For farmers wondering about the impact of the federal government’s decision to sign an international climate change treaty in December, there still are more questions than answers.
The federal government has promised to slash emissions of such greenhouse gases as carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide and methane.
It has not yet said how it can be done or how much it might cost.
“The critical thing right now is to try to get some answers,” said Jack Wilkinson, president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture.
Read Also
Russian wheat exports start to pick up the pace
Russia has had a slow start for its 2025-26 wheat export program, but the pace is starting to pick up and that is a bearish factor for prices.
“If they see a system of incentives for farmers and voluntary measures and no carbon tax, then we can improve our performance and contribute. But that is a lot of ifs.”
It is a debate that will range far beyond agriculture.
The Canadian business lobby has warned that it will cut billions of dollars of growth from the economy, cost jobs and efficiency.
Reform party environment critic Bill Gilmour has warned that Canadians will not support it when they find out the costs and realize that while many industrialized countries agreed to cuts, developing world countries are not yet included.
“This is a bad deal,” said Gilmour. “The Liberals have signed a deal that will lower the standard of living of all Canadians … . Canada’s economy will take a beating while developing nations will walk free.”
For natural resources minister Ralph Goodale, the challenge is to answer critics while trying to figure out a way to win domestic support for a plan to implement the commitments Canada made in Kyoto, Japan.
At the conference, a treaty was signed committing countries to different targets for greenhouse gas emission reductions.
Canada agreed to six percent below 1990 levels over the next 14 years for the six major greenhouse gases, including carbon monoxide, nitrous oxide and methane. It would mean a 19 percent reduction from existing levels.
Goodale returned from Japan and immediately said he will start a round of consultations with those affected, including industry, interest groups and the provinces.
Immediately, provincial premiers including Alberta’s Ralph Klein said the targets are unrealistic and would damage resource-producing economies.
Goodale again promised there will be no “carbon tax” to reduce use of fossil fuels.
And to appease Alberta and the oil patch, he said no province, region or economic sector will be expected to carry a disproportionate share of the cost of implementing the deal.
“All our efforts must be fair and equitable in sharing burdens and benefits across all regions and sectors,” he said in a mid-December speech to the National Press Club in Ottawa. “We’re not interested in victimization.”
For farm representatives like Wilkinson, the devil may be in the detail.
During the tense final few days of negotiations in Kyoto, Goodale’s officials contacted Wilkinson and other farm leaders to talk about the deal that was emerging.
The CFA president said a greenhouse gas emissions deal may not be a bad thing for farmers, depending on how they go about it.
“We really need to get more detail from them and go beyond the vague commitments,” he said.
