Farmers in Saskatchewan and Manitoba might not get a full slice of the farm bail-out pie because their provincial governments don’t think they can afford to put up their share.
And farmers in Alberta won’t get a penny more support than they would have already got from the existing provincial whole-farm program, says its minister.
Saskatchewan and Manitoba don’t have whole-farm insurance programs. But both say it is unfair to have to come up with 40 percent of the federal program – which could cost Saskatchewan more than $200 million.
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
“The jury’s out on whether we can participate,” said Manitoba agriculture minister Harry Enns. “There are limits to our provincial resources.”
Eric Upshall, of Saskatchewan, would also not commit to the program.
He said Ottawa now gives his province about 30 percent of the national safety net money. If the $900 million package is broken down that way, Saskatchewan would receive about $270 million from Ottawa. The provincial government would have to put up $108 million to fulfil its obligations.
But if the program targets farmers who are the most hurt by the present commodity price crash, Saskatchewan and Manitoba would end up with a much larger federal share. That’s because farmers in those two provinces are suffering the most.
That, said Upshall, would force a much higher provincial contribution, something Saskatchewan can’t afford.
“That would make it even more inequitable.”
Upshall said Saskatchewan has a huge farmland base but a tiny population. This crisis hurts it more than any other province, but its taxpayers are being asked to carry a disproportionate load.
Enns’ and Upshall’s officials intend to continue to lobby for changes to the bailout that would make it easier for their provinces.
“I’m going to continue the fight … for the best deal that would see the farmers get the money they need and our taxpayers be put on an equal footing with the other taxpayers in Canada,” said Upshall.
Enns said his officials want to find out whether Manitoba can get all of Ottawa’s share of the money for their province while only putting up part of their 40 percent responsibility.
Enns said he doesn’t know if his cabinet colleagues will agree to filling the entire provincial responsibility.
He is also worried that short-term support he is planning to provide to hog producers will mean he can’t afford to put as much into the federal bailout, and that he’ll have to pick and choose between farmers.
“I have a great deal of work to do over the holidays before we can just sign on to this program,” said Enns.
British Columbia and Alberta say they don’t have a problem because they have already paid their share. Alberta intends to keep Ottawa’s money as a refund on its Farm Income Disaster Program. B.C. considers its whole-farm insurance program to already fulfil its 40 percent share.
“We’re looking at receiving a cheque from Ottawa,” said Alberta agriculture minister Ed Stelmach. Alberta considers its contribution to the Farm Income Disaster Program to be a 100 percent contribution now, so any federal money will be used to pay back the province.
Stelmach said he expects the federal-provincial program to be virtually identical to FIDP.
The Alberta program is capped at $200 million, but has never paid out anything near that amount. Alberta paid out $64 million through FIDP in 1995. In 1996 the payout was $57 million. This year Stelmach expects a record payout for hog and grain farmers.
