Farming welfare bums

Well I really cant let this rant go past, which is perhaps why it was posted. My earlier posts on this subject at http://www.vivelecanada.ca/forum/viewto ... opic=15083 and http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php/ ... 8124834614 received little attention but perhaps this will spark a debate. Quote “Those farmers who survive will have a greater market share and will make significantly more profit. The laws of the free market will resolve the problem without government assistance. What will happen to farmers who go out of business? The same thing that happess to anyone who loses his/her livelihood: they will have to sell the farm and invest the money to start something else.” I must say that I do not favor , nor do most farmers, government handouts, many of these FAMILY farmers have second jobs in order to SUBSIDIZE their farming operations, having LOST money over the last few years. They are calling for support from pure necessity, most would prefer to be able to sell their products at a profit but have been backed into a corner by the CORPORATE take over of food production, processing, distribution and sales, which is very close to becoming a monopoly. It is not “a free market” because of this, if you have no fear in one or two international conglomerates totally controlling our food supply then just continue with your view on this and it will happen. At this point I am not even sure we can stop it. MY concerns regarding this are many, not the least of which is the inability of citizens to fight these large corporations on zoning, pollutions and excessive use of chemicals issues. There are other posts on this site regarding the enforced use of GM seeds and chemical resistant varieties that are transferring to the wild. In my view the smaller farms MUST survive if we are not going to be held at ransom in the future by these corporations. Please see the previously posted items for links to some of the National farm organizations that have extensively researched this, all of whom specifically say that SUBSIDIES IS NOT THE ANSWER but the removal of unfair monopolies and excessive profits by the Multinationals is what is required for a long term solution. The cry for farmers for funding NOW, is just to survive till that takes place (if it ever does). Unlike industry crop farmers must invest in seed, fuel, nutrients and labor to plant the crop only to be at the mercy of the weather and mostly corporate set sales prices before they realize any profit. THEY HAVE NO CONTROL OVER THEIR PROFITABILITY under the current circumstances. As has been seen with the BSE crisis their considerable investment in raising livestock to market weight is often for naught, and they must sell at a loss. It is not possible to put your cattle in storage to wait for the market to change, they daily consume your meager profit in feed. As in any sector there are those who are “rabid” in their approach to this problem and I favor those who are more reasonable in their approach. HOWEVER given that many of these folks not only have lost money on the farm over the past few years but have mortgaged their property to pay for seed or feed in the vain hope that the prices they receive will turn around and give them even a modest profit. And are now in danger of loosing their farm, many of which have been in their families for generations, it cannot come as a surprise that some are driven to excesses. Whilst I an sure that there are diverging points of view between rural and city folk given the totally different lifestyles and outlook, the signs held by the farmers of late say it all “FARMERS FEED CITIES”

[QUOTE]have been backed into a corner by the CORPORATE take over of food production, processing, distribution and sales, which is very close to becoming a monopoly[/QUOTE] Yes, it's that wonderful "New World Order" that the old George Bush declared when the Berlin Wall fell. Back then most of us didn't know what it meant but now we do. As a great man once said: "Corporations have been enthroned. An era of corruption in high places will follow and the money power will endeavor to prolong its reign by working on the prejudices of the people until wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed. " Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865) Which reminds me... on the last election entire rural Canada voted Conservative. They voted for the most corporate-friendly party in Canada today. Remember NAFTA? Brought to you by the Mulroney government. If corporations are hurting you, why do you vote for them? Don't answer, I do know the answer. You vote conservative because they told you they'd elliminate gun control. That's enough to tip the scale. Next I hear, you complain about corporate takeover. Do you even know what you are voting for? [QUOTE]the signs held by the farmers of late say it all “FARMERS FEED CITIES” [/QUOTE] Yes, but the farmers who feed cities can be anywhere, like in Brazil, China, Mexico, US, etc.

Interesting perspective Badsector.I gotta agree with you. Farmers have been doing this for years.I am well aware of the problems that face agriculture.The farmers themselves are part of the problem.As you point out they vote conservative.If they believe in,and want a free market,then accept the fact you are in a unprofitable business and get out.Why should the taxpayer bail you out? <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/rolleyes.gif' alt='Rolling Eyes'>

Quote “on the last election entire rural Canada voted Conservative. They voted for the most corporate-friendly party in Canada today…………. If corporations are hurting you, why do you vote for them? Don't answer, I do know the answer. You vote conservative because they told you they'd elliminate gun control.” Yes it seems that much of the rural RIDINGS did go that way, I most certainly did not vote that way and many others did not either. It may be in part due to the fact that most citizens (rural or urban) are simply not up to speed on this issue. Even in rural ridings the farmers and true rural residents are far outnumbered by urban residents. I believe the gun control thing is upsetting to many who NEED a gun for pest control in rural areas, but is far overplayed in the press as to its importance. There are many hunters and gun enthusiasts in the cities who come out to hunt in rural areas (and a pain in the ass they are around here!) and it would seem that the registry was aimed mostly at those folk. Quote “Yes, but the farmers who feed cities can be anywhere, like in Brazil, China, Mexico, US, etc.” But do you want to be reliant upon imported food or have Canada be as self sufficient as possible given the increasing “globalization”.? Do you want a least some control over the source and quality of your food? Generalizations are often misleading, for instance I would take issue with the following……. Quote “.Farmers are typically people who are against social assistance. Whenever it comes to helping the less fortunate in our cities, rural folks are always the first to object and demand that the government just let the city people starve. They would toss a single mother with four small kids out to the street and have zero understanding and tolarence for people who lose their livelyhood “ It may be that the particular person who you met may have held that extreme view or may have expressed his view poorly. I have found that rural folk are much more concerned about the welfare of their neighbors than some of those I have met in the city, but I do not paint all urban folk with the same brush. That said you must perhaps understand the point of view of a “self employed” farmer (or for that mater any self employed individual) who owns their own property. Unlike those who rent and work for someone else they are ineligible for those “social safety net programs” . I myself, wilst not a farmer, cannot collect UIC or EI or whatever they call it nowadays, nor could I collect “social assistance” (so far as I know) because I own my house and my business even though our family income has been below the “poverty level” (which is pretty much meaningless) for several years. I will grant you that in general, accommodation is more expensive in urban centers, but this is (in my view) offset by the ability to use public transportation and not have the expense of maintaining a vehicle, a necessity in rural areas. There is no safety net for farmers or the self employed, and that I will admit colors my view of those who regularly and over long periods rely upon these programs. I have personally met those who make a career of getting government payments but don’t think there is any difference here from rural to urban, nor do I paint all recipients with the same brush. Some genuinely need help, as do many of our farmers.

If you live in a city the reality is you simply do not have ANY idea what farming is all about. It's like white people talking about native affairs, they like to think that because they read a couple of articles in readers digest that they know what its all about. In a city you have very few restrictions on you, you're work is completely separate from your home. ON a farm, your home is your work. As a a farmer you may have no recourse to EI, or welfare. You simply lose your home and your livelihood. The regulations on farmlands, what can be done with it and what can't fill numerous volumes. Farmers compete with corporations which own the research, much of the land, the seed, the pesticides, and the fertilizers. That's like owning a store next dooor to a store than owns all the productst they sell and trying ot compete. Do some reading sometime on an actual farming website, that's all I can say. If you think you know rural issues, I guarantee, you have NO idea. If you think rural folks spend all their time thinking about how to make city folk starve, you have NO idea what you are talking about. Get some education and talk to rural folk, THEN come back and post about it.

[QUOTE]Rural: But do you want to be reliant upon imported food or have Canada be as self sufficient as possible given the increasing globalization? Do you want a least some control over the source and quality of your food? will grant you that in general, accommodation is more expensive in urban centers, but this is (in my view) offset by the ability to use public transportation and not have the expense of maintaining a vehicle, a necessity in rural areas.[/QUOTE] Telling you the truth, my wife and I always look for Canadian made food when we go shopping. We do what we can to stay away from imports. I live in a city and couldn't make it to work without my car. I am 100% reliant on my vehicle to earn a living. [QUOTE]Marcarc: If you live in a city the reality is you simply do not have ANY idea what farming is all about.[/QUOTE] It may be, but it's also true the other way around. Rural folks can't undertand the issues we face in city life, yet whenever we have a conservative government they attempt to run cities like farms. The result is always a disaster. Ask Torontonians why they don't vote conservative. They learned not to. [QUOTE]As a a farmer you may have no recourse to EI, or welfare. You simply lose your home and your livelihood.[/QUOTE] The company I work for (Research and Development) was enticed to set up shop in Canada by a government grant. If they lose interest in maintaining presence here (because the government of the day will no longer support R&D) and I lose my job, I won't qualify for EI or welfare either. My EI will be negated by my severance pay and I would have to sell my home, car and lots of other things before I would qualify for welfare. I am sincerely hoping I will never have to apply for either. [QUOTE]If you think rural folks spend all their time thinking about how to make city folk starve[/QUOTE] I actually didn't say that. Earlier I quoted from a farming activist. The person got me with his insult in a very sensetive time. I was struggling to retrain, get back to the workforce and support my family. His view, however, was pretty typical. Those who are employed (or have a profitable business) don't usually give a rat's ass about the unemployed and rural folks have very little understanding for those who endure unemployment in the cities. Most often they blame the person. There are people who want to be unemployed but for the majority of us it's a humiliating experience. Anyway, understanding begins with experience. Those who lived through hard times are more likely to have empathy for others. A journalist conducted an interesting experiment about this during the Mike Harris times. He dressed as a homeless person and tried to beg in two very different areas of the city. First he went to Bay Street, the financial center of Canada. He didn't get any money but received many rude comments about them bankers to go get a job, etc. Next, the guy went to Parkdale, one of the poorest areas of the city, also a high crime area, full of hookers and drug dealers. He made considerable money begging there. The people who lived there had genuine understanding for poverty and did what they could to help a poor person. So, I may not understand rural issues, but rural folks don't understand city issues either. Perhaps a little more understanding would be useful from both sides.

Quote “So, I may not understand rural issues, but rural folks don't understand city issues either. Perhaps a little more understanding would be useful from both sides.” Pretty hard to argue with that, dialog is always good, if each can start to understand the other point of view and try and remain open minded that’s progress! Quote” The company I work for (Research and Development) was enticed to set up shop in Canada by a government grant. If they lose interest in maintaining presence here (because the government of the day will no longer support R&D) and I lose my job, I won't qualify for EI or welfare either. My EI will be negated by my severance pay” No disrespect, I hope you never again have to seek another job, but given todays job market volatility I would hope for the best but prepare for the worst. That said, is not the grant provided to your firm a subsidy to that corporation much the same as a payment to the business of farming would be? Severance pay! What is that? Self employed and farmers don’t get that either! I do hope your encounter with that “farm activist” does not make you see all rural and farm folk in the same light. Like any segment of our society or any organization there are those “over the top”. One only has to look at rally’s about globalization or any union picket line or demonstration to see that one or two strident AHs can totally derail the point of the whole thing and create enemies not empathy. So how about it, should we support our Canadian farmers with grants and subsidies? Should we push governments to encourage cooperatives and discourage corporate ownership of our farmland and food chain? Should we protect our farmers against cheap and/or inferior imports? Should those who invest in the business of farming have a reasonable chance of competing and at least get sufficient return to pay for their labour? Give us your view, do you really believe that the family owned farm can (or should) survive? Must we ensure that Canadian cropland, cattle, hog, chicken, egg, milk production etc etc remains under Canadian control, corporate or otherwise?

When farmers take a second job to subsidise their farming habit, they are subsidising your food. It was farmers in Sask who paved the way for our medicare system without who's efforts we would have the US system.Don't judge all farmers by the slavering of one redneck. Most realise they may soon become dependent on the social safety net themselves.The CBC ran a series on their "Ideas " program about the "Canadian Clearances" comparing them to the Scottish highland clearances. Corky Evans, yankee imitation socialist, said that every political party in Canada has as it's agenda, making rural life as diffficult as possible , in order to force people off the land and into the cities, many joining the ranks of the homeless ,in order to leave the land free for a corporate takeover. My father's uncle, a lifetime farmer, explained the economic problems of farmers . He said they may have had an older tractor which was doing the job adequately. When the neighbor bought a bigger, new tractor, he had to follow suit as he couldn't let the neighbor out do him, even if it meant going into debt. When the neighbor built a bigger house, ditto , a bigger, newer combine, ditto. Soon he was so far in debt that he couldn't make it without another job. He had been sucked into the consumer monkey trap, just like the urbs do. Farmers are scared shitless of the tories coroporate agenda. Many have said that they voted tory to get rid of the gun registry. When that has been accomplished they will get rid of the tories and vote NDP the rest of their lives, at least in Sask and Manitoba. If they don't scrap the gun registry they may as well scrap the tories anyway ,only if that happens they will get scrapped in their stronghold of Alberta as well.Either way they won't be around long. Brent Swain

I know a LOT of farmers and am a member of several organizations and I can tell you that debt certainly isn't a result of 'keeping up with the jones'. A perfect example of corporate farming and a look at where the west is headed is to look at New Brunswick and PEI and their control by McCains. NB now has a grand total of fewer than 1500 active farms. The main reason that accounts for debt is crop insurance, you need to pay for it up front BEFORE you've been paid. That is the central problem in farming. It's like running a small business every year, you need all the seed, pesticides, fertilizers, labour, insurance, etc., all half a year before you get a nickel. Now that the government has gotten out of doing anything constructive, farmers have to go to McCains or Irvings (Cavendish Farms) in order to either get a loan, or back up the loan. And of course with the money or the guarantee comes conditions, both companies have VERY strict regulations on the types of practises they will accept product under. If you even breathe the word 'union', you'll never get another nickel. Several years ago we saw how keen Ag Canada was getting into bed with Monsanto and virtually ALL crops were genetically modified so the only time we saw government involvement was trying to get the farmers to plant GM potatoes. THen, two months into the season McCain says they aren't going to buy any GM potatoes. Even though they underwrote the whole experiment, the farmers had to swallow the whole loss and many went bankrupt and many of course simply finally said enough is enough. That, of course is just a start, but it's a pretty big issue. Yes, there are 'lifestyle' issues like gun registries, however, I know plenty of farmers who have no guns and could care less about that. In much of Canada, while the slogan 'farmers feed cities' may be true for some products, much produce in the cities comes from the US, Mexico and Chile. So now that farms have 'served their purpose' they are cut loose. PEI has been a little more successful with their potato crop primarily by avoiding Cavendish and McCains as much as possible and focusing on international trade of their seed potatoes. New Brunswick, of course, has LONG been OWNED by corporate interests (and yes I"m talking about government). And yet, when the US maintained that there was a 'latent disease' in PEI potatoes which they couldn't prove was even there in order to prop up the price of Idahoes, the government simply ignored the issue. Yet when we saw the 'factory farms' that is the beef industry get infected with mad cow because of their own practises, the government jumps in with a billion dollar buyout, which much evidence shows went straight to processors (though we can't find out as Klein had his infamous hissy fit when somebody just suggested we find out where the money went). Of course comments like the above are, well, I don't know what they are but if somebody doesn't see the issue with colouring an entire industry from comments made by one person, then there's no point even discussing it. Of course the point is quite valid that fewer people can get unemployment even in cities, but that's not a farmers fault. Having collected EI AND run a small business I can tell you that if you are in a location (city) with a viable skill, the chances of you getting enough EI to keep your home are a HELL of a lot better than any farmer can hope for in his wildest dreams. Yes, they will deduct your severance, and no, you won't have as much money, but I've dealt with these people and if you are actively looking for a job they will usually make sure you don't lose your house. Finally, as for the political point, the reality is that we live in a two party system. Anybody with a few clues knows that in most areas the NDP are a distant third. So, when one party has been screwing you over for over ten years, well, OF COURSE you are going to vote the other party, particularly if they are even making the claim of suppoorting you-what other option is there? For lobbying though, farmers know they have to 'reach' city folk because that is where the representation is. Yes, there are ideological differences, and there are different farm industries, different provincial structures and all kinds of things. However, the simple fact of human reality is that people look at their own self interest first. All farmers have is land, which they want to leave to their kids, and THAT issue takes precedence over all others. Of course, like I said, many industries and provinces simply have no more farming industry. A new breed of small farms are setting up around cities with active markets, but the small family farm has largely died out in most places.

I think it's time we stopped calling support for those who feed us "Subsidies" and start calling it what it is , an investment in the security of our food supplies. How viable or secure is reliance on food from Chile when the cost of shipping it halfway around the world keeps skyrocketing?Or when they have depleted their soils. The NDP is the government in huge food producing areas like Sask and Manitoba, and could be in the maritimes if people there wouldn't keep voting for one right wing party or another. As Tommy Douglas said , "When the mice had enough of the government of black cats, they voted them out and replaced them with a government of the white cats." I remember hitching a ride accross Quadra Island with a guy from Redonda Island. He told me of a hand logger who found a large area of deadfall cedar. When he talked to the ministry of forests, he was told that it was top quality cedar. He applied for the neccessary permits, spent a year and many dollars building a road in , took the first logs to a mill and found out that they were full of worms.The ministry of Forests( right wing govt) said "Whoops, we made a mistake. By the way, you owe us stumpage for every sapling you cut making that road." Had a large company asked them they would have been told it was worthless from the beginning. This is typical of how governments with their "Canadian Clearances" agenda deliberately kills off anyones efforts at trying to make a living outside of suburbia ,without going hat in hand to a big multinational corporation. I'm sure it is the same for farmers. I was dissapointed that ED Schreyer wasn't elected as MP ,as he was the only one speaking out against this agenda. Sask farmers are scared shitless of Harpers snuggling up to corporate interests ,and as soon as the gun registry is scrapped, Sask and Manitoba will elect far more NDP MP's.Many have said so. Brent

There's no way of predicting such things, but in essence that is very much true. That's pretty much the lay of the land. Back in the early 90's my parents finally saved some money and wanted to 'diversify'. This was before there was a Tim Horton's on every corner. In our town there were NO coffee houses, even though it had a population of 10,000 and a working population of 15,000. My folks contacted Tim Hortons and did an economic study and survey in order to get a franchise. After much work, Tims said they weren't interested-too small. Two years later one millionaire from the neighbouring city opened up TWO Tims in the town. To my chagrin my parents STILL go to Tims religously. That's an aside, but the general idea is true. I love the above quote, what the mice forget when they have had enough of cats and bring in the private sector, is that dogs will eat mice too.

Bret says “I think it's time we stopped calling support for those who feed us "Subsidies" and start calling it what it is , an investment in the security of our food supplies.” Markarc says “For lobbying though, farmers know they have to 'reach' city folk because that is where the representation is. Yes, there are ideological differences, and there are different farm industries, different provincial structures and all kinds of things. However, the simple fact of human reality is that people look at their own self interest first.” Yes, if we can but persuade the general population and the majority of our representatives that in fact that it is in their own best interest (and that of Canada) to invest in the security of our food supply then we may make some progress. In my other posts I have noted that there seems to be somewhat of a consensus as to the main cause, namely control of the marketplace by a few large corporations. Finding a solution and implementing it would seem is years away. It appears that everyone is too busy running around putting out grass fires to notice that the barn is on fire! One of the problems is, of course that there is no consensus about what to do or even recommend, there are ”at least 15 different approaches to giving farmers more clout in the marketplace” according to by Elbert van Donkersgoed of the Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario as listed in his Farm & Countryside Commentary. • One report proposes limiting access to farm income supports to owner/operators. Another report goes a step farther and recommends banning the corporate ownership of land and livestock. • There are recommendations to do something about the growing consolidation that is happening in the food retail sector: restructure the Competition Bureau; strengthen the Competition Act and require the divestiture of assets by farm input providers and food processors in highly concentrated sectors. • It is no surprise that co-operatives are supported. According to the reports, farmer-owned new generation coops create greater critical mass, strategic value-added, economies of scale and reduce transaction costs. • The three pillars of supply management are endorsed: production discipline, producer pricing and import controls. • There’s a push for research on cost minimization, net income maximization, input-reduction, organic agriculture and energy conservation. • Most of the reports call for market development that will create choices for farmers to leave volatile, low-price markets. They call for strategic investments in infrastructure and the establishment of an organic value chain roundtable to address production, distribution and retailing. • Some reports go a step farther and propose transition funding to help farmers make the switch to organic agriculture, to local food alternatives, to non-food products such as renewable energy to health products and to farming systems that are not energy- and chemical-intensive. • There are recommendations for developing a Green Label to brand food that is grown and processed in Canada so that this food becomes known for meeting high Canadian standards and delivering a sustainable price for producers. • Most of the reports support labelling initiatives to educate consumers. The labelling proposals include: a calculation of the “the farmers’ share” of the consumer dollar, genetically-modified ingredients; the country of origin and “food miles.” • One report proposes labels that differentiate “made-in-Canada” food products form those that are merely processed in Canada. Although agriculture is one of Canada’s biggest sectors the population of independent farmers that are a large part of it, is miniscule, when compared with the urban population and thus receives less attention from our politicians than it deserves. That the farm / rural life makes these folk fiercely independent and only now are we starting to see them organize in any meaningful way make it even more difficult for them to compete for attention with the Urban and Corporate lobby. I like most of these proposals but see a problem with some proposals that will be hard to come to any agreement on.. What is a “family farm” how do we differentiate from a “corporate farm”? It cannot be done by acreage as across our nation an independent farm can vary from a couple of hundred acres in Ontario to thousands on western operations. Some families have combined their farms and incorporated in order to compete, other individual farmers have not but have been persuaded by large corporations to accept financing to build “industrial hog barns” in return for market access. Although the farm remains in the ownership of the individual the corporation effectively controls the farm as these contracts give them a monopoly on the output whilst remaining in charge of the price paid and holding the mortgage on the operation. How do we help those that need support without putting more money in the pockets of those that are causing the problem., as Markarc said “Yet when we saw the 'factory farms' that is the beef industry get infected with mad cow because of their own practises, the government jumps in with a billion dollar buyout, which much evidence shows went straight to processors.” It is true, the farmers saw very little of that payout and even a small independent packer whose plant received fire damage about that time was unable to get any government support and was unable to make a viable business case for rebuilding. It closed and further reduced the choices of market for local cattle producers, this in the heart of “Ontario’s cattle country” It is a complex issue but only with support from all Canadians, rural and urban, will our leaders be persuaded to actively seek solutions.

[QUOTE]Sask farmers are scared shitless of Harpers snuggling up to corporate interests ,and as soon as the gun registry is scrapped, Sask and Manitoba will elect far more NDP MP's.Many have said so.[/QUOTE] If it takes the nutty World of free guns for everyone, no questions asked, to make a farmer vote for his own economic interest, then we are dealing with a very dumb crowd. God always punishes dumbasses. Currently there is a 4-day farmers' protest going on in Toronto, at Queen' Park (provincial parliament). These protests are usually organized by the provincial tory party and I always see John Tory there (Ontario tory leader). The tories are doing a good job to make the farmers really angry, and manipulate them against their policial fow, the Liberals. There isn't much the provincial government can do for farmers. Downloading from federal governments and Ontario's saggign economy means there is a lot less money to go around and the government just can't give everyone what they want. STill, the Ontario Liberal government reecently gave farmers some $125 mil emergency aid and they said they would invest more money in farming in their next budget, due in a few days. That money will of course be missing from other areas, such as health and education. Farmers should take their protest where it belongs (to Parliament Hill in Ottawa) and John Tory should get lost. The Ontario government can do nothing to limit the flood of cheap foreign food into Canada. International trade is a federal jurisdiction. And again, the farmers never vote Liberal and never sympathize with city folks.

[QUOTE]Rural:'So how about it, should we support our Canadian farmers with grants and subsidies? Should we push governments to encourage cooperatives and discourage corporate ownership of our farmland and food chain? Should we protect our farmers against cheap and/or inferior imports? Should those who invest in the business of farming have a reasonable chance of competing and at least get sufficient return to pay for their labour? Give us your view, do you really believe that the family owned farm can (or should) survive? Must we ensure that Canadian cropland, cattle, hog, chicken, egg, milk production etc etc remains under Canadian control, corporate or otherwise?[/QUOTE] Dear Rural. The corporate agenda regarding all areas of our economy is to kill the small guy and support corporations in monopolizing industries. This is happening to manufactoring (China) and services (India) and people working in those industries are suffering greatly. Globalization now reached agriculture and farmers are suffering as well. Believe me, this is only the beginning. As long as we have right wing governments in place, the family farm is doomed, the corporations will destroy it. Keep voting tory and start looking for a new career... or understand global developments and start voting for an anti-globalist party (e.g. the NDP) and see some results. As long as you vote conservative, you have no right to complain, cause the destruction of family businesses is a conservative policy. Yes, we should protect the family farm! We should do it by not participating in unfair trade agreements that undermine out national industries. Paul Martin signed the Doha agreement, effectively sealing the fate of the family farm. Mind you, all developed countries signed it so Canada had little choice there, in this nutty globalist environment. The Doha agreement elliminates all farm subsidies in developed countries by 2012, brought to you by the corporations who control our governments. The agreement also provides unlimited, duty-free access to Third World food producers to all Western countries. This shameful agreement is a death sentence to farming. I already started a thread about this in the trade section ("Globalize farming next?" topic). When the Doha agreement was signed, I didn't hear even a peep out of farmers. I suspect it was because their tory masters didn't make them rebel against this particular agreement. The conservatives are the biggest proponents of free trade and will not take up any cause that would jeopardize it. It's time for farmers to reevaluate their party loyalties, cause I am afraid they are used as pawns by the right leaning parties. Hey, here is an interesting question I have! In European countries the farmers have their own political parties. Why not Canadian farmers? European countries typically have coalition governments and the farmers' parties are often part of it. If Canadian farmers want a greater voice in parliament, they should form their own party and use it to get their message across. Hoping that other parties would speak for them doesn't work, so why not have your own political voice?

“As long as you vote conservative, you have no right to complain, cause the destruction of family businesses is a conservative policy.” I repeat…. I most certainly did not vote that way and many others did not either. It may be in part due to the fact that most citizens (rural or urban) are simply not up to speed on this issue. Even in rural ridings the farmers and true rural residents are far outnumbered by urban residents. ”Yes, we should protect the family farm! We should do it by not participating in unfair trade agreements that undermine out national industries.” I totally agree that that is one of the major problems, there is little in your post that I disagree with. It may be that the “family farm” is doomed but I for one do not believe that we should let them sink into oblivion without a fight. As for the “Farmers Party”, not a bad idea except under our current system it will but further split the vote and once again ensure that the Libs or Cons get in.