IS THERE something about Lyle? Or is it something about the times?
Whatever the reason, prairie New Democrat agriculture ministers seem to have decided that federal minister Lyle Vanclief is their man, a federal minister to be counted on, an Ontario Liberal who understands the needs of agriculture across the country.
It wasn’t always thus. There have been times in recent years when prairie politicians suggested Vanclief was indifferent to farm problems, out of touch with the West and marginalized at the federal cabinet table.
Read Also
Crop insurance’s ability to help producers has its limitations
Farmers enrolled in crop insurance can do just as well financially when they have a horrible crop or no crop at all, compared to when they have a below average crop
There were hints that he should be replaced. That was then.
But last week, Saskatchewan’s Clay Serby and Manitoba’s Rosann Wowchuk, took advantage of a federal-provincial ministers’ meeting in Toronto to sing Vanclief’s praises.
He had shown leadership in creating an outward-looking and futuristic national agriculture policy and including trade policy, said Wowchuk.
He would represent exporters as well as protected sectors in trade talks, said Serby.
And Vanclief had not closed the door on more drought aid, despite the impression many farmers have received.
“Mr. Vanclief can’t make any commitment today but what we do have from him is a commitment to work on our behalf to try to find some solutions to this drought situation we have,” said Serby.
It’s as close as provincial ministers have come in some years to accepting the bromide: “I’m from the federal government and I’m here to help. Trust me.”
What has happened to make Vanclief something of a federal poster boy for provincial politicians?
On the surface, he’s the same old Lyle, resolutely unwilling to promise more help and always appearing to be on the verge of suggesting that farmers are partly responsible for their own income predicament by not taking full advantage of existing farm support programs.
So maybe what has happened is that there is a changed world since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, a political world in which domestic agricultural problems have been pushed well down the agenda by calls for war spending, military needs and security investments.
Perhaps provincial ministers understand their diminished presence in the political debate and figure that if they don’t circle the wagons and support each other, they will have even less impact on the federal debate over where to spend limited dollars.
Hang together or hang separately.
Or maybe, one farm leader suggests, provincial ministers and their governments have looked at falling tax revenues and looming deficits and decided they too want to resist demands for more farm spending.
The best way to do that is to have Ottawa refuse to spend more. With provinces supposed to contribute 40 cents for every federal 60 cents, a federal commitment of zero means a provincial matching fund of zero.
And perhaps the best way for provinces to encourage Ottawa not to spend more is to support and praise Vanclief as their federal defender.
His record is not as an agriculture minister who believes in throwing money at money-losing farms.
Whatever the reason, Vanclief should be forgiven for basking in the unaccustomed glow of provincial praise.
Canadian politics create strange bedfellows.
