For Farmers, It's Always One Thing Or Another

Posted on Saturday, April 16 at 19:24 by 4Canada
The international pricing and subsidy system is so out of whack, according to figures compiled by Statistics Canada and the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, that it costs Canadian consumers and taxpayers more to keep agriculture alive in this country than it would to pay farmers to do nothing.

Between 1999 and 2002, for example, Canadian farmers received support, in the form of either artificially inflated prices or direct subsidies, to the tune of $24.9 billion.

Yet, over the same period, after all costs were accounted for, these same farmers made only $8.8 billion in net income.

Full article (registration required)

Contributed By



Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. Sat Apr 16, 2005 11:16 pm
    Actually, I think the good thing coming out of the crisis is that so many farmers have realized how dependent the industry is on the US market, and how much it has been taken over (with our government's help) by "vertically integrated agribusiness" ie giant companies that have a hand in the entire thing from production to packing--and are almost all US-owned. Many farmers have realized that free trade isn't necessarily fair trade, nor even all that free. Many are looking for "made in Canada" solutions and alternatives and trying to get their industry back. <P> <a href="http://www.beyondfactoryfarming.org/cgi-bin/index.pl?node_id=780;lastnode=853;lang=en;last_cat=522.522.504">Agirbusiness and factory farming</a>: "Some of the largest agri-business companies in the world are the proponents of factory farming in Canada. Smaller companies are often linked to larger one through vertical integration and contracts. <P> Agri-business corporations are often the main beneficiaries of agricultural support programs, government incentives and tax breaks. <P> Beef: The beef industry in Canada is dominated by two companies, Cargill and Lakeside Packers Inc. which is a division of Tyson, the largest meat-packing corporation in the world." <P> More: <a href="http://www.beyondfactoryfarming.org/cgi-bin/index.pl?node_id=842;lastnode=780;lang=en;last_cat=522.522.504">Food sovereignty</a> <P> My feature article in AlbertaViews a recently: <a href="http://www.albertaviews.ab.ca/janfeb05/janfeb05slaughterhousedrive.pdf">Slaughterhouse Drive</a><br> <p>---<br>Now call it extreme if you like, but I propose we hit it hard, and we hit it fast, with a major, and I mean major, leaflet campaign.--Rimmer, Red Dwarf<br />

  2. by RPW
    Sun Apr 17, 2005 3:01 am
    Turns out that Small IS Beautiful.............

    ---
    RickW

  3. Sun Apr 17, 2005 2:12 pm
    It will be back to farming when the oil runs out! Lets see agribusiness run without cheap oil.

  4. by avatar Spud
    Sun Apr 17, 2005 4:24 pm
    The oil wil be rationed for agribusiness.They get first dibs.
    Sorry.

  5. Sun Apr 17, 2005 7:04 pm
    Yes, with vertical integration the small farmer assumes all the risk while the large agri-business dictates everything to the small farmer. And farmers are being forced off the land so that these large agri-businesses can take their land! That`s the thing too, to ship goods many thousands of kilometres to far away markets, this is heavily subsidized by governments. Maybe small farmers can get into the co-op business once again.

    ---
    Dave Ruston

  6. by hoopoe
    Mon Apr 18, 2005 4:51 am
    <blockquote>The federal government strategy was to follow the U.S. lead. Ottawa refused to let Canadian beef producers test all cattle bound for export markets, as the Japanese, for example, demanded.<p> The government said this would be unscientific. But not all farmers agreed.<p> "They should test them all," says John Ysselstein, as he leans back in the office of his Woodstock-area farm, watching the closed-circuit television that monitors his 1,000 cows.<p> "It would have been cheaper than losing all our markets. Everyone around here says that."</blockquote> Could it be that both the US and Canadian governments are afraid this kind of testing would reveal the true extent of mad cow in North America? Think about it, what other reason is there not to secure your markets with a test that would cost $30 to $50 for each animal selling at $2500 per head, especially when the Japanese indicated this kind of testing would be acceptable to keep their market open to Canadian cattle or beef?



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.




Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

canadian bloggers | canadian news