Western Producer staff
Midway through his first term back in government, agriculture minister Ralph Goodale faces what could well turn out to be the defining test of his political will and skill.
The issue is the struggle to design a new generation of farm income support policies.
The problem is that despite agreement on some general goals, there is not really a meeting of the federal and provincial minds on this issue.
It is his responsibility to either broker a deal that has eluded governments for years, or make good on his threat to go it alone, without the provinces.
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?
By issuing that threat last week at a federal-provincial ministers’ meeting in St. John’s and setting a Sept. 30 deadline, Goodale took the greatest gamble of his 21 months in the agriculture minister’s office.
Farmers, as well as provincial capitals, will be watching closely to see if he has the political skills, the strength of will and the support of his own government to make good on his threat.
He has, of course, faced other major policy tests since November 1993, but they have carried far less of Goodale’s personal stamp.
Trade disputes have been tough but they are governed by rules and broader Canadian government objectives. Goodale’s role often has been to do the best with the hand dealt to him by others.
So it was with his major “decision” to abolish the Crow Benefit and to slash agriculture spending. These decisions were imposed on him by finance and transport departments, leaving Goodale the job of working out the details and selling the changes to his constituency.
The safety-nets issue is different. It is his to make or break.
As usual in Canada, the issues at stake are simple at their core and complicated in the breach.
Ottawa, with the support of some major farm lobbies, wants a national income support program with something resembling national standards on how, and how much, money can be spent.
Wildly varying levels of support between provinces could encourage inter-provincial subsidy wars in an attempt to buy production and perhaps trigger international trade sanctions.
Some provinces, led by Alberta, want more flexibility in the rules governing what support they can offer their farmers.
Political attempts to reconcile these differing visions have sputtered along for years with no end in sight.
Goodale, seemingly stung by accusations that in the interests of federal-provincial peace and a deal at any cost he has been letting the provinces dictate the pace and erosion of national vision, has decided at last to set a deadline and to proclaim a federal bottom line.
His instincts are to talk people into submission rather than strong-arm a solution. In this case, the technique has not worked so threats now underpin the usual pleas for compromise.
If his deal-brokering skills fail him this time, does Goodale really have the instinct and will to impose a federal solution? This winter should answer that question. Farmers are watching.
