What Is The Farm Crisis?
by Roger Epp
No noisy rallies here. No angry provincial premier to placate or
avoid or all-party resolution from the legislature demanding federal
help for farmers. Instead, Alberta offers the prospect of well-organized
support for free-market agriculture from the taxpayer-funded commodity
lobbies. It is the home of Reform MPs who, until a year ago, thought
gun-control was the main farm issue and once opposed "subsidies".
Reform legislators still fervently believe in the fantasy of an
international trade deal that will solve the farm crisis without
cost to Canadians.
So it was no coincidence that Vanclief chose Red Deer to announce
an extension of the so-called farm-aid program. The Liberal chair
of the Commons agriculture committee had labeled it an "absolute
failure" even before farmers across the prairies repeatedly told
him so in hearings in December.
But unlike Saskatchewan and Manitoba, the Alberta government has
no serious problems with a program more designed to weed out farmers
than help them. The Alberta government also stands alone in its
support of the Kroeger recommendations for further deregulation
of grain transportation that are now before the federal cabinet
(see Ken Larsen, "Shipping News," The Post, fall 1999).
The only trouble with this picture is that Alberta farmers are
failing to live up to the free-market stereotype and the free-market
instincts of their politicians. Alberta farmers sounded an awful
lot like their counterparts in Manitoba and Saskatchewan in their
presentations to the Commons committee. They expressed their anger
about government abandonment to the agriculture committee, and resisted
the idea that the farm crisis was merely a short-term cash-flow
problem to be solved with a one-time, politically-packaged bailout.
Their situation is more desperate than that.
It is not too dramatic to say that the future of the historic,
export grain-growing region of the prairies is in the balance. The
region is fast becoming a Canadian outback. When you drive through
it, on pavement that is patched, pot-holed, and sometimes given
up to gravel, you are alone on the road - save for tandem grain
trucks doing the work once done by railroads. The future many feared
when the Crow freight-rate benefit was abandoned in the mid-1980s
may already have arrived.
In the new outback, the farm crisis is about disintegrating rural
communities. Rail lines are abandoned and grain elevators come down.
Tax-bases shrink. Populations age and decline. Retail stores and
government services like hospitals, schools and post offices are
consolidated in larger centres. People who have given volunteer
energy wear out or move away.
The farm crisis is also about the lack of leadership that can represent
a fractured agricultural community. It is about coming to terms
with the national political irrelevance of the prairie farm vote,
and with urban-rural tensions ripe for political manipulation. Farm
people once were romanticized as the backbone of the country; now
they are perceived as parasites on the public purse and feel powerless
to change that perception.
The farm crisis is about fears for the future of what is good work
- work that feeds people, engages parents meaningfully with their
children, and requires multiple skills. Now farm people talk about
the prospect of becoming 'bio-serfs' under contract to one of a
handful of seed-chemical conglomerates. They work great distances
off the farm to subsidize their operations (in vulnerable rural
professions like nursing), and face Revenue Canada reclassification
as hobbyists for their trouble. They constitute perhaps the oldest
occupational group in the country. Many of them are eating up what
ought to be retirement equity, postponing what eventually will be
a make-or-break period of generational transfer.
In that sense, too, the crisis is about the immense psychological
burden of keeping a third or fourth-generation family farm that
is not merely a business, but a physical anchor of home and identity.
Finally, the farm crisis is about an acute sense of government
abandonment. The federal government, for example, is considering
whether to yield the last traces of regulatory authority over grain
transportation. The railroads have made it clear that grain is a
commodity like any other, and not a high business priority at that.
Farmers already pay several billion dollars more per year than they
once did to ship their grain. They have seen few of the promised
"productivity gains" from deregulation. "Remember the Crow" is becoming
a rally cry - even in Alberta.
The same government has seemed all too willing to play free-trade
"boy scout" with western grain when its competitors won't. Add to
that Ottawa's virtual surrender of agricultural research to the
private sector, and its enthusiastic support for the biotechnological
revolution. This creates a situation where seed diversity is dangerously
limited, and ambivalent farmers are caught in the crossfire of consumer
boycotts and plant breeders' rights. They speak wistfully of the
not-for-profit innovation that once came from federal experimental
farms.
Make no mistake: there is an urgent need for a farm-cash infusion,
even if the largest beneficiaries might well be creditors. At the
same time, when politicians and urban voters hear what sounds like
yet another demand for a bail-out, they should understand how much
public money has been withdrawn from the farm economy. Whatever
the perception, Ottawa's financial support for farmers has dropped
steadily and substantially - as much as any funding envelope in
this era of belt-tightening.
To the extent the crisis is about community, leadership, and the
nature of work, the primary responsibility lies, of course, with
farm people. But government policy can help or hinder them. These
days, they can be forgiven their envy at the European Union's political
commitment to farm populations, despite the trade difficulties it
causes them.
Farm people, in the end, want meaningful policy recognition of
the importance of family-based agriculture. At the very least, they
and their communities deserve not to be written off as the sacrificial
lambs of deficit reduction and trade liberalization.
Thousand Tonne (or
Who Owns Your Soul Anyway?)
Lyrics by Ken Eshpeter
This song, to the tune of the classic working ballad, "Sixteen
Ton," was the rousing, finger- snapping, hand-clapping conclusion
to Ken Eshpeter's presentation to a panel on "Corporate Biotechnology,
the Family Farm, and Food Security" at Parkland's November conference.
The Cargill and Monsanto in the lyrics are transnational agri-business
corporations; Agricore (formerly the Alberta and Manitoba wheat
pools) and United Grain Growers are historic cooperatives in the
process of corporate makeovers.
I was born one morning
when the sun did shine
My father said the farm
would one day be mine
"You'll grow wheat for your bread and oats for your meal,
But pangs of anxiety
you might feel."
Chorus:
You load a thousand tonne
and what do you get
Another year older
and deeper in debt
Oh Cargill don't you call me
cause I can't go
I owe my soul to Agricore
I'm on the phone
to UGG to confide
They'll sell me seed and fertilizer and herbicide
My crops are looking super
but my bank account is not
They say it's only accident
the price of wheat is shot
A farmer gets a rush
when he sees things grow
And "help" is there for buying from Monsanto
If you survive the hail and pests and lack of rain
Oh Cargill's waiting patiently
to "take" your grain
I'm standing here at 50 years
and wondering why
I've spent all this time looking up in the sky
I hope my children find a way
to break this chain
And bring some profit back
to raising grain
Ken Eshpeter farms near Daysland in east-central Alberta.
|