A Federal Court justice has reserved his decision in a case involving the Net Income Stabilization Account program.
The judge heard arguments on a motion to dismiss a farmer claim that changes to NISA in 1994 were made after an improper vote.
Three farmers from Saskatchewan and Manitoba launched a class action claim against the federal agriculture minister in July 2003. When the federal justice department filed its statement of defence, it also filed a motion to dismiss the case and was heard in a Regina courtroom Jan. 16.
Read Also
Farming Smarter receives financial boost from Alberta government for potato research
Farming Smarter near Lethbridge got a boost to its research equipment, thanks to the Alberta government’s increase in funding for research associations.
Federal counsel Brian Hay argued that the farmers’ claim hadn’t demonstrated a reasonable cause of action. He compared it to an earlier challenge known as the Boyko case.
“You can’t sue to try and get the federal and provincial governments to change their policy,” Hay told the court.
The judge noted the program is voluntary.
Hay agreed, saying the farmers can’t be vulnerable because they weren’t forced into participating.
Tony Merchant represented the farmers.
He told the court that farmers lost a lot of money because the change to NISA guidelines prevented them from using grain freight and handling costs in the eligible net sales figures used to calculate their NISA contributions.
“Our estimate is that the dollars are in the range of $560 million plus whatever interest may flow,” he said. “For each participant … it’s something in the range of $13,000 to $18,000 plus (interest).”
The farmers say the changes to the guidelines were made without enough provincial support. British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island all voted against it. Quebec voted in favour of the changes, even though it had not formally signed the NISA agreement, they say.
Merchant said the farmers are not seeking a policy change. They want the minister of agriculture to comply with the law and the NISA agreement.
It could be a month or longer before the judge makes his decision.
