Farmers need to align with like-minded interests

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 07/08/2021 (1753 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Most farmers wouldn’t be able to cite the long list of acronyms behind the dizzying array of farm support programs we’ve had in Canada through the generations.

The history behind the likes of WGSA, CFIP, AIDA, GRIP and NISA, or tripartite stabilization, feed freight assistance and crop insurance, may seem irrelevant to today’s farmers. But they provide important context for how farm support programs have evolved to stabilize and support the industry’s growth without favouring one region or sector over another and without opening the door to trade sanctions from other countries.

The suite of programs to help farmers manage risk and recover from disasters as well as to support industry innovation and market development lives under an umbrella agreement called the Agricultural Policy Framework, which expires in 2023. Discussions have started around a new one.

The Canadian Agricultural Policy Institute recently turned to agricultural economist Douglas Hedley to analyze where Canadian farm policy has come from and where it might need to go. Hedley’s long career with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada included serving as assistant deputy minister for Farm Financial Programs in the early 2000s.

Hedley points to the origins of the first agricultural policy framework in the early 1990s as pivotal to the relative stability of farm policy development in Canada since. Then-federal minister Don Mazankowski was able to convince provincial and territorial colleagues to move towards a whole-country, whole-farm approach.

It was a marked departure from the past. Regional programs such as grain freight subsidies or stabilization programs for livestock led to countermeasures to offset their real or perceived impact on other regions or sectors. They were hard to budget for and became easy targets for claims of unfair trading practices from Canada’s competitors.

The ability of the federal, provincial, and territorial governments to co-operate during that era enabled policies that looked beyond funding direct farm supports to boosting research and market development.

Hedley points to the shared federal-provincial-territorial jurisdiction over agriculture as one inescapable complication. The federal government is obligated to balance national priorities against regional ones, whereas the provincial governments are singularly focused. As well, the issues on the table, such as climate change, tend to be divisive.

“The emerging economic and political stage is both unpredictable and unstable,” Hedley writes. “Rather than designing policies for the longer term as in climate change and research, policy processes need to be fostered and maintained to enable Canada to respond quickly in an ever-changing domestic and international environment.

“Policy approaches need to be nimble, able to respond rapidly to events domestically and internationally, and founded on an improved and strengthened relationship with provinces and territories.”

The other reality farmers must face this time round is that consumers, non-farming rural residents, and single-issue advocacy groups are demanding their perspectives be considered too.

Even within government, agriculture touches multiple portfolios in addition to its own.

Plus, Canada’s global competitors are backing away from multilateral trade rules in favour of bilateral deals that elevate their interests. If the provinces and territories retreat into regional blocs as well, it’s questionable whether the current policy framework will be able to respond to the rapidly changing needs.

“This effort can only be developed with a strong sense of commitment and trust among (federal-provincial-territorial) partners, across the horizontal and vertical organization in the sector, and the wider interests of organizations and interests of society regarding agriculture and food,” Hedley says.

Where does all this leave farmers, whose numbers continue to shrink and whose voice is often fractured even within the sector?

Farmers will be looking for policy solutions they can take to the bank out of these consultations; Hedley is saying the focus needs first to be on sound processes for decision making.

To make their case, they need to align with like-minded interests around environment, trade or food security. They must be able to show how what’s good for them is also good for others and in ways beyond their sector’s economic importance.

Developing a new policy framework has never been more complicated. Likewise, it has never been more necessary.

Laura Rance is vice-president of content for Glacier FarmMedia. She can be reached at lrance@farmmedia.com