AS THE Conservative government’s main point man on agricultural issues (never mind where the marching orders come from), Chuck Strahl has a problem.
Ten months into the job as agriculture minister and likely more than halfway to the next election, he is finding it difficult to deliver on some of his party’s big-ticket election agricultural promises.
The realities of governing in this cranky, complex federation are much more daunting than they apparently appear from opposition benches.
And the key Conservative promises – end the Canadian Wheat Board monopoly and replace the unpopular Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization program – cannot be done by government fiat. They involve messy details like a law requiring a producer vote before the CWB can legally be transformed and the fact that CAIS is a federal-provincial program requiring provincial approval before it is transformed into something more effective and likely more costly.
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?
On the wheat board file and from a Conservative point of view, Strahl has been remarkably decisive (the opposition would say undemocratic and divisive) given the government’s minority status. Still, the wheat board moves have stirred up fierce opposition in the Conservative prairie political heartland and it is not an issue the former British Columbia construction contractor comes at with instinctive understanding.
It is an electoral and political battle that will play out in a region and an industry with which he has no personal ties. None of his B.C. voters has a direct stake in the issue.
Clearly, in this prairie-strong Conservative caucus, others are making the bullets that Strahl is firing at the CWB.
The CAIS file is potentially more problematic for the minister because he is more likely to end up being held accountable for the successes or failures of his efforts.
Here is Strahl’s problem as he sits down this week in Calgary with provincial agriculture ministers to continue negotiations on changing CAIS enough to be able to credibly claim it has been “replaced.”
To date, almost no one believes new rules that tinker with the margin-based program really mean it is being “replaced.” Putting mascara and lipstick on a pig does not make her a party animal.
But Strahl has faced strong resistance from provinces on proposals to end the unpopular margin-based feature of the program, even though it has proven itself a flawed model in declining-margin sectors where CAIS essentially stabilizes poverty.
He also has found provincial resistance to proposals for a stand-alone disaster relief program 40 percent funded by provinces but with no predictable budget.
Provinces who pick up 40 percent of most CAIS costs already are reeling from projections that by the end of payouts for the 2005 CAIS year, costs in the first three years will be $1 billion above projections.
So Strahl is under pressure to make changes, even if it is all federal funding, to allow the party a credible political claim that CAIS has been replaced.
Don’t be surprised if the minister latches onto the Canadian Federation of Agriculture proposal to include a farmer-contributory tier of coverage at the top of CAIS, modeled on the farmer-loved and bureaucrat-hated Net Income Stabilization Account program model, as a sure symbol that the essence of CAIS has been changed.
