Farm disaster aid rules are on the verge of taking a political step backward, making the next-generation program less useful to farmers than what now exists, predicted officials of farm lobbies and the federal government.
Even before thousands of farmers benefit from what are expected to be higher 1999 AIDA payments, provincial ministers seem intent on ensuring the aid soup is watered down in the future.
Agriculture ministers gathering in New Brunswick next week to sign a deal for the next three-year disaster aid program likely will set rules that are less farmer-favorable than the current Agricultural Income Disaster Assistance program.
Read Also
Manitoba beekeepers battle for survival
Honeybee colony losses have hit 43 per cent, making 2025 the latest in a string of poor bee survival years for Manitoba’s honey producers
“We strongly believe AIDA ’99 rules should apply and we will fight any attempt to step back from them in the new program,” Canadian Federation of Agriculture president Bob Friesen said in an interview last week.
He identified the problem as provincial ministers who find the improved AIDA rules too rich.
“I believe our federal minister will go to Fredericton to defend those rules but the provinces will be obstacles,” said Friesen. “And I worry that the minister is under pressure to reach a federal-provincial deal at all costs. We do not think that deal should be reached at the expense of farmers.”
In an interview, federal agriculture minister Lyle Vanclief gave some weight to Friesen’s argument and fear.
He said June 23 he is preparing to go to Fredericton to argue for the AIDA 1999 rules as the basis for the next three years of federal disaster program spending.
Ottawa has said $435 million will be available each year as 60 percent of the funding. Provinces will add the 40 percent addition – $290 million in total.
Vanclief said only two provinces, Quebec and Prince Edward Island, have accepted the 1999 federal rule change that 70 percent of negative margins should be covered. He expects the provinces to oppose inclusion of that proposal in the new program.
“It is important to me that there be similar federal and provincial rules across the country in the new program,” Vanclief said.
“I have reminded farm leaders that when Ottawa stepped to the plate and said negative margins would be covered in 1999, only two provinces joined us. If they (farmers) want that to be part of the program, they will have to convince their provincial governments to join us.”
He said he is anxious to sign a deal in Fredericton during the July 4-5 federal-provincial meeting.
The CFA’s Friesen said farm groups will find it unacceptable if governments back away from benefits achieved through lobbying to improve the AIDA 1998 program. He said coverage of negative margins is an important issue.
“If farmers have negative margins, it means markets have abandoned them. It is unacceptable that governments would abandon them at the same time.”
