Is Liberal support for the Risk Management Program a game changer in rural ridings?

Friday, May 6, 2011

It may not be, but it has injected a note of urgency into electoral debates in rural Ontario

by BARRY WILSON

The political dialogue needs nifty catch phrases that sum up the message. In the 2011 election campaign that is coming to an end May 2, the phrase is "game changer."

Everything, it seems, is a game changer. Charges of anti-democratic practices against the Conservatives are a game changer. Opposition unity against the Conservatives, triggering an election, is a game changer. Potential Conservative gains in ethnic communities are a game changer. Everything that might have an impact is a "game changer."

Not really. While some have used the term, I will not call the election-eve decision by the Ontario Liberal government to make permanent its support for the Risk Management Program (RMP) a game changer. It is not even clear it will have much of an impact on the May 2 vote.

But the provincial decision, and the subsequent federal Liberal promise to inject federal dollars into the provincial program, did change the election narrative in many rural Ontario ridings. Conservative candidates quickly found themselves on the defensive on the issue.

Politically, farm leaders in the province might be wise to temper their reaction to the apparently stark political choice. Provincial farm leaders quickly said a measure of federal candidates would be whether they support backing the provincial cost-of-production–based insurance program with federal dollars.

Farmers should support candidates that have farmer-friendly policies, the farm leader message says. And since the federal Liberals are the only party explicitly promising support for RMP funding, it implicitly suggests farmers should vote for the Liberals and against Conservatives.

Even if farmers take that advice to heart, and there are reasons to suspect farmers base their vote on many factors beyond farm policy, they are such a small portion of the voting population that a farmer uprising is unlikely to influence many rural ridings where Conservative margins have been in the 10,000-vote-plus range.

However, farmer opposition will be noted if the Conservatives win government again. That's just the way they are.

Ontario farmers also might remember that it was the Liberals who ended federal support for provincially-designed programs almost a decade ago. And in their federal platform published in early April, there was no cost included for supporting Ontario's RMP.

This is not to suggest that Ontario farmers should not vote their self-interest if they see that in backing a party promising to support the provincial cost of production-based risk management program.

But it is to suggest that farmer voters should press all candidates on whether their positions on supporting provincial risk management programs are credible. If there are concerns that federal support could make the programs subject to an American trade challenge, would a federal government of any stripe take that risk?

And will arguments about whether federal support for provincial programs tilts the balance in favour of rich provinces make a future federal government think twice about adding to provincial inequality? These are issues for a future federal government.

The Ontario RMP question has injected an element of urgency into rural electoral debates. In the broader scheme of things, it is unlikely to be a game changer and, if it is, the direction of the game change remains uncertain. BF

Barry Wilson is a member of the Parliamentary Press Gallery specializing in agriculture.