Prime minister Stephen Harper last week promised to make his regime a farmer-friendly government offering more cash, better programs and a sympathetic ear.
“No longer will the concerns of rural Canada fall on deaf ears,” he said in the lead-off speech during a special parliamentary debate on agriculture April 6 evening.
“Rural Canadians from coast to coast to coast finally have an ally in Ottawa. I do not say that we can fix the neglect of a decade overnight and I know that our producers do not expect that, but in the weeks, months and years ahead, our government will move ahead not with mere words but with actions.”
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
He promised that an election pledge of $500 million additional farm aid will be delivered, likely in the spring budget.
He promised the controversial Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization program will be replaced with a program that takes cost of pro-duction into account and has a separate disaster program.
He vowed a new biofuels strategy soon will be announced with rules that help farmers get a stake in the biodiesel and ethanol industries. And he promised support for supply management while ending the Canadian Wheat Board monopoly for export wheat and barley.
“The government, with our agriculture minister leading the charge, will give Canadian farmers the respect that has been denied to them for too long,” Harper told the House of Commons.
The previous day, the prime minister indicated his interest in the file by unexpectedly showing up at a meeting between farm leaders and agriculture minister Chuck Strahl.
But none of that impressed the leader of Canada’s largest farm lobby, who was at the early morning April 5 meeting with Harper and later on Parliament Hill where thousands of farmers rallied for more support.
“We’re terribly disappointed,” Canadian Federation of Agriculture president Bob Friesen said April 7. “Talking about program changes in the future is fine and good but that’s a discussion for tomorrow, literally. The discussion for today is that we need money now, immediately, to help farmers pay their bills and get a crop in.”
Friesen said the episode has made him question the commitment of Strahl and the Conservative government to the sector.
He said the minister’s argument that new farm aid cannot be announced until it has appeared in a budget approved by Parliament is incorrect.
A year ago, just before the 2004-05 fiscal year ended March 31, the government of the day took $1 billion out of the impending surplus and allocated it as farm aid in a hastily arranged announcement.
“What makes me question their (Conservatives’) commitment is that they had an opportunity to flow money to agriculture before March 31 and chose not to do so,” said the Manitoba farmer.
All unspent surpluses recorded at the end of the fiscal year automatically are used to pay down the $500 billion dollar federal debt.
During the parliamentary debate, Liberal agriculture critic Wayne Easter made the same point about the missed opportunity.
“That’s what happened last year with the previous minister of agriculture (Andy Mitchell) when it was coming up to March 31,” said Easter.
“There was a problem in the farm community. The minister prepared some documentation and he received $1 billion from the minister of finance. Members opposite could have done the same and put cash in producers’ pockets immediately.”
Last week, a Conservative backbencher also questioned the impact of money the government is promising. Lethbridge MP Rick Casson was talking about the $755 million promised by the Liberals that now is being sent out by the Conservative government, but he could as easily have been referring to the additional $500 million promised.
“It is being sopped up so quickly that it is not really going to make a huge difference,” he predicted.
