We express appreciation to leader Dalton McGuinty and his Liberal colleagues, also, for campaigning with a rural/agricultural platform based strongly on the recommendations of the Farmers of Ontario coalition.
The New Democrats paid little attention to agricultural issues during the campaign. But leader Howard Hampton represents a rural riding with a solid agricultural base and it's expected he will continue to play a direct role in that party's agricultural activities during the coming four to five years.
We extend our sympathies to Noble Villeneuve, Ontario's Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs from 1995-1999, who lost his seat to John Cleary, also an incumbent. Villeneuve did a fine job representing the interests of farmers all across the province, and had a particular interest in fuel ethanol development and preservation of the Ontario Market Revenue Insurance program. However, Cleary is also no stranger to agriculture and rural affairs, having been the Liberal co-critic for agriculture from 1990-1995, and critic for rural affairs from 1995-1999. He has also been a strong supporter of fuel ethanol.
At press time, the new Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs had not yet been named, but we look forward to working with whoever the Premier appoints. Hopefully he or she will be brought up to speed quickly, given the need for a strong performance at the national meeting of Canadian agriculture ministers scheduled for early July (see related item later in this newsletter).
OMAFRA
BUDGET
With an election having been called immediately after the 1999/2000 budget was tabled by Minister of Finance Ernie
Eves, the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs' (OMAFRA) financial situation remains somewhat
in limbo. However, it is expected that Eves' announcements of early May will receive proper Parliamentary approval
in the months ahead.
The budget tabled provided $35 million in new money for OMAFRA, with a fairly wide latitude regarding how this money can be used - environmental improvement, food quality, new product development and more. And while the money is promised only for one year, there is an expectation that the $35 million/year commitment will extend over several years. The $35 million corresponds almost exactly to the $35 million cut which would otherwise have occurred in the 1999/2000 OMAFRA budget because of the termination of the Grow Ontario program and the end of special funds allocated for ice-storm damage. Although there is new money for new programs, our understanding is that the ministry will still be obliged to cut several million dollars from its base budget, much of which is used to pay salaries. This will undoubtedly mean lots of future meetings within the ministry (and between ministry and farm leaders) on how best to use the new money and also meet expenditure requirements. The new minister will play a major role.
Note that the $35 million is in addition to the $40 million in new funds allocated for the Ontario Whole Farm Relief Program (OWFRP), although it remains to be seen whether the OWFRP becomes permanent, or functions only for taxation years 1998 and 1999. (See related story later in this newsletter, and in this month's editorial.)
The Farmers of Ontario campaign must be judged as a success. While it probably did not secure a commitment for $350 million in new funding over five years, it accomplished a lot. Congratulations go to the coalition consisting of representatives of the Ontario Agricultural Commodity Council, the Ontario Federation of Agriculture and the supply management sector. Thanks also to those OMAFRA staff members who cooperated on the various committees - at the request of the Premier himself - to develop background material for the Farmers of Ontario campaign. Bob Down, OCPA past president and vice-chair of the Ontario Agricultural Commodity Council, and Terry Boland, OCPA's director of communications and public affairs, devoted much time to this effort.
1999
CORN CROP
A record grain corn crop was produced in Ontario in 1998. The 1999 crop is also off to an excellent start with
most of it having been planted before May 10, and good rainfall having generally occurred across the province in
late May-early June. It appears that southern Ontario will escape a June frost this year - always a danger for
corn planted early with good growing conditions during May.
A lot can happen before the October harvest. However, there are valid reasons to expect above-average yields again this year. Unfortunately, the same expectations exist all across the North American corn belt, and price expectations are not good. They could get worse if favourable growing conditions continue into the July 1-4 holiday weekend. That's a key reason why safety net programs continue to dominate the OCPA agenda.
GMO ISSUES
As shown by an accompanying
article in this issue on genetically
modified corn, biotechnology has also dominated OCPA activities this year, the
Ontario corn industry is attempting to find a balance between the needs of some
customers - especially those with European sales of processed products - and
the belief of most participants that biotechnology offers major opportunity
for improvement in corn quality, productivity and environmental integrity. But
we have a major media challenge, and we recognize that not every farmer and
farm organization holds similar views.
AGCare is ideally positioned to play a leading communications role. The organization has an excellent and committed board of directors and executive, led by chair Jim Fischer and vice-chair Mary Lou Garr, and a well-qualified new coordinator, Brenda Cassidy. By now you will likely have seen lots of letters and items in local and national newspapers originating from the pens of Fischer, Garr and Cassidy. We hope that this will lead to much more. Dr. Doug Powell, Assistant Professor of Plant Agriculture at the University of Guelph, and one of the world's top experts in risk communication, has been an invaluable advisor to AGCare and OCPA as these organizations attempt to deal with the current media frenzy. Thanks also to Dr. Gord Surgeoner, now on leave from the university, as president of Ontario Agri-Food Technologies, and chair of the national Food Biotechnology Communications Network also headquartered in Guelph.
The university itself is an enigma. It supports the efforts of Powell, Surgeoner and a host of excellent scientists attempting to affect real improvements in agricultural and food quality and the environmental sustainability of the agri-food system through biotechnology and associated plant breeding techniques. But the university supports a number of anti-biotech activists, including Dr. Ann Clark, also in the Department of Plant Agriculture, and who is a regular at Ottawa news conferences and other events where the imagined horrors of biotechnology are dramatized. Of particular disappointment is the way in which Clark tries to belittle her departmental colleagues, undermining their integrity rather than addressing their arguments in an academically honest manner. The university (especially the Department of Plant Agriculture of the Ontario Agricultural College) is sending confusing messages.
As a final comment, it's disappointing to see how little attention the media has devoted to the latest chapter in the saga of Dr. Arpad Pusztai, formerly of Scotland's Rowett Research Institute. Pusztai received international attention a few months ago - even via newspapers and magazines in rural Ontario - for his claims that genetically modified (GM) potatoes were deadly to rats - and, by implication, humans. However, an independent panel appointed by the British Royal Society (an independent academy promoting the natural and applied sciences, founded in 1660) reviewed Pusztai's research and recently concluded the following: "On the basis of the information available, it appears that the reported work from the Rowett Research Institute is flawed in many aspects of design, execution and analysis and that no conclusions should be drawn from it. We found no convincing evidence of adverse effects from GM potatoes. Where the data seemed to show slight differences between rats fed predominantly on GM and on non-GM potatoes, the differences were uninterpretable because of the technical limitations of the experiments and the incorrect use of statistical tests." The Royal Society's report merited scarcely a mention in the global media, and clearly had no influence on the views of self-appointed U.K. farming expert, Prince Charles. (The Prince may be one reason why the British - as many Canadians - are so vigorous in singing, "God save the Queen.")
BT SURVEY
It is our impression that Ontario corn farmers have been careful this spring to ensure that Canadian guidelines
for the planting of at least 20 per cent of seeded acreage with non-Bt corn, for "refugia" purposes,
have been respected. But we need to know for sure. For this reason, Powell and his colleagues at the University
of Guelph, in cooperation with OCPA, AGCare, the Ontario Bt Coalition, Pioneer Hi-Bred Ltd. and Novartis Seeds
Inc. have initiated two surveys (one by telephone and one by mail) to find out if this perception is indeed true.
If you are contacted, please give the surveyors your full cooperation. Results will be released as soon as they're
available.
FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL
SAFETY NET PLANS
Information on the status of federal-provincial farm safety net discussions
is provided in this month's editorial
and will not be repeated here. The meeting of Canadian ministers of agriculture
in Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, in early July will be an early test for the
new Ontario minister.
Saskatchewan and Manitoba are seeking an extension of the existing arrangement which favours them over other provinces. Status quo is their goal. Ontario, with support of most other provinces, is insisting on a fairer deal.
One element to watch is the "Romanow factor" whereby the premier of Saskatchewan bypasses the Hon. Lyle Vanclief, federal Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, and goes straight to the Prime Minister to seek special treatment. Saskatchewan premiers have done this on various occasions before. The Hon. Ralph Goodale, Minister of Natural Resources and Saskatchewan's only Liberal MP, also has a history of bending the rules in favour of his own province - as we saw well during his tenure as federal agriculture and agri-food minister - and Goodale has lots of cabinet clout. This must be frustrating for Vanclief, who has tried his best to avoid showing bias to Ontario (despite his rural Ontario roots) during his two years as federal minister.
Hopefully we can count on some off-setting support from Ontario's Premier, Mike Harris, who has voiced strong support for the need for a fairer share for Ontario in the allocation of federal agri-food spending.
And hopefully we'll get some strengthened support from the federations of agriculture in our efforts to secure a more equitable distribution.
Vanclief is expected to name another national safety net advisory committee in June, with a first meeting likely before ministers meet in early July. The committee may be smaller than the one which existed in late 1997-early 1998. Hopefully the interests of Ontario grain and oilseed producer groups and other members of the Ontario Agricultural Commodity Council will be represented on the new committee.
There is lots of money at stake - not to mention the need for Ontario crop-growing farmers to survive in the face of competition from highly subsidized corn farmers in the U.S., Europe, and, to a growing degree, Quebec. Watch for political games at the highest level.
And Ontario officials should remember, a bad deal is worse than no deal.
MARKET REVENUE INSURANCE (MRI)
AND DISASTER RELIEF
Interim payments, worth a total of nearly $30 million for Ontario corn and wheat farmers, went out in early May.
There has been a small number of appeals and we're hopeful that the formal appeal process can become functional
quickly. Details are still being developed and there are some legal complications about what can be done with existing
legislation, though it looks like the process will likely involve some members of the AGRICORP crop insurance committee,
with advice being provided by representatives of Ontario grain and oilseed producer groups and OMAFRA. In general,
however, the MRI process has worked very smoothly...compared, for example, to the Ontario Whole-Farm Relief Program
and its federal counterpart, the Agricultural Income Disaster Assistance program.
Given the continuing depressed state of Ontario corn, soybean and other grain and oilseed prices, expect the final 1998/99 MRI payments to be at least as large when they arrive, in late 1999. MRI support prices for 1999/2000 will be about the same magnitude as in 1998/99, meaning a further draw down in the size of the Ontario GRIP/MRI reserve, and further demonstrating the wisdom of allowing this fund to build when prices were temporarily higher for a few years during the mid-1990s. MRI net payouts (i.e., after subtracting one-third as the producers' share of premium costs) in both 1998/99 and 1999/2000 can be expected to be two- to four-times larger than current-year government contributions to the program.
We continue to watch the ever-changing farm income support programs south of the border. Though the specifics are still under discussion, the question appears to be no longer "whether?" but, instead, "how much more?"
Several members have asked why OCPA has not been more deeply involved in complaints about the design of the current OWFRP/AIDA program. The answer is several fold: OCPA worked hard to influence the design of this program in late 1998, emphasizing a number of major design flaws (the details are still on the OCPA web site, www.ontariocorn.org). But these criticisms and suggestions were generally rejected by governments and general farm organizations championing the new program, so OCPA chose not to pursue them further because our opposition was viewed as being obstructionist and could have delayed the introduction of a program which was likely to be of immediate benefit to hog farmers and other livestock producers. In addition, OCPA directors remain of the view that so-called "disaster" programs based on 70 per cent of three year averages - while potentially of value to other sectors - are of much less value to grain and oilseed producers, where the price depressions are likely to be of much longer duration (driven by huge subsidy practices in the U.S. and Europe). The same foreign subsidy influence has not been experienced by most other Canadian agricultural sectors. As a result, we've chosen to concentrate our energies on the maintenance of, and improvements to, Market Revenue Insurance, NISA, and crop insurance - three core programs which our directors believe are far better suited to the needs of our members.
OCPA directors and staff recognize there are significant flaws with the present disaster program design, but consider it important to concentrate the organization's limited resources on activities most likely to yield the most long-term safety net benefits to members.
However, if the political will exists to make the disaster relief programs permanent - an eventuality which remains in doubt for reasons explored in this month's editorial - OCPA, in cooperation with other members of the Ontario Agricultural Commodity Council (and, hopefully, general farm organizations) will be actively involved in the planning process.
CROP INSURANCE
About 63 farmers have chosen to participate in the 1999 optional unit pilot project, less than the initial goal
of 100 participants, but enough to produce meaningful results. We'll be following this closely.
Interestingly, over 60 per cent of the farmers contacted about the optional unit program this spring (who were not formerly in crop insurance) chose to buy insurance in 1999 - some in the optional unit program, but many just in the regular program. Total crop insurance participation, measured in number of insured acres may be up by about 10 per cent in 1999, the result of more aggressive marketing, lower per-acre premium costs (especially for those qualifying for price discounts because of lower risk) and a steadily improving program design (better re-seeding benefits for corn growers in 1999, for example).
The goals for 2000 include further development of the optional unit coverage program, continuing low premiums, consideration of the merit of reducing premiums for those who "self-insure" and reduce total risk by growing crops over wide geographic areas, and the possibility of a new 100 per cent-government-supported crop wildlife damage coverage - such as exists for crop producers in Western provinces, and for some livestock producers in Ontario (example, wolf damage to sheep).
GREG STEWART, CORN EXTENSION SPECIALIST
OCPA provides $20,000 per year to support the position of Greg Stewart as Ontario's corn extension specialist (or
program lead, to use OMAFRA terminology). Stewart has performed superbly well in this position, and has been extremely
busy during his first year speaking at dozens of meetings, writing many articles, visiting researchers and other
extension workers all across the North American corn belt, and playing an integral role in OCPA activities (example,
CASCO-Nacan-GMO production/marketing needs for 1999, see article elsewhere in this issue). Stewart's performance
has left us wondering how we operated without this support before. In addition, he has demonstrated that one can
work within government and have a good, public sense of humour - witness his recent column about nitrogen fertilizer
requirements and his good-natured digs at Peter Johnson, also a highly respected OMAFRA extension agronomist.
Stewart's position was established as a pilot project, the only OMAFRA extension "lead" to be funded in partnership with a farm organization, and the only position not established as "permanent" from the beginning. OCPA directors have stated their willingness to have the Stewart position made permanent so as to provide more security, including health benefits, to Greg and his young family, and have asked OMAFRA to move quickly in making this change.
In an era when OMAFRA's budget for extension is being continually squeezed, it makes sense to maximize opportunities for joint industry-ministry funding of extension specialist positions. This was a key recommendation of the Agricultural and Rural Advisory Services Study of 1997. Stewart has demonstrated what is possible, through service every bit as professional and competent as that provided by extension faculty positions at "land grant" universities in the U.S.
RESEARCH COALITION
UPDATE
The newly formed Ontario Agricultural Research Coalition, chaired by Bob Down, OCPA past-president, holds its second
official meeting on June 24. Ken Boyd, former research administrator (recently retired) in OMAFRA and, before that,
an OMAFRA extension engineer, is providing managerial services to the coalition, on contract.
The initial issues for the coalition include the size of overhead research administrative changes by the University of Guelph and a 10 per cent (up from 8 per cent) "claw back" of Matching Investment Initiative research funds by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. Potential new sources of funding for agricultural research will also be considered on June 24 as will opportunities for farm organizations to use refundable research tax credits to magnify the size of check-off support for agricultural research.
Ken Hough, OCPA's director of research and market development, has been chosen as the new representative for the Canada Grains Council to the Canadian Agri-Food Research Council (CARC). Also, at the early May annual meeting of CARC, Norris Hoag, assistant deputy minister, Research, Education and Laboratories Division, OMAFRA, was elected as the new CARC chair. Congratulations to both individuals.
GRAIN FINANCIAL PROTECTION
STAND-OFF
OCPA members will be familiar with OMAFRA's desire to transfer responsibility (including costs) for the Ontario
Grain Financial Protection program to a new corporate entity involving corn, soybean, wheat and canola producer
organizations and the Ontario Grain and Feed Association. This has been accepted by producer groups. However, the
ministry has also attempted to transfer responsibility for provisions of the Grain Elevator Storage Act to the
new corporation, a transfer which has only been judged acceptable to producer organizations if permanent financial
support is provided by the ministry. Producer groups do not consider it their responsibility to fund the policing
of what is an effective warehouse storage policing act.
Although the ministry had initially seemed willing to provide such permanent funding, it has recently back-tracked and, as a result, negotiations may end. Without an acceptable commitment from OMAFRA for permanent funding of this function, OCPA and other affected grain and oilseed producer groups will oppose any change in the current Grain Financial Protection and Grain Elevator Storage Act provisions. Without legislative amendment, change cannot occur.
THANKS TO SUSAN ILER
OCPA expresses a special thanks to Susan Iler who leaves the employ of the Ontario Soybean Growers' Marketing Board
at the end of June. Susan provided strong and effective leadership to a host of cooperative ventures including
the Ontario Field Crop Research Coalition, Ontario Agri-Food Technologies (she was the founding vice chair), AGCare,
and many more, and will be deeply missed.
Iler will marry Bill Litwin later this summer, and the two will farm near Highgate, Ontario. Best wishes to the couple.
BEST WISHES TO EUGENE WHELAN
OCPA extends its best wishes to Eugene Whelan who retires in mid-1999 as a Senator (the government type, not a
hockey player!). Whelan is one of the reasons why OCPA exists, having helped the fledgling organization in various
ways back in late 1982 and early 1983, when he was federal Minister of Agriculture, and reversing a flawed bureaucratic
decision, thereby permitting Canadian corn farmers to receive a federal stabilization payment of $4.48/bu on 1982/83
corn crop sales. That decision, made at the request of OCPA, went a long way in establishing the credibility of
the new organization within both farm and government circles.
While OCPA and Whelan have not always agreed on every issue - significant differences exist, for example, in the area of biotechnology - we've remained good friends. OCPA has the highest respect for his commitment to rural Canada and to what he's done for Canadian farmers. Hopefully we'll continue to see him, and his wife, Elizabeth, as regular guests, at OCPA annual banquets.
OCPA director for Essex, Gerry Wismer, and his brother Darwin, continue to share-crop Whelan's home farm near Amherstburg.
A NEW CAREER FOR ROSS DAILY
Ross Daily, host of the long-running This Business of Farming show of CFPL-TV in London, presented his last program in late May. Daily hosted
this show for 22 years (the late Roy Jewell was host for 25 years before that), and was well known all across Ontario
for his willingness to speak out for agriculture and for his constructive criticisms. Daily is a good friend of
agriculture, but not an apologist - willing to give credit where he thought it was due, and criticisms when the
reverse occurred.
Daily taught OCPA a lot about effective, timely communications, and those lessons will be long remembered. He and his wife, Eve, begin a joint new career as financial planners with Scotia-McLeod in London. But we expect that we have not heard the last of his strong voice in agriculture - we hope not, anyway - and wish them lots of success in their venture.
The future of This Business of Farming (which only aired during the fall, winter and spring seasons) is uncertain.
PHANTOM AGRICULTURE CRITICS
As the Parliament of Canada reaches its second anniversary of the June 1997 election, it's puzzling how little
Ontario has seen of the four opposition agriculture critics. It's no mystery why the Bloc critic has not visited
Ontario, but the continuing absence of visits from the Reform, New Democratic and Progressive Conservative agriculture
critics is puzzling - all three parties proclaim that their mandates and interests are national and not just regional.
In the case of Reform, Ontario received numerous visits - and well appreciated visits - from its agriculture critics prior to the last election, but hardly any since then. Joe Clark, leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada, and his Ontario MP, Jim Jones for Markham, met with some Ontario farm leaders earlier in late 1998 - again in a well-appreciated visit. But his agriculture critic (who has been openly antagonistic to Ontario agriculture in some of his statements in Hansard) was not present. The same non-presence applies for the New Democratic Party critic. Indeed, that party's most notable interest in Ontario agriculture of late was a recent TV clip of leader Alexa McDonough of Nova Scotia holding an apple while suggesting that it was unsafe to eat because of pesticide residues.
The opposition critics have been gracious in meeting with Ontario farm leaders when they've visited Ottawa, but have been reluctant to visit Ontarions on their farms. And most of the issues which they raise during Question Period in the House of Commons - and indeed, in correspendence with OCPA - are Prairie issues...just as those from the Bloc feature Quebec.
A recent letter from one party critic discussed the need for better communications between agricultural interests north and south of the 49th parallel. He obviously meant between Canada and the U.S., but his comments could also apply to Eastern and Western Canada, with most of the agriculture east of Manitoba - about half of the Canadian total - occurring south of the 49th.
Are they national critics or regional critics?
| Period: Oct. 1 - Apr. 30 |
Approximate Tonnes Marketed |
Average Weighted Price |
| 1998-99 |
2,663,200 |
$117.37/tonne |
| 1997-98 |
1,436,700 |
$152.25/tonne |
|
1996-97 |
1,891,500 |
$153.11/tonne |
| The above figures are based on levies received by OCPA for commercial sales. | ||
1