When Scott Mobray got up Jan. 23, the Manitoba Crop Alliance (MCA) director knew there were job cuts coming at Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC). He had heard about 15 per cent. The number later reported was around 665.
What he didn’t expect was the pending closure of seven AAFC research facilities throughout the country, including the research centre in Portage la Prairie, Man. And he’s still not sure what to make of it.
“We knew there was cuts coming,” he said.
Read Also
Government silence loud on AAFC cuts
Canada’s federal government trumpets fiscal responsibility; their silence on a day of massive Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada cuts was baffling at best.
“We didn’t know where they were targeted within agriculture, but it’s pretty concerning when they start closing research facilities and and laying off staff.”
WHY IT MATTERS: Steep cuts at AAFC have raised questions about the future of public research and extension services provided by the department that farmers have come to rely on.
Mobray was primairly concerned about losing research capacity and what that means for the long-term effectiveness of investments Manitoba producers have made into public research.
“AAFC is, no question, the key partner for MCA and, of course, by extension, Manitoba farmers,” he said.
“Over the years, we’ve provided a significant amount of time and effort and money to AAFC on behalf of our farmers through both the core breeding agreements and the cluster funding research.
“So it’s a little concerning that way, because we have put in an awful lot of time, money and effort over the years to work with them on this, and it’s showed. There’s been lots of studies that have shown that money generated significant returns for farmers and for the general public in Canada.”
To an extent, he can see the fed’s perspective. The need to cut government spending and waste is a big talking point, but many don’t like it when it’s time for them to make sacrifices, he said.
“Nobody ever likes it when it’s in their backyard, (when) it’s in there area of of need,” he said.
Government is “getting pushed to streamline and reduce bureaucracy and all that sort of stuff,” he added. “Everybody thinks, ‘Oh well, it won’t affect us,’ but ultimately it ends up affecting everybody.”
The Keystone Agricultural Producers was also trying to parse how closures will impact things, especially given the absence of official confirmation on the morning of Jan. 23, although social media messages and coffee shop talk pondering which stations were getting shutters was spreading widely.
It wasn’t until later in the day that it was confirmed that AAFC Portage la Prairie was on the list, along with Nappan, N.S., and both Scott and Indian Head in Saskatchewan. Research and development centres in Guelph, Ont., Quebec City, Que., and Lacombe, Alta., are also closing.
KAP’s general manager Colin Hornby said his first concern was farmer impact.
“We want to make sure that there’s no funding cuts that negatively impact the services programs or whatever value it is that producers get from AAFC,” he said.
The future after AAFC cuts
Cuts to AAFC could be a step toward restructuring Canada’s agriculture research landscape, according to national stakeholders.
Keith Currie, president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture (CFA) called the cutbacks a “necessary evil” and said Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food Heath MacDonald and Deputy Minister Lawrence Hanson have their “fingers on the pulse of the ministry.”
“There’s nothing wrong with efficiencies,” Currie said. “And if … there were hirings that didn’t make sense, taking a look at it and getting leaner and meaner, I think that’s what we do in business. That’s what you do on our farms.”
He added there have been jobs added in the last decade that some producers have “kind of scratched our head at.”
“Having said that, it depends where these cuts are going to happen,” he continued. “We’ve been clamouring for probably 10, 15 years about not enough public sector research.”
In a Jan. 23 release, Canadian Wheat Research Coalition (CWRC) chair Jocelyn Velestuk called news of the cuts “a tremendous loss to Canadian agriculture.”
“It is a loss of not only expertise and people who have contributed to farmers’ success, but also of agricultural research capacity that is crucial to fuelling innovation and maintaining progress throughout the industry,” Velestuk said.
Tyler McCann, managing director of the Canadian Agri-Food Policy Institute (CAPI), said the cutbacks, particularly the closures of research sites, were a predictable development. AAFC has not been investing enough in its research infrastructure for decades, he feels.
“It is inevitable, if you don’t invest, that at a certain point in time you will need to start to close facilities. And that appears to be where we’re at today,” McCann said.
Politicians were likely responding to the signals from the broader agriculture community, which McCann said has not always championed science and research among other issues like trade and business risk management.
“Hopefully this reminds everyone else in the ag ecosystem that research and development and innovation is critical to competitiveness, and we need to double down on making that a priority going forward.”
One upside of the cuts is that they could provide an opportunity for a renewal point in agriculture research in Canada, McCann argued.
“Hopefully (AAFC) will start to show some leadership on this and engage with the other stakeholders who have significant skin in the game, other R&D funders, other R&D performers, in what that renewal looks like,” he said.
It could also be a chance for the AAFC to do more with less. McCann said there is an argument to be made that the department had too broad of a research footprint for the research funding it had.
“What will determine whether or not we can be competitive at a time of cuts is whether or not they’re going to make other changes to how they fund and do research to streamline and improve the efficiency of the work that they do,” he said.
Currie and McCann agreed it would be important to keep on those with roles to play in the recently announced Next Policy Framework, which will cover 2028-2033.
McCann called it an opportunity to double down on innovation and “to say, yes, we know that (AAFC) shrank its footprint, but in the Next Policy Framework, for the next five years, governments are going to commit more resources and more energy and more focus to innovation.”
Currie also pointed to the agriculture trade file and the temporary foreign worker/seasonal agriculture worker programs as areas he hoped would remain steady.
