Ag committee question deserves thoughtful answer - Opinion

AT THE core of the winter quest by federal politicians wandering the

land in search of agriculture policy truths, there is a fascinating

question.

What should be the role of government in future Canadian agricultural

policy? It is the question the House of Commons agriculture committee

is asking at public hearings across Western Canada this week and in

Eastern and Atlantic Canada in March.

It gets to the core of the issue of the future shape of the

Read Also

Producers face the reality of shifting grain price expectations

Significant price shifts have occurred in various grains as compared to what was expected at the beginning of the calendar year. Crop insurance prices can be used as a base for the changes.

agricultural community.

Markets, based on the underlying premise of survival of the fittest,

provide no certainty. Prices are volatile. Weather is variable.

Governments, love them or hate them, can set policy and pass laws that

inject some predictability into the business. For proof, look no

further than the European Union, sectors covered by the United States

farm bill or Canada’s regulated dairy sector.

They also can pass rules and regulations that impose regulatory burdens

on farmers, create paperwork and add costs.

For evidence of this belief, talk to farmers who think they could make

a better buck outside the Canadian Wheat Board or farmers fearing costs

and bureaucracy because of impending Species at Risk legislation.

Governments can tilt the legendary playing field by favouring some

farmers over others. Governments also can make the trading terrain more

level by supporting farmers when they are facing subsidized competitors.

All this makes the question crucial: what do farmers want of their

governments? More help? Get out of the road? A European-type commitment

to support and foster a healthy farm sector and rural economy, come

heck or high water?

In many ways, it also is a brave question for politicians to ask,

because it is so wrapped up in ideology and ideology is at the heart of

most political philosophies. They risk hearing answers they’d rather

not hear.

Normally, politicians and political committees ask the easier

questions: how are you doing? Do you need more help? Are government

programs working?

In agriculture, this usually leads to fairly predictable answers.

Things aren’t good. If we don’t get more help, I’m out of business.

Governments provide too little, too late.

But a question of what role governments should play demands a bit more

thinking, perhaps some philosophy, a dash of speculation and maybe even

some original thinking about the role of the state in a global economy.

Last week, Saskatchewan Liberal Senator Jack Wiebe said that in his

travels with the Senate agriculture committee, he has found farmers so

tired and stressed from the tough fight for survival these days that

they are not doing the deeper political thinking typical of the sector

in past times.

More than one great political idea or political movement has been born

in the mind of a farmer spending hours in a combine.

So it is possible these hearings will be hijacked by the here and now,

by farmers’ concerns about surviving another year, by criticisms of the

present system.

If that happens, it will be a pity.

A good question deserves thought-provoking answers.

Your reading list