Last week’s announcement of $900 million in federal aid to farmers is welcome news. In the words of president Jack Wilkinson of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, it “will make the difference for thousands of farming families who were facing the very real prospect of losing their livelihood, their homes and their place within their communities.”
With another $600 million to come from provincial governments, the total $1.5 billion package will be a substantial contribution from taxpayers. It is heartening reconfirmation of the value that Canadian society places on agricultural producers.
Read Also
Topsy-turvy precipitation this year challenges crop predictions
Rainfall can vary dramatically over a short distance. Precipitation maps can’t catch all the deviations, but they do provide a broad perspective.
Agriculture minister Lyle Vanclief and his cabinet colleagues deserve credit for arranging the much-needed emergency aid.
Now, farm families urgently need to know details of the support program, so they – and their bankers – can calculate how much money they will get.
One major missing element is a commitment by all the provinces to provide their 40 percent of the total.
The biggest initial holdout was Saskatchewan’s NDP government, which said it cannot afford that much.
There is considerable justification to that argument – Saskatchewan’s comparatively small population and its large share of the nation’s farmland mean it would bear a per-capita financial burden much greater than other provinces.
But if Ottawa makes it a condition that no federal funds will flow without provincial money, then Saskatchewan will have no choice other than finding its 40-percent share.
Agriculture is simply too important on the Prairies for any provincial government to abandon it. Saskatchewan is expected to be the province hardest hit by the income crisis, with negative net farm income forecast for 1999. To pass up hundreds of millions of dollars in federal aid would be irresponsible.
Even after agreement on the federal-provincial split, there will be many thorny details to be worked out.
Farmers themselves have differing views on how the aid should be divided. Should it all be based on net farm income? Or total family income, including off-farm employment? Should there be a limit to how much one farm or one hog facility can get?
Instead of income-based criteria, should aid be targeted by commodity and paid per acre or per animal?
There is no shortage of difficult questions. Farmers and their elected representatives need to work together, without divisive confrontations, to help produce a workable plan. It won’t be perfect, but it will be $1.5 billion better than they had before last week.
