by SUSAN MANN
Federal and provincial agriculture ministers must act now and implement changes to the national farm safety net program, AgriStability, an Ontario farmer leader says.
That’s also the message the Ontario Agricultural Sustainability Coalition gave to Ontario Agriculture Minister Carol Mitchell before she headed off to attend the Federal, Provincial, Territorial Agriculture Ministers’ meeting in Saskatoon July 7 and 8.
Ontario Cattlemen’s Association president Curtis Royal says “we just hope they don’t come out with basically what they’ve come out with the last two or three times.”
After the agriculture ministers’ meeting last summer in Niagara-on-the-Lake and also the one Feb. 5 in Toronto, the politicians said they’d hold consultations with farmers. “To come back out with something similar like that and no action is basically unacceptable to us here in Ontario,” Royal says.
In a written statement, the Coalition says it is recommending changes to AgriStability that will provide a much needed infusion of funds to Ontario’s cash-strapped farm businesses. It is also proposing a comprehensive business risk management program based on cost-of-production for non supply-managed commodities. The agricultural industry has already started working out some details on this with OMAFRA staff; the Coalition wants the federal government to help develop the details too.
If there isn’t any progress at the meeting, Ontario should be prepared to announce the province will fund at least 40 per cent of the proposed changes to AgriStability retroactive to 2008, the Coalition says.
Mitchell says the business risk management program, including proposed changes to AgriStability, is one of her top issues “and for my stakeholders that’s an issue they want to see dealt with.”
But Ontario is just one province at the meeting table. “What I take forward are the concerns from my ag community and what we see our ag community needs to move into the future.”
As for the Coalition’s request for the province to fund at least 40 per cent of the proposed changes to AgriStability if there isn’t any progress at the meeting, Mitchell says she didn’t want to predict the outcome of discussions at the table. “We’ll see where we land at the end of (the meeting).”
In its written statement, the Coalition says farmers have been patient but if there isn’t any progress at the meeting “farmers will be very vocal in expressing their discontent.”
Ontario Federation of Agriculture president Bette Jean Crews says their response will depend on the outcome of the meeting. But “the only thing that we don’t want to do is one huge demonstration and then nothing else.”
Crews says AgriStability “wasn’t designed to meet all of the multitude of crises that we’ve had in the last few years, even in the last decade.”
A national survey shows a majority of Canadian farmers are dissatisfied with the current AgriStability program, it says in an Ontario Federation press release.
Brian Gilroy, chair of the Ontario Fruit and Vegetable Growers’ Association, says AgriStability doesn’t do the job farmers need it to do. And he’s hoping federal Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz will acknowledge the program isn’t working. “For the minister to continue to say that things are fine is, in my opinion, inappropriate.”
He also hopes negotiations can begin to provide safety net programs that address today’s needs.
Crews says the Coalition’s proposed changes will cost an estimated $100 million a year in Ontario and $300 to $330 million annually across Canada. The Coalition is asking for the changes to be made retroactive to 2008 because that’s when AgriStability was introduced.
Ontario Pork chair Wilma Jeffray says making improvements to AgriStability retroactive to 2008 can be done at the agriculture ministers’ meeting because “the people who make those decisions are all sitting together. We see that as something that can be done immediately to put some immediate relief into the farm community because the need is so great.”
Implementing the changes can’t wait until the current agricultural policy framework expires in 2013, she adds. BF
Lead on
It has been a week since the PFT meetings and the only evident solidarity of the unified OASC group is a deafening silence.
Mitchell says she didn’t want to predict the outcome of discussions at the table. “We’ll see where we land at the end of (the meeting).” and now a week later more deafening silence.
The Coalition said farmers have been patient but if there isn’t any progress at the meeting “farmers will be very vocal in expressing their discontent.” So without a voice from elected leadership is this an invitation for rural revolt? Without a plan B going in and no position since FPT meetings is there any evidence of leadership?
Ontario Federation of Agriculture president Bette Jean Crews says their response will depend on the outcome of the meeting.
and Veg says “For the minister to continue to say that things are fine is, in my opinion, inappropriate.” That’s a strong statement! So what does inappropriate get us or politicians?
Wilma Jeffray says making improvements to AgriStability retroactive to 2008 can be done at the agriculture ministers’ meeting because “the people who make those decisions are all sitting together. and Implementing the changes can’t wait until the current agricultural policy framework expires in 2013.
The only OASC unity that has been established is a deafening silence behind a solid lack of leadership to achieve a goal that can only be described as unacceptable. Lead on in silence cause we sure can't see you looking for plan B.
Lead on
The silence is deafening! I agree and many have noticed the same.
The farmers have lost confidence with the Minister as it is apparent she is a mere puppet. She is silent because she has nothing positive to bring forward to the farmers.
The farmers have lost confidence in the OFA as they appear dysfunctional due to their track record of non-accomplishments. They are silent because of their inability to achieve any measurable success.
There is no confident voice to represent the farmers in Ontario and the farmers themselves are becoming silent.
Martin Luther King Jr said: "Our lives end the day we become silent about things that matter."
Confused Minister????
"Mitchell says the business risk management program, including proposed changes to AgriStability, is one of her top issues “and for my stakeholders that’s an issue they want to see dealt with.”
What on earth did the Minister say? Who are the stakeholders she makes reference to??????
The legal definition of stakeholder is:
(1) n. a person having in his/her possession (holding) money or property in which he/she has no interest, right or title, awaiting the outcome of a dispute between two or more claimants to the money or property. The stakeholder has a duty to deliver to the owner or owners the money or assets once the right to legal possession is established by judgment or agreement.
(2) The duties of a stakeholder are to deliver the thing holden by him to the person entitled to it on demand.
The farmers are entitled to Cost of Production under contract with the government. Farmers have been waiting for the money to be delivered. Who is the stakeholder that is holding the farmers' entitlement to cost of production? Who is the third party holding our money?????
If the stakeholders feel it is so important and needs to be dealt with as the Minister stated, why is it taking so long to deliver and where is the money the stakeholders are withholding from the rightful recipients- the farmers.
Farmers need to demand their entitlement from the stakeholders- NOW!
Fast math
Crews says the Coalition’s proposed changes will (only) cost an estimated $100 million a year in Ontario. Really!? then why and how has farm debt and equity loss both nearly doubled in Ont?
Last fall Drombrowsky sent back 82 million of unused money. Does Crews really think that 82 million would have cured the problems in this province by 80% or does she and G&O just want to set the stage to have the 40% old RMP money reinstated to be able to claim a win?
Seems they are storming around like gas feed ducks, appearing more like tempests in teapots, while monkeying around begging for peanuts.
Change is inevitable Success is optional
Confident leaders are not afraid to put forward determined plans. They are not afraid to announce deadlines and point out that governments have abandon agricultural producers. Government support programs that do not work, or no longer exist, have not bargained in good faith or held up their fiduciary duty are not worthy of respect.
Maybe the real fear is our leaders themselves are afraid to call for a long term protest to avoid exposing, "the masses might not follow".
This is quite different subject than assuming there is no fight or passion on the rural backroads for change. Question for real change is who will lead the change charge out in front?
Backroad wisdom: "Can't lead from behind ...that's herding". We have been herded long enough. We need to be heard not herded.
Where has leadership taken
Where has leadership taken us? The pork industry was lead to terminal ruin. Beef was likewise decimated by BSE and consequential trade restrictions like COOL, sheep were left to wild marauding animals and G&O’s new voice has not matured and is still squeaking in the background “40% might be ok” while horticulture is not (never) happy. All sectors have been collectively lead and left to ruin.
The only sector that seems to have some semblance of life is supply management. I am not sure one would want to say this was due to leadership as there is no edification of a leadership model. Maybe it is the evidence of monopoly control but is it at the expense of all other sectors of agriculture?
If the OASC group fails today (and the odds makers are betting they will) history will show they were the “last batter up”. In most professional leagues another season without a win means the coaches and leaders are fired … to keep the paying fans and players. Let the post- season firing begin.
the leadershiop has missed one point
If anything should be fired, it shouldn't be the coaches and leaders, it should be supply management players, the sector which profits at the expense of all other sectors of agriculture.
Not if, but when, the OASC group fails, instead of firing the coaches, trading away a few of the players who don't know how to be team players (supply management) would be a far-better move for the rest of the team.
Good luck
Gerry Ritz is on reoord as saying that AgriStability is working. He isn't likely to change his tune, ever. What do the Provincial Ag Ministers have for "Plan B"?