TALK of a Canadian farm bill is all the rage these days.
It is fed by the federal government concession that the farm commodity sector is in crisis, that falling incomes are chronic and not the fault of inefficient farmers and that safety net programs are not doing the trick.
Low prices facing farmers as they complete their harvest this year are fanning the flames of discussion.
The campaign by Canadian corn producers to win protection from subsidized and price-depressing imported American corn has focused attention on Canadian farm support policy, always a year or two late and a bale or two short of a full load.
Read Also
Agriculture needs to prepare for government spending cuts
As government makes necessary cuts to spending, what can be reduced or restructured in the budgets for agriculture?
Farm groups are holding meetings across the country to debate the dire prospects for farm incomes, concluding along the way that a more systemic, timely and predictable farm support system is necessary.
A Canadian farm bill was the subject of a debate at the Canadian Federation of Agriculture summer meeting in 2005 and has been discussed at susbsequent meetings.
But what template would be used? The assumption is that it would be a Canadian version of the U.S. farm bill, with a floor price that takes production costs into account and sends counter-cyclical payments when market prices are lower than costs.
The U.S. farm bill regime is the scourge and envy of farmers in Canada who feel that they are competing with unfairly subsidized American product and yet marvel at how quickly Washington gets money to farmers.
So a Canadian farm bill would provide program support comparable to the U.S. farm bill, right? Not necessarily.
Quebec City could provide as many lessons on farm bill construction as Washington. Most Canadian farm policy envy focuses on Quebec and its stabilization insurance payments based on a cost of production formula and timely payments.
That could as easily be the model for a Canadian farm bill as the U.S. farm bill. All options are on the table.
Take, for example, a couple of exchanges at recent House of Commons agriculture committee hearings on the corn duty issue.
Liberal MP and let’s-deal-with-chronic-low-farm-income guru Wayne Easter suggested that Canada needs a floor price to match American levels.
Could Canada set a floor price equivalent to the American price? Easter wondered.
“If we were to take the Americans head on and establish a floor price equivalent to theirs, it would protect our grain industry.”
The answer seemed to be “yes” but is there political will?
Then there was an exchange between Saskatchewan Conservative David Anderson and senior Agriculture Canada official Howard Migie about corn producer options other than a duty.
Migie noted that Ontario corn farmers, along with other ag sectors, are pushing for re-establishment of a “companion” program aimed at getting money out quickly.
Migie called the proposal “a commodity-specific program similar to, if I can call it so, the Quebec ASRA program.”
All of which helps explain why Quebec farm leader Laurent Pellerin has become a popular speaker at farm meetings.
Coming soon to a policy debate near you: the Quebec option: would it work here?
If farmers answer yes, governments should be prepared. Quebec spends up to four times as much per capita on farm supports than other provinces.
