Stephen Harper and Chuck Strahl are appearing at a live news conference at a farm about 20 miles from here at the moment, covered on local radio. They are about to announce that CAIS is being retired and replaced.
Harper makes a few intro comments and
Our government recognizes more needs to be done, especially about rising costs of production… input costs have risen over 3 times faster than product prices… and that’s what brings me here today.
$1 billion in new money for income stabilization … modelled on conventional bank savings accounts … an annual cost of production benefit… inviting provinces to share in funding.
Basics are now up at the AAFC website.
Sounds promissing. I hope that they get away from the usual 60-40 split on funding these programks. That formula is grossly unfair to Saskatchewa. That formula means that the average taxpayer in Ontario pays far less into the formula than does the Saskatchewan taxpayer. We need a formula that recognizes some sort of “average” cost to all taxpayers in the provinces affected.
What a waste of tax dollars. We need a real conservative government who will sit back and let the economy take care of the agriculture sector, not these Liberals who go by the name conservative and squander money.
I’m with you Saskcon, we should be cutting spending and taxes and reducing the number of government programs.
I am giving this government the benefit of the doubt until they get a majority.
Lets get some perspective here. We are talking about an industry that is very important to our provincial economy and has to compete with the treasuries of countries like the USA and France. The subsidies provided to farmers in those countries so badly distort what world commodity prices should be. Until we can get those countries to lower and hopefully eliminate subsidies to their producers there will be the need for our governments to support agriculture.
Now, you want a sink-hole for federal government money – look no further than Bombardier. When you look at government grants to that company and loan guarantees provided to Bombardier customers, the amounts that the feds help out farmers with is a pitance by comparison.
Here’s the kind of announcemenmt I am waiting for:
“$1 billion in new money for income stabilization … modelled on conventional bank savings accounts … an annual cost of production benefit… ” This money will not be an added expense to the taxpayer as I also announce the disbanding of the CBC effective today.
There had better be some tax relief in the budget after all these additional expenditures, spending windfall profits on additional program spending is not my idea of how a Conservative government should be governing.
I don’t see things differently, Bob. I am also opposed to spewing money over Bombardier.
As Cascadian says: There had better be big tax cuts for all, including me, in this budget.
“…spending windfall profits on additional program spending is not my idea of how a Conservative government should be governing.”
Just the other day they gave over $100 million to the oil industry in Alberta . ‘Cause we all know how tough it is to make a profit in the oil industry.
“who will sit back and let the economy take care of the agriculture sector”
Normally this is a statement I would agree with, except that no where in the world is the agricultural sector free market driven. Some countries are more than others, but overall the ag. world is fairly screwed up. Look to the US for subsidies, or perhaps the EU. Look at the CWB, or the Dairy Producers Association at home.
However, I hope that PMSH has a plan, and not just a handout. Handouts = Grit thinking – not what I hope for the Conservative government.
Softening up for the election. As I say, when they get a majority, they have no more benefit of the doubt.
Great smackdown of Lorne Calvert by Stephen Harper.
When it was noted that Calvert was absent, the Prime Minister stated that on the Eco-trust, where other provinces are getting millions, and the waiting times guarantees, Calvert has not brought the Government of Saskatchewan to the table.
He closed by saying that things that are good for Saskatchewan shouldn’t be held up by partisanship.
Iberia – could you provide some factual information; I’m confused.
You say that Harper gave over 100 million the other day to the oil industry in Alberta. I wasn’t aware of that.
I know that he gave 155.9 million to Alberta to set up their tasks in the EcoTrust program, which are several projects to reduce emissions and pollutions. These include a large scale CO2 capture and storage system, dev’t of a clean coal system, waste to energy system, etc. These are all projects carried out by the Alberta gov’t, and co-funded by the federal and provincial gov’ts.
I’m aware that the federal and provincial Alberta gov’ts also set up an EcoEnergy Carbon Capture Task Force.
But I’m completely unaware of what the federal gov’t gave to the oil industry. Please inform me. Thanks in advance.
First let me say that I voted for what I thought was a conservative party in the last election. I will not make that mistake again. This regressive conservative party is the same as the librano’s. They have no morals they govern by the heat the left wing media puts on them.
If subsidies from other countries are the problem use import duties. I don’t think this is possible in canada. The government is so corupt that it is not reparable. It’s time the west formed a republic and told canada to take a hike.
It’s quite refreshing to see PMSH using the Parliamentary recess as an opportunity for positive announcements. And the press attention he is receiving is a stark contrast to that being given to Dion’s “magical mystery tour”. One press report concerning Dion’s lack of visibility started out with the question “Where’s Waldo?”
Funny that Calvert wouldn’t show up, the premiers of Ontario & Alberta did for the respective announcements in those provinces. Perhaps he was out filling potholes or something…
Unfortunately AG Subsities are a necessary evil in todays market. Try making a living selling your product when your competitors can sell for a third or half of the price because they are HEAVILY subsidized by their governments. The last four years were the worst in history for Canadian farmers. Yet, they were the best four years for USA farmers. Europe is even richer in assistance for their farmers. (Strong AG Unions) What happens if we don’t offer assistance? Our AG sector dies and consumes will then pay even greater dollars for their food. Once you kill it you cannot easily get it restarted. All farmers what is a fair return on the money and time they invest. I beleive that I have read somewhere that a farmers share of a $3.50 box of cereal is about 13 cents. Is this fair?
It is a good sign that the Conservatives have made enemies of some conservative ideologues. It suggests that the Conservative gov’t is more worried about reality and functionality rather than maintaining a pure idiological stance. Nothing is more frightening than an ideologue in politics. Bodes well for the chances of forming a majority in the coming months.
Adler has it on right now that Calvert didn’t even know Harper was in the province.
‘Calvert didn’t even know Harper was in the province’
Good to See Unka Lorne is ‘right on top of things’ and in the loop. Seems he dropped the ball on a few DOE issues he should have been aware of. Out of touch, out of time, and hopefully, soon out of office.
“… The wartime controls that President Wilson and Congress imposed on the grain trade in August 1917 halted the sort of opportunities that had originally come Norris’s way(Jim Norris, Canadian grain trader). The Food Administration Grain Corporation (USDA) under the direction of Herbert Hoover, took over the sale of grain to the allies and the allocation of foodstuffs to the American armies abroad. Congress fixed the prices of spring wheat from the upper Northwest at $2.20 a bushel, and the Allies bought their wheat through their own Wheat Export Company in New York City. It was all government-to-government. The United States, Britain, and France had effectively made the grain trade into a public utility.” Page 105 Merchants of Grain, by Dan Morgan (Penquin 1980)
The world grain trade has not been a “free market” since that time.
Canadian Grain farmers are in an industry that is controled by the treasuries of VERY rich contries.
Worst offenders ??
Japan
Saudi Arabia
France
Germany
Switzerland
Britain
Sweden
USA
Canada
Sad to say, but without the Federal govmit, the prairie farmer is dead in the water. That is why PMSH has to carry on with the decades old intervention. Been going on since WWI.
I think that bazoo and cardstonkid have it right. The reality is that the EU, USA, Japan, etc, heavily subsidize their farmers. Canada has no choice but to subsidize its farmers, given that the rest of the developed world does so, and given that of all the developed world, Canada has one of the shortest growing seasons and smallest agricultural land bases.
The world does not operate within an open free market; if it did, the cheaper production costs of Asia and Africa would nullify the agricultural production of Europe, the US and Canada.
I have just received a CARBON CREDIT TRADING, newsletter from the Prairie Policy Centre. I think this letter is available at
http://www.prairiecentre.com.
Page 1-Carbon Credits: What does it all mean
Carbon dioxide equivalent (co2e)
page 4 Rules, Risks & Options.
producers should seek legal council prior to signing any agreements.
Lots of info, if you can understand it.
Tony W, I agree with Cardstonkid’s comments.
I too am frustrated that there has been no such thing as a true blue conservative on the planet, in power, since Maggie Thatcher. But I’m reconciled to the lesser of evils.
Tony, without fisking all of your post …can you please explain what is “corrupt” about Harper’s announcement? It’s done in front of CTV cameras, not in brown paper bags.
If you want more conservatism in government you are going to have to have a lot of stamina to unwind decades of subsidies and guarantees that generations of farmers, corporations and workers have all come to expect as a right.. after years of NDP and Liberal largess… here’s what Harper said today “I’m confident we will fulfill our commitment and Saskatchewan will be a big winner. Whether it will be enough for the NDP is another question”
If you want real change to conservatism, the reality is that it will have no chance of happening in Harper’s first majority mandate; it might happen in his second…assuming enough baby boomer utopians die off.
Bear in mind the alternatives .. you have seen them, with brown paper bags.
“Most of the provinces have signed on or are ready to sign on for these. The government of Saskatchewan isn’t. I would encourage the government of Saskatchewan to sign.”
Haahaha Lorne just got kicked in the nuts!
Opps forgot the URL
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070309/harper_farmers_070308/20070309?hub=TopStories
As long as agricultural help doesn’t degenerate into a marketing board system I think we should give Steven the benefit of the doubt. The WTO process is an honest attempt to elinimate agricultural subsides.
Just look at what happened to poultry and dairy with the “authorized extortion” that the marketing board perform. We have the worlds most expensive butter and milk prices (with only fair quality) and we are the only nation on Earth where chicken is more expensive then beef…
See http://www.crfa.ca/issues/bytopic/dairyprices.asp
ET:
3w.cbc.ca/canada/edmonton/story/2007/03/08/alberta-harper.html
That $155.9 million is nothing less than a subsidy for oil companies. Please explain the rationale of subsidizing pollution control in an industry that is seeing record profits.
I’m not sure if it’s part of this plan:
3w.cbc.ca/canada/edmonton/story/2007/03/06/carbon-plan.html
I can understand the need for subsidies in agriculture, but using taxpayer’s money to help profitable industries is wrong.
PRIME MINISTER ANNOUNCES $1 BILLION FOR CANADIAN FARMERS
March 9, 2007
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
Prime Minister Stephen Harper today announced two new commitments to farmers totaling $1 billion for improvements to national farm income programs. These investments are the next important steps in fulfilling Canada’s New Government’s commitment to replace the Canadian Agriculture Income Stabilization (CAIS) program.
“Our government is taking another step forward towards replacing the Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization Program with programming that is more predictable, bankable and better enables farmers to better respond to rising costs,” said the Prime Minister.
Today’s announcement will mean an injection of $400 million directly to producers to help with the high cost of production in farming. An additional $600 million is earmarked to kick- start new government/producer savings accounts that would go into effect once agreement is reached with the provinces and territories.
The $1 billion federal initiative includes:
A federal commitment to the creation of contributory-style producer savings accounts;
A $600 million federal investment to kick-start the accounts; and
A direct payment of $400 million to producers this year to help address high production costs over the last four years and $100 million annually to address cost of production issues when they occur.
Today’s announcement builds on the $1.5 billion for 2006-2007, as announced in Budget 2006, that helped to address gaps in the system in areas such as production insurance, the margin-based program and putting in place a new disaster relief framework.
This new funding will be available as soon as Parliament approves the upcoming budget.
“I can understand the need for subsidies in agriculture, but using taxpayer’s money to help profitable industries is wrong.”
The gov’t could legislate pollution restrictions on the industry which could stall the economy or they could encourage the industry to develope this technology by subsidizing it and limit the risk of negative economic impact
No, iberia, that funding can’t be defined as a subsidy for oil companies. The fund is for:
developing a plan for a large-scale CO2 capture and storage system, to capture and transport CO2 for use in enhanced oil recovery or for underground caputre and storage.
And supporting a Clean Coal Front End Engineering design project towards a coalfired electricity generator capable of near zero emissions
And a waste to energy project in Edmonton to convert municipal waste into electricity, as an alternative to landfill waste disposal
And a hydrocarbon upgrading demonstration program, which will invest funding in projects that explore commercial opportunities to upgrade Alberta energy resources into other consumer products.
Your definition that IF a gov’t funds research and projects in a specific resource, THEN, the gov’t is actually subsidizing the private industry, is invalid.
After all, that would mean that research carried out by engineers (on research grants) for safer road construction – would be a ‘subsidy to the company building the road’. Research carried out by engineers on safer cars would be a ‘subsidy to the car companies’. Research carried out by biologists on disease immune cattle would be a ‘subsidy to the cattle industry’.
And so on.
So, the gov’t is not subsidizing the oil industry. Try again.
Iberia “using taxpayer’s money to help profitable industries is wrong”
And using taxpayer money to help failing industries is insane. Because it ends up harming the healthy industries by propping up failing industries.
So let’s agree subsidizing industry is not a good idea.
But Librano$ brought us Kyoto. Like Iggy brought us the “Québec nation” .so we’re not in a vacuum we’re in the real political world where we have to react to opposition forces. And Canadians want action on climate change because Mo Strong .. blah blah blah.
McGuinty got $350 million should Stelmach get nothing? It’s a national per capita formula. It’s not a subsidy .. which are, I agree with you , a bad idea.
So let’s stop all subsidies starting in the East in the Auto industry Bombardier. Actually, Oil doesn’t get a subsidy, it gets faster equipment write-offs handed them by the Liberals in the 90’s, they should be revisited and all industry should get the same write-off formula, no favoritism, no punishment.
Tit for tat subsidies — engaging in bad economics because other countries do — makes no sense but is politically inevitable it seems, even with a super majority.
The notion that we need to be food sufficient for security reasons is emotionally compelling but also nonsense. But essential nonsense politically.
As even many putative conservative posters here prove, there’s no real conservative constituency in Canada. The best we can hope for is a less corrupt liberalism under slightly better management and a slightly less Ontario-Quebec-centric administration.
With reference to Thatcher above: government as a % of GDP barely budged under Thatcher or Reagan.
The very best you can expect is a slight reduction in the GROWTH of government spending not an actual reduction.
It is EXTREMELY important for a country to be able to produce it’s own food. Relying on other countries for your food production is hazardous to your health. The basics must be covered.
Other countries heavily subsidize their agricultural sectors, and can export that food to Canada cheaper than we can grow it, despite our efficiencies. As long as those external forces are keeping food prices artificially low, we MUST counter that with whatever is required to maintain a core food production sector. You cannot allow the expertise of our various farming sectors to be lost for a generation to take take short-term advantage of cheap food imports – it’s a long term risk that could be disastrous.
Yes, I wish we didn’t need to do this. It would be great if all trade barriers and duties etc were gone and our farmers could compete worldwide on their efficiencies. But right now we have to deal with the world as it is, not how you’d wish it to be. If your house is on fire, you put out the fire first before you start painting.
Oh dear!Very disappointing…sems it’s nearing election and the Harper cons seem as comfortable with the lib-socialist concepts of bribing voters with their own money and Ag welfare/public susidized ag production…not very free market…not very Conservative and certainly a step back IMHO…why not attack the causes of front end cost loading on producers?…Fuel tax, sales tax, handling taxes and a dozen middle men in the supply chain each skimming a profit and collecting fed VAT taxes.
Maybe if you outlawed produce marketing monopolies and price fixing agencies and got out of the producer’s pockets Canadians wouldd actually pay the real value of the food they consume.
But then the unimaginative way is to buy off Farmers fo another year with their own money to get reelected, then ignore the real system demons for another 4 years till the next pre election bribe comes out.
How desparately disappointing….particularly to conservatives who thought Harper would do government different from the Liberals.
“Oh dear!Very disappointing…sems it’s nearing election and the Harper cons seem as comfortable with the lib-socialist concepts of bribing voters with their own money”
Actually I basically agree with you there, but Harper is operating in a broken systme, I’m not sure how realistic it is to expect it to change overnight. Also, it is pre-budget right now, and as much as we all think there is going to be an election soon, its not like he’s working on his 3rd budget on the eve of an election, he’s announcing legitmate budget allocations for spending. Although I must agree it is a bit excessive for a conservative Prime Minister.
“Prime Minister Stephen Harper today announced two new commitments to farmers totaling $1 billion …”
Great, my paycheque going into the pockets of farmers who’s net worth is 10x mine.
When is he going to announce a billion for middle age guys who sit in cubicles all day and have to worry about paying the mortgage and putting food on the table.
I’m tired of subsidising everyone else. Conservative, Liberal, Commie… it doesn’t seem to matter who is in the big chair, does it?
WL Mackenzie Redux:
Well, Harper is 100% better than any Liberal leader, so I’m happy.
WL Mackenzie Redux,
“concepts of bribing voters with their own money”
Yeah right, Farmers of SK need to be bought by Conservatives.
I mean they all voted for Martin last election.
-sarcasm off-
me no dhimmi – that could be an interesting discussion – the lack of a ‘real’ conservative constituency in Canada. I think this is a valid observation, but the causes/faults lie within ourselves.
Canada is economically and militarily piggybacked on the USA. This is not due to the US; it is entirely due to Canada’s actions.
Prior to WWII, Canada was connected, not piggybacked, with the British Commonwealth. Canada had its own military, it had a robust economy for its size. But, post WWII and in particular, in the period since 1960 (the Trudeau legacy) – Canada changed.
Economically it became a dependent economy, operating within franchises owned by the US and other foreign nations. That is, we didn’t develop the industries, we allowed others to develop them, set up their factories – and we functioned as managers and workers. Then, we didn’t compete on the world market – and the result is that 85% of our exports go only to the US. We rely on them as consumers.
We set ourselves up as passive people, with the nice name of peacekeepers, and relied on the US and the UK and others to do the dirty military work of setting up the peace. We’d then and then only, go in to ‘maintain that peace’. We decimated our military.
We self-defined ourselves as ‘middle of the road centrists’ – and refused to question, debate, argue. And innovate. Innovative ground breaking research became the domain of the US and other countries. Canada would copy the innovations. So, the US would spend the millions to develop the new drug; Canada would copy it – and offer it at lower prices and inform everyone how kind it was to do so, ignoring that we paid none of the research and development costs.
We have taxed our corporations and citizens so heavily that Canada has been unable to develop an investor class. We rely on foreign investment to build our industries.
All of this means that Canada cannot, yet, operate as a conservative nation. It is too dependent on others and without sufficient self-reliance for such actions. Therefore, what Harper is trying to do, is remove the federal hand out of Provincial gov’t, allow the provinces to take charge, reduce corporate taxes, build an investor class, expand Canada’s military, expand Canada’s export network – and none of this can be done easily or quickly.
ET writes:
“Your definition that IF a gov’t funds research and projects in a specific resource, THEN, the gov’t is actually subsidizing the private industry, is invalid.”
ET, if a gov’t funds research into a project that will be used by private industry and then sold back at a profit to the same people who funded the research in the first place (the taxpayer), then it IS a subsidy. It’s not like the energy industry can’t afford to do this research on it’s own.
The same goes for your other examples. Why, for example, should taxpayer money be used to help design cars so that they could be sold back to us at a profit? What you’re supporting is commie-capitalism.
A subsidy for farmers is different. They are forced to compete in international markets against products that are heavily subsidized. Until an international agreement to end subsidies is reached, the Canadian gov’t will have to help farmers or risk the end of food production in Canada.
WL Mackenzie Redux: you should start your own blog site. you have the answers for everything..now what could we call your site…i know “Moon Battery”
Great, my paycheque going into the pockets of farmers who’s net worth is 10x mine.
When is he going to announce a billion for middle age guys who sit in cubicles all day and have to worry about paying the mortgage and putting food on the table.
I’m tired of subsidising everyone else. Conservative, Liberal, Commie… it doesn’t seem to matter who is in the big chair, does it?
Would you rather pay 35% of your gross income for food? Then farmers wouldn’t need a subsidy would they. We have one of the lowest costs of food in the industialized world here.
Sounds very similar to the Western Grains Stablistion Fund that was running 20+ years ago. The government matched the farmer dollar for dollar, but it was limited to grains only.
Calvert was just interviewed “live” on CTV. Anyone catch the whole thing? I take it he was miffed.
Iberia is right folks; however clarification is required:
When Dion wants to intervene in the economy with massive infrastructure projects to boost productivity – this is an investment in our nation
When Harper wants to provide incentives, and yes tax dollars, to help our oil industry prepare for emission caps, that is a subsidy and they should simply be put out of business.
BTW, Iberia. Just because oil companies have made profits lately, don’t assume they always have.
I assume you won’t be voting for Mr Dion.
Shamrock:
When oil companies pollute because of production practices which are designed to maximize profits, why should taxpayers have to pay to clean up their mess for them? They are highly profitable now so they don’t need the help.
You are quite confused if you think that investing in public infrastructure is the same as subsidizing private industry.
rhebner: It takes a million dollars at 5% to provide an income of fifty thousand dollars, which for a couple is not excessive these days. Especially if it has to provide medical expenses, drugs etc. which are inevitable as we grow older.
The only pension plans farmers have is the OAS and CPP. The CPP is smaller if one didn’t earn enough to pay income tax in some years as was the case in many instances. Most cubicle workers at least have some sort of company pension plan. What I’m getting at here is that a retiring farmer needs a million dollars net worth to provide an income that affords a reasonable standard of living in retirement. Remember, farmers have mortgages and have to eat too.
Len Pryor
Iberia: I have noticed in many of your posts that you link to a CBC story to back your position on various issues. Given that the CBC is likely the most bias Anti-West/Conservative news agency in the country, would it not be wise for you to seek other sources of information? Change the channel once in a while. You may gain a new perspective.
Taxpayers money that is given to farmers is in reality a subsidy for the consumer. If the cost of grain in $1.50 loaf of bread is 10 cents what would that loaf cost if the grain was worth 20 cents? $1.60 or $3.00? If we consider the 10 cents a government subsidy who benefits the most, the farmer or the consumer?
Iberia, who are the biggest polluters in Canada? Farmers. Do you object to them getting help too?
I don’t buy your argument that CO2 is “pollution.”
Why don’t you be honest? You are quite happy seeing the oilsands shut down, aren’t you. This is your justification. As I said earlier, it is not correct to say oil companies are highly profitable (Exxon returned 13% on equity last year, when they were supposed to have made obscene profits).
You are quite confused if you think oil companies make big profits all the time.
Should we subsidize Bombardier Why is it OK for Liberal governments to subisidize them?
Get your head out of your a**.
“It’s quite refreshing to see PMSH using the Parliamentary recess as an opportunity for positive announcements.
Sad to say, but without the Federal govmit, the prairie farmer is dead in the water. That is why PMSH has to carry on with the decades old intervention.
Canada has no choice but to subsidize its farmers,
etc., etc., etc……
Just goes to show, there ain’t no hypocrite like a right wing hypocrite.
BTW, if farmers didn’t vote conservative, does anybody think they’d be seeing one thin dime?