The leaders of Canada’s largest farm lobby called on Ottawa Monday to go further in providing aid to farmers than many provinces are willing to go.
Canadian Federation of Agriculture president Bob Friesen led a delegation to a May 10 meeting with agriculture minister Lyle Vanclief and he brought a tough message. He suggested while some provinces do not want the Agricultural Income Disaster Assistance program to cover farmer losses, the federal government could.
“I think the federal government could show some leadership here and perhaps the provinces would feel the pressure and follow,” Friesen said in a May 10 interview.
Read Also
Canola oil transloading facility opens
DP World just opened its new canola oil transload facility at the Port of Vancouver. It can ship one million tonnes of the commodity per year.
Friesen suggested that Ottawa, as a sign of the “passion” for agriculture that the minister expressed in the meeting, should announce that unspent money from the 1998 AIDA commitment would be used to cover 60 percent of farmers’ “negative margins.”
If the provinces still do not agree to cover farm losses in the second year of the program, the federal government could commit to do the same again.
“The minister expressed his passion for the sector and his commitment to do the best he can,” said Friesen. “This is a way he could show that.”
Negative margins were excluded from the AIDA payout formula and the CFA has been critical of that, suggesting that since losses are included in the three-year average income against which claims are judged, losses should be covered.
Some provinces, led by Alberta, have said they would not be part of any federal-provincial scheme that included compensation for losses because it would erode interest in buying into other safety net programs, including crop insurance.
Vanclief has used lack of provincial support to justify the exclusion of negative margins from the program.
Friesen said there is no justification for that federal stand.
“They have options.”
He said Vanclief promised to consider unilateral federal action on paying for a portion of losses.
“He said he would consider it as an option but I don’t want to put words in his mouth.”
