Farm group lobbying for rejection of carbon tax bill

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 11/03/2024 (649 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

BRANDON — Manitoba’s farm policy organization says it’s lobbying for the House of Commons to reject a carbon tax bill because amendments passed by the Senate watered it down.

Keystone Agricultural Producers (KAP) says it wants the original version of the bill — which included an exemption for heating of barns and a lengthier sunset clause — passed instead. The amendments removed the exemption and shortened the sunset clause from eight years to three.

“The livestock guys and gals are the ones that are most upset, but also the grain producers because it only gives them three years of certainty,” Colin Hornby, manager of communications and stakeholder relations for KAP, said.

Bill C-234, a private member’s bill introduced by Conservative MP Ben Lobb in February 2022, would exempt farmers from the carbon tax on propane and natural gas used for drying grain and heating barns. The original version, as presented in March 2023, had a sunset clause or set period of time for the exemption of eight years.

However, when the proposed legislation reached the Senate it passed amendments to remove the part about heating and cooling livestock buildings and shortened the sunset clause to three years. The amended bill has since been sent back to the House where it remains in consideration.

KAP met with members of different political parties while at the Canadian Federation of Agriculture meetings in Ottawa last week, telling them that the organization wants the original version of the bill passed, Hornby said.

“While we’ve been here, we’ve met with members of the Liberals, members from the Conservatives, Greens,” Hornby said.

Grain drying is important for preserving food safety, he said, and heating and cooling livestock barns are crucial for animal welfare.

As previously reported, Brandon-Souris MP Larry Maguire said the carbon tax, currently applied to natural gas and propane used on farms for activities such as drying grain and heating livestock barns, is projected to cost farmers $978 million by 2030, as confirmed by a report from the Parliamentary Budget Officer.

Hornby called the version of the bill currently before the house “scaled back,” and, though he says that it won’t create a further negative impact for livestock producers and will ensure a three-year carbon tax exemption for grain farmers, it won’t achieve what the original bill was intended to do.

“The bill intended to capture activities on a farm where there’s no alternatives,” he said. “There’s no alternative to drying grain without fossil fuel, a source of power that’s commercially viable. And the same goes for heating and cooling of a barn.”

The eight-year sunset clause in the original bill was to allow time for advancements in technology to create alternative ways of heating, cooling and drying that don’t rely on fossil fuels, Hornby explained.

Meanwhile, the Canadian Cattle Association says that it supports the bill in its original form.

“Beef cattle producers use these fuels to prepare livestock feed while enhancing efficiency. Farmers continue to be taxed on these efficiency-driven practices with no alternative fuels for these types of activities,” an emailed statement from the association said. “Given supply chain constraints and escalating inflation, the passage of the original Bill C-234 (as presented in March 2023), would help ease the burden on producers.”

Robert Misko, a grain farmer in the Parkland region, said farmers need the exemption because there are no affordable and effective options for grain drying. The shortened sunset clause leaves less time for producers to find an alternative.

“Farmers are environmentally sustainable because it’s what we do in the long term, we don’t want to harm the land, we’re not looking to over-fertilize, we’re not looking to waste energy in places … we try to be as efficient as we possibly can,” he said. “This tax, we have no means of passing it on, we have no means of controlling it. It’s just an extra cost to farming.”

Misko is doubtful that three years will be enough time for an alternative that is effective and affordable for farmers to implement and says the reduction of the sunset clause appears to be passing the buck along to the next government.

He says he understands the intention of the carbon tax, but for grain farmers with no alternative for drying, the tax will just add another challenge to making a livelihood as a farmer.

“I think farmers on the whole, we’re trying to be as environmental and green as we can, it’s in our best interest to do that,” he said.

“We farm, Mother Nature and us have to work together or it doesn’t work at all. But then there’s things that are beyond our control and expenses, especially in the case of the carbon tax, it’s an escalating expense.”

KAP plans to continue to ask for a full exemption for livestock producers even if the House decides to pass the amended bill, and to continue advocating for the amendments to be rejected and the original bill to be passed in the meantime.

“We just think it’s in the best interest of the sector to do this to make sure we leave more money in the pockets of farmers,” Hornby said. “So, they can invest in things like other sustainable practices on farms.”

— Brandon Sun