Agriculture policy depends on which farmers Ottawa is wooing
steven chase
OTTAWA— From Saturday's Globe and Mail (includes correction)
The Harper government has never been so conflicted about farmers, particularly now that Ottawa is freeing western wheat and barley producers from the obligation to sell their products through the Canadian Wheat Board.
Are farmers free-market-loving entrepreneurs who need to be liberated from state cartels such as the Wheat Board?
More related to this story
* Canada’s Wheat Board wars: The future of farming cut two ways
* Question PeriodIs neutering wheat board akin to beaver biting off its own testicles?
* Race heats up to launch Canadian grain exchanges
Or should they be heavily regulated through production quotas and price supports and fenced off from foreign competition by high tariff walls? Like dairy farmers, for instance, who were promised this year the Conservatives will “resolutely defend” their sheltered businesses.
The answer depends, apparently, on which farmers the Harper government is wooing.
On one hand, the Conservatives champion free enterprise for producers of beef, grains and oilseeds such as canola, and seek greater access to foreign consumers during trade talks.
“Entrepreneurial farmers are proving over and over that they can and will help drive our economy if they have control over their farm and over their bottom line,” Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz said as he moved to un-yoke western producers from the Wheat Board on Wednesday.
On the other hand, the Harper government is firmly wedded to a protectionist approach to farmers who produce Canadian milk, eggs or poultry.
Tariffs of more than 200 per cent shelter this supply-managed sector from foreign rivals, and domestic production is limited by a command-and-control approach to the farm economy.
Mr. Harper has long championed dismantling the Wheat Board’s monopoly for his western base, but one-time adviser Tom Flanagan says the former Canadian Alliance politician shelved his aversion to supply management years ago when courting rural Ontario votes.
The Conservatives’ stout refusal to lower protectionist walls around dairy, egg and poultry farms has already cost it a seat at major trade talks among Pacific Rim nations, according to Lawrence Herman, a lawyer and former Canadian diplomat who is at Cassels Brock & Blackwell in Toronto.
The United States and eight other partners including Australia, New Zealand, Singapore and Vietnam are negotiating an Asia-Pacific regional trade deal known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement.
Mr. Ritz said in a statement that contrasting Ottawa’s treatment of different farm groups is “like comparing apples and walnuts.” He said supply management was created in response to farmer’s demands, while the Wheat Board was imposed on western producers during wartime “to ensure cheap wheat to Europe.”
Mr. Herman said supply management and untethering farmers from the Wheat Board are irreconcilable approaches to agriculture.
“However the minister attempts to rationalize these policies, they’re fundamentally contradictory,” the international lawyer said.
"On the one hand, the government’s trumpeting the virtues of free markets by removing the monopoly powers of the Canadian Wheat Board. On the other, they’re going to the wall to defend a Soviet-style command system, one where both the total allowable supply and the price paid to the farmers are set by the farmers themselves. By any standard, this is the antithesis of a free and open market.”
steven chase
OTTAWA— From Saturday's Globe and Mail (includes correction)
The Harper government has never been so conflicted about farmers, particularly now that Ottawa is freeing western wheat and barley producers from the obligation to sell their products through the Canadian Wheat Board.
Are farmers free-market-loving entrepreneurs who need to be liberated from state cartels such as the Wheat Board?
More related to this story
* Canada’s Wheat Board wars: The future of farming cut two ways
* Question PeriodIs neutering wheat board akin to beaver biting off its own testicles?
* Race heats up to launch Canadian grain exchanges
Or should they be heavily regulated through production quotas and price supports and fenced off from foreign competition by high tariff walls? Like dairy farmers, for instance, who were promised this year the Conservatives will “resolutely defend” their sheltered businesses.
The answer depends, apparently, on which farmers the Harper government is wooing.
On one hand, the Conservatives champion free enterprise for producers of beef, grains and oilseeds such as canola, and seek greater access to foreign consumers during trade talks.
“Entrepreneurial farmers are proving over and over that they can and will help drive our economy if they have control over their farm and over their bottom line,” Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz said as he moved to un-yoke western producers from the Wheat Board on Wednesday.
On the other hand, the Harper government is firmly wedded to a protectionist approach to farmers who produce Canadian milk, eggs or poultry.
Tariffs of more than 200 per cent shelter this supply-managed sector from foreign rivals, and domestic production is limited by a command-and-control approach to the farm economy.
Mr. Harper has long championed dismantling the Wheat Board’s monopoly for his western base, but one-time adviser Tom Flanagan says the former Canadian Alliance politician shelved his aversion to supply management years ago when courting rural Ontario votes.
The Conservatives’ stout refusal to lower protectionist walls around dairy, egg and poultry farms has already cost it a seat at major trade talks among Pacific Rim nations, according to Lawrence Herman, a lawyer and former Canadian diplomat who is at Cassels Brock & Blackwell in Toronto.
The United States and eight other partners including Australia, New Zealand, Singapore and Vietnam are negotiating an Asia-Pacific regional trade deal known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement.
Mr. Ritz said in a statement that contrasting Ottawa’s treatment of different farm groups is “like comparing apples and walnuts.” He said supply management was created in response to farmer’s demands, while the Wheat Board was imposed on western producers during wartime “to ensure cheap wheat to Europe.”
Mr. Herman said supply management and untethering farmers from the Wheat Board are irreconcilable approaches to agriculture.
“However the minister attempts to rationalize these policies, they’re fundamentally contradictory,” the international lawyer said.
"On the one hand, the government’s trumpeting the virtues of free markets by removing the monopoly powers of the Canadian Wheat Board. On the other, they’re going to the wall to defend a Soviet-style command system, one where both the total allowable supply and the price paid to the farmers are set by the farmers themselves. By any standard, this is the antithesis of a free and open market.”
Comment