TALK about inflation. The federal government has announced a “$15
billion investment in Canadian agriculture over six years.”
At least that’s what Canadian Wheat Board minister Ralph Goodale
announced in Regina July 12. His real purpose was to add a few details
about a small part of the government’s previously announced $5.2
billion government funding plans – $190 million over the next
half-decade or so.
But in the course of his remarks, Goodale made the claim that
government was committing $15 billion to agriculture “to move this
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?
sector from crisis management to a more profitable future.”
Really? Just three weeks before, prime minister Jean Chrétien announced
$5.2 billion in new federal spending over the next six years. Critics
immediately went to work, poking holes in the claim of “new” spending
since it largely continues what has been spent in recent years.
They also complained that by lumping six years together for a grand
multi-billion dollar claim, farmers and urban taxpayers alike were
being given a false impression of generosity.
Little did critics know that the stakes, and the government’s
generosity, were about to take a three-fold leap.
By July 12, CBC radio was carrying Goodale’s claim of $15 billion worth
of government largesse and then the ungrateful-sounding retort by
several Saskatchewan farmers that it was a government lie and the truth
was that farm supports are being slashed.
Huh? Who could blame an urban listener for wondering how farmers could
be such whiners? $15 billion is a lot of money and even if it is over
six years and there are more than 200,000 Canadians who call themselves
farmers, that still averages out to $75,000 per farmer.
Who wouldn’t like the government to cut them a $75,000 cheque?
Of course, behind the numbers, the story is much less clear and the
largesse far less certain. By using the most exaggerated spin possible
on the government commitment, Goodale set up critical farmers to be the
perennial whiners many urbanites consider them to be.
How did Goodale arrive at that number, almost three times the best The
Boss could come up with? The best answer is: “creatively.”
First, he added up six years of the existing safety net base, plus the
last year of the Canadian Farm Income Program, to come up with another
$4.14 billion in federal commitment. Let’s see, $5.2 billion in
Chrétien dollars + previously committed spending = $9.34 billion.
Of course, hundreds of millions and perhaps billions of those dollars
will go into research, environment, pesticide regulations and other
programs that are not a direct safety net contribution.
But wait, we’re still more than $5.6 billion short of Goodale’s grand
claim.
Luckily, the federal minister took it upon himself to also calculate
“projected provincial contributions” and then to announce their $5.6
billion contribution as part of the total.
It is misleading and presumptuous but what the heck. Busy Canadians now
have lodged in their memories a federal $15 billion farm aid
announcement.
What could farmers possibly have to complain about? Political problem
solved.
