SOMETIMES, the disconnect between the endless possibilities of political debate and the reality of political action is jarring. It was like that last week in Ottawa.
The issue was whether there will be more federal farm aid this year.
Listening to the political debate, a visitor from Uzbekistan could be forgiven for imagining that farm aid is a hot topic and a real possibility.
At the House of Commons agriculture committee, farm leaders from Ontario and Grain Growers of Canada made a strong plea for more federal help to grains and oilseeds producers. MPs did not dismiss the idea.
Read Also
Late season rainfall creates concern about Prairie crop quality
Praying for rain is being replaced with the hope that rain can stop for harvest. Rainfall in July and early August has been much greater than normal.
Across the street in a Senate committee room, rural leaders from Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba argued that more money is needed to keep rural Canada from further decline.
Senators, as is their custom, sounded downright sympathetic.
In Moose Jaw, Sask., western premiers renewed their call for an additional $500 million in federal aid.
And so it goes. As the parliamentary season winds down, there is a steady stream of lobbying for more aid, as if it was achievable.
Presumably, these lobbyists think agriculture minister Lyle Vanclief, prime minister Jean Chrétien, finance minister Paul Martin and any other cabinet minister who has addressed the issue were fooling, or perhaps bargaining, when they said after March 1 that they are not prepared to allocate any more money to agriculture.
(Time out for a short digression.)
Actually, they never put it so bluntly as to say they are not prepared to give more. Instead, they seek political comfort in the argument that they cannot afford to allocate more.
That, of course, is self-serving fabrication. They could “afford” it if they wanted. Government leaders have made a political choice about where they want to invest the tens of billions of dollars the government had last year above basic program commitments. Farmers got what the Liberals figured they deserved, in a world of competing demands.
So let’s consider it a willing government lifestyle choice, rather than an unhappy circumstance forced by poverty.
(The digression ends.)
So where is the evidence that makes the lobbyists think it worthwhile to keep coming back to ask for aid?
In truth, there is none.
The issue is not on the government agenda. The file is closed for this year.
And even as the finance minister moves toward a winter 2002 budget, revenues will be down, the projected surplus will be less certain and government generosity likely will be strained.
In other words, the issue of more farm aid will not be on the government agenda at least until winter, and then fiscal and political conditions will be less favorable than they were last winter, when the Liberals produced just half a loaf.
Why do farm and provincial groups continue to talk as if more help is available?
Maybe it is optimism. Maybe it is simply because the need still is evident. Or maybe it is simple reflex after years of repeating the mantra.
Whatever the explanation, they do farmers a disservice if they raise expectations that more help is on the way.
