the APF in its present form.
But if it decided it wanted to implement it despite its flaws, the NDP would need all of its 29 votes in the legislature to get it passed, assuming one NDP member of the legislative assembly is named speaker of the house with no voting privileges.
If one NDP MLA opposed that or any other plan for rural Saskatchewan, it could result in party infighting and deadlock, she said.
As for the slight re-bound in rural support for the NDP (the party increased its share of the popular vote overall by 6.6 percent over 1999), de Clercy attributes it to effective communication with rural voters.
“The New Democrats spent a lot of time sending messages that they were concerned about (rural people), that (rural people) were on the NDP radar, and that (the party) wanted to build bridges to those communities.”
De Clercy added the questions the NDP raised about whether the Saskatchewan Party would privatize crown utilities was as important in winning support from rural areas as it was elsewhere in the province.
U of S political studies professor Joe Garcea said the jump in NDP support reflects a better voter mobilization over 1999, rather than an emerging rural trend toward voting NDP.
“The NDP vote came out, while the Sask Party vote just stayed the same (as in 1999).”
Like de Clercy, Garcea said many rural people voted based on protecting the crown utilities, which he called a “practical consideration.”
Garcea also pointed to a mistake made by Sask Party leader Elwin Hermanson during the televised debate that may have swung undecided support to the NDP.
“By focusing so much on the deficit, the Saskatchewan Party helped the NDP by showing how (the NDP) had to go to bat for rural families,” Garcea said. “That gave (Calvert) the opportunity to emphasize where and how much his government spent in relief to agricultural producers,” such as in drought assistance and BSE compensation.
While de Clercy can envision struggles developing within the NDP, she can also envision strife emerging within the Sask Party.
“There may also be some tensions within the new Sask party caucus,” she said, referring to the addition of three urban MLAs from Saskatoon.
“Those Saskatoon representatives are going to argue for more benefits for the city.
This may, ironically, alienate voters in the rural areas because now they’re sharing their party with city people, whose interests will not be the same as theirs.”
National Farmer’s Union, Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan and Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association representatives all agree that reform of the property tax system remains their pre-eminent concern.
During the election campaign, the NDP announced plans to “reform” the property tax formula if re-elected.
Education in Saskatchewan is funded 59 percent through tax on property and 41 percent through provincial operating grants.
The groups want the province to assume a much larger share of that funding.
