Policymakers are looking for new input, and possibly confirmation that some of their programs are the correct ones, according to Christine Burton, director of rural policy and strategic development for Agriculture Canada.
She represented Ottawa at the Brandon stop of the nationwide tour of the second round of federal consultation sessions last week.
Burton said farmers have touched on a range of issues during previous meetings.
“We certainly don’t think that we have a lock on the ideas for development,” said Burton.
Debbie Kooting, who with her husband farms 1,800 acres and raises cattle near Rapid City, Man., held out little optimism for the process. Still they decided to attend, joining some 50 participants in the APF session held in Brandon.
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
“Don’t you think that if we had a cost-of-production program out there, we wouldn’t have to be going to these vision meetings where we have to keep having to ask for money all the time?” she said.
“We would know bottom line what we are going to get for our products, no matter what the product might be across Canada. It would fit from ocean to ocean.”
The issue of rail line abandonment and the increased burden of transportation costs for producers and the environment should be included, according to Les McEwan, a hog and grain farmer from Altamont, Man.
“Government doesn’t seem to be willing to change its policies towards that at all, and it doesn’t seem to be part of this discussion,” he said.
Andrew Dennis, a grain farmer from Brookdale, Man., said the bureaucracy has been successful in looking after the value-added aspect of the production chain, but the primary producer has been neglected.
“The bureaucracy should be split into two sectors, one that represents primary producers and is funded by the taxpayer. If you want another bureaucracy for the value-added chain, it should be funded by corporations: the Cargills and the ADMs,” he said.
“We’ve got a value chain that is primarily taking producers’ cash and their three generations of equity. Then the taxpayer is attempting to slow the devastation from occurring too quickly. Not too successfully, I might add.”
All Canadians will suffer if control of the food chain is lost, Dennis said, because the result will be higher taxes and quadrupled food prices.
“If the primary producer side is not propped up, the fleas are going to kill the dog,” he said.
David Rolfe, president of Keystone Agricultural Producers, said the turnout was encouraging, with more farmers and representatives from commodity groups showing up than at some of the other meetings held across the country.
“This is an opportunity to help government develop policy that’s going to take us right through to 2013,” he said.
“It’s not short-term policy. We have to be absolutely sure that the direction that’s given from these meetings is respected and that it takes us in the right direction.”
The jury is still out on how well the first round of APF consultations has worked. They were held in 2001 and implemented in 2003, Rolfe said.
“We have to make sure that this time we get it absolutely right, because we can’t afford any more mistakes in the future.”
Larry Powell, a market gardener near Roblin, Man., wondered why there was little emphasis on sustainability in the proposed new APF framework.
“We have to start doing things differently. We have to start promoting local markets. The present way we are doing things just doesn’t stack up with our commitment to the environment and being producers of good quality, safe food,” he said.
Wayne Hiltz, manager of the Manitoba Chicken Producers, also noted that the word sustainable was missing from the vision statement.
“We would like to see the ability to realize benefits from products that were produced at a much higher level of food safety or quality than other competitors on the world scale,” he said.
He added a cautionary note to government bodies pursuing greater market access and clearer trading rules.
“We need to be a fair trading partner. Right now we feel that Canada has gone above and beyond their requirements while other countries have stalled, or haven’t even gotten to the levels that they should have been at 10 years ago,” Hiltz said.
“That certainly is a hindrance to the Canadian producer, who isn’t subsidized to the level of some of our competitors.”
Bill Anderson of Forrest, Man., said the APF vision statement and principles struck him as a little out of date.
“Every word in there could have been or probably was written 20-25 years ago in earlier vision statements,” he said. “That’s an observation, and it probably points to its limited usefulness.”
One elderly farmer, who stepped outside for a cigarette said that for 50 years he has been hearing the same thing from government after government.
“It’s the same old song; the tune is the same, only the words keep changing.”
