There’s little doubt that Ralph Eichler enjoyed the agriculture portfolio the last time he led it.
From 2016 to 2019, Eichler was a fixture at agriculture events throughout the province. He clearly relished the role and felt it was an important one within the provincial government; it was an industry he was proud to represent.
Perhaps a victim of his own success, Eichler found himself promoted to the higher-profile economic development (and training) portfolio in a 2019 cabinet shuffle.
Read Also
Introducing the purple tomato
Health Canada has approved bioengineered The Purple Tomato (TM), maybe leading to new culinary uses and health benefits?
Now he’s back on familiar ground in the ag and food portfolio following the resignation of Eileen Clarke, who had been minister of Indigenous and northern relations. There is, of course, the drought situation that has crippled production in many parts of the province, and the policy response to that.
Federal agriculture minister Marie Claude Bibeau has made it clear she’s willing to put up that level of government’s funds for the disaster program AgriRecovery.
Last Thursday Bibeau, at a media event in Winnipeg, indicated five provinces, including Manitoba, had requested the program be activated.
Historically, Manitoba has been extremely reluctant to trigger the program, claiming budgetary necessity. There’s some truth to that claim.
In Manitoba, primary agriculture comprises seven per cent of the provincial GDP.
By comparison, Ontario sees primary agriculture — despite being the largest agriculture sector in Canada measured by dollars — comprising just 2.2 per cent of that province’s GDP. That leaves the costs of programs like AgriRecovery a lot more budgetary room to hide.
But for Manitoba producers — and those in Saskatchewan who frequently find themselves in a similar plight — it’s a frustrating situation. They find themselves second-class citizens in their own country as the provincial and federal governments play political hot potato with their fate.
Manitoba requesting the program indicates Eichler may have done enough fancy stick-handling at the cabinet table to convince his colleagues of the necessity for immediate action. This is clearly an early victory for him.
On top of this immediate crisis, Eichler is facing some ongoing issues that need to be addressed.
There are the controversial Crown land reforms that have seen cattle producers thrust into economic uncertainty with costs rising at a time they can least afford them.
This furor has subsided in recent months as cattle producers have battled more immediate concerns, but it hasn’t gone away. It continues to bubble under the surface and will surely boil over again this winter as the losses of the summer sink in for the sector.
And while a provincial election is still some time away, the current government must be acutely aware that the NDP road to power frequently involves some rural constituencies in these areas turning orange as core PC voters opt to sit on the sidelines rather than vote for a government that has irked them.
And of course, there are the upcoming negotiations for the next agricultural policy framework, set to come into effect next year.
Manitoba has been part of a pan-Prairie push to revisit the very concept of AgriStability, and replace it with a whole-farm revenue insurance program. That’s happened at the same time the federal government has offered to sweeten the existing program by increasing reference margins and other modifications.
So far, the province has resisted, to the frustration of the province’s farm groups.
Whether the proposed whole-farm revenue insurance program will proceed is not clear. It would need some support from outside the region and so far, it seems there hasn’t been any rush in Ontario, Quebec or B.C. to endorse it.
Prairie farmers could find themselves in the maddening situation of being stuck in an unworkable program that won’t be reformed because their own provincial governments refuse to co-operate with the federal plan.
So as Eichler takes the reins at agriculture again, he has his work cut out for him. It’s a good thing this is a minister that’s never been afraid of hard work.
What’s less clear is whether he gets any support at the cabinet table to address many of these issues.
The Pallister government has built a reputation for being a ‘top-down’ kind of organization, so it’s unlikely that retiring minister Blaine Pedersen was acting in a vacuum.
It would seem that these situations are very much by design, and that vision could well continue — until there’s a change at the top.
