The Canadian Farm Families Options program is not a disguised attempt to persuade poor farmers to leave the industry, a program administrator insisted to skeptical opposition MPs.
“The program is meant to give them some breathing space while they consider their options,” Clair Gartley, director general of the agricultural transformation programs directorate at Agriculture Canada, told the House of Commons agriculture committee.
“They don’t have to exit farming to be eligible. They can make a choice.”
The Options program was announced last summer as a $550 million two-year pilot project to supplement the incomes of farm families that last year earned net taxable income of less than $25,000 for a family or $15,000 for an individual. The farm also had to have gross sales of at least $50,000 to be eligible.
Read Also
Agriculture ministers agree to AgriStability changes
federal government proposed several months ago to increase the compensation rate from 80 to 90 per cent and double the maximum payment from $3 million to $6 million
By Nov. 5, more than 13,000 had applied and $60 million had been sent out to 5,732 farmers.
With the application deadline extended to Nov. 20, the departmental official said he expects thousands more will be approved and tens of millions more dollars sent.
Gartley said $380 million, or almost 70 percent of the total, will be available as farm income supplements.
Another $126 million will be available to pay for skills training or business planning that applicants will have to agree to take part in as a condition of receiving Options money. Administering the program will cost an estimated $46 million.
During his appearance, he faced a barrage of criticism from Liberal and NDP MPs about the rules of the program and its underlying purpose.
Liberal Paul Steckle said many farmers think it is an exit program: “It is moving these people onto the welfare rolls.”
Gartley said the skills training or business planning are meant to give farmers more income options. The government has said it could involve changing cropping patterns, looking for more off-farm income or leaving the farm.
New Democrat Alex Atamanenko said the demand that farmers receiving money must agree to skills upgrading or development of a business plan is an insult.
Gartley said the government advisory programs have been in place for several years under the agricultural policy framework, but few farmers were taking advantage or them.
But he insisted the government will not tell farmers what decisions to make.
“They have to find their own way.”
The most scathing criticism came from Liberal Wayne Easter, who called it a blame-the-victim program.
He said the causes of farm poverty are low prices and distorted markets rather than poor farm management skills.
