Interesting times call for ag stability - The Moral Economy

WE ARE all going to have to take a few extra deep breaths these days, because we live in interesting times. The phrase recalls the ancient Chinese curse, “may you live in interesting times.”

It is a curse, I’m told, because the Chinese value tradition, constancy and calm, the opposites of “interesting.”

The good news is the general strength of grain prices. There will likely be some shifting from crop to crop as producers seek to maximize profits.

However, the livestock sector is suffering from a wide range of problems.

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.

The challenge lies in analyzing the morality of the economy – the values that guide it.

This means asking how these situations developed, what they mean to us and what we might do about them.

With crops, we see the value of supply and demand. There is high demand for canola for food and fuel. There is high demand for flax, since many flax producers have switched to canola, reducing flax supplies.

There is high demand for corn as livestock feed and automotive fuel. There is a high demand for wheat because not enough is being grown to meet needs, particularly feeding hungry people.

Because grain prices are rising, feeding livestock is more expensive. The high Canadian dollar and rising transportation costs are hurting. There have been dramatic calls for help to the livestock sector.

That means government action. Such action makes sense. It can help individual Canadians who work on farm and related businesses to weather an economic storm. It can help maintain Canada’s important international trade strength.

The federal government would have to take a strong lead in such farm assistance action. However, our current government is philosophically opposed to taking that leadership. It has different values.

Our prime minister has an apparently unfailing belief in corporations. For example, we need more hopper cars for hauling grain. The farmers of Canada will buy them. But will the farmers control them? No, a railway corporation will.

Likewise, the prime minister keeps attacking the Canadian Wheat Board, whose goal is to get the best possible return for producers. The effectiveness of the board has been demonstrated repeatedly. The Americans complain, for example, that they simply cannot compete.

Prime minister Stephen Harper wants to give Canadian farmers choice, namely the choice of which international grain company to which they will sell their products.

The problem, of course, is that agricultural corporations are loyal to their shareholders, not to farmers – a stark contrast to the goal of the CWB.

Harper’s position is strong, but only slightly different from that of other national and provincial governments. Past governments have pussy-footed around the issue of agricultural sustainability and stabilization.

Until we get governments truly committed to that stability and sustainability, farmers will simply continue drifting at the mercy of the markets and the corporations.