The fourth federal election in seven years is underway and it’s an ideal time for farmers and ranchers to get answers from candidates on plans for agriculture.
At least in this early going, the Prairies show every sign of voting largely Conservative, as they have for several decades. Many political pundits opine that the outcome of voting in rural Western Canada is a foregone conclusion, so candidates and particularly party leaders need not expend too much effort to campaign here.
The accuracy of that opinion will be tested within the next four weeks. Truth be told, agricultural issues don’t tend to swing the outcome of federal elections.
Read Also
Land crash warning rejected
A technical analyst believes that Saskatchewan land values could be due for a correction, but land owners and FCC say supply/demand fundamentals drive land prices – not mathematical models
However, like any and all voters, those in the agricultural industry have questions for their candidates and their party leaders, and they deserve answers. There’s no better time than an election campaign to get those answers.
Business risk management programs:Many farmers are dissatisfied with the accessibility and predictability of farm support programs.
What are the party strategies to protect or insure farmers against market and weather circumstances that are beyond their control?
Trade deals:Canadian agriculture is largely reliant on trade. With the World Trade Organization deal on life support, candidates should be pressed on their party’s plans for bilateral trade deals and market access.
What goals do they have for the Canada-European Union comprehensive economic trade agreement? What plans do they have for deals with populous China and India? What plans do they have to improve market access for Canadian products in other countries?
Agricultural research:The Conservative budget released March 22, now essentially a campaign platform, earmarked $50 million for an agricultural innovation initiative, presumably a commitment to research.
However, agricultural research would still receive far less funding than it has in years past. How do the Conservatives square this, and what plans do the other parties have to adequately fund agricultural research so the sector can flourish?
Agricultural research, part two:What are the party positions on biotechnology, GM labelling and the question of product release using market acceptance as a guide, as was proposed in Bill C-474?
Grain transportation:What plans do the parties have to implement recommendations in the recently released Rail Freight Service Review and what plans do they have, if any, for a costing review demanded by many agricultural commodity groups?
Food safety:There is more consumer attention paid to food safety than ever before. Food recalls and concerns about inspection of imported foods have generated considerable controversy. What plans do the parties have to ensure food safety and adequate inspection?
Grain marketing:The broad strokes of various party positions vis a vis the Canadian Wheat Board are well known but what about the specifics? Could the board survive in an open market? If so, what studies or data support that assumption? Should farmers decide the future of the CWB or is it the role of the governing party?
Rural broadband:Each major federal party has talked about it. Do they have specifics on how high-speed internet can be available to all prairie farmers? Such access is becoming ever more vital to their business operations.
Rural health care:What are the parties’ proposals to improve access and quality of rural health care?
These and other questions would legitimately be on the minds of rural voters as this election unfolds. Politicians should be ready for tough questions. Let’s make sure such questions are asked and that answers are given.
Bruce Dyck, Terry Fries, Barb Glen, D’Arce McMillan and Joanne Paulson collaborate in the writing of Western Producer editorials.
