While some have praised aspects of the plan, others have condemned the lack of attention paid to agriculture and farmers.

The Canadian Cattle Association (CCA) stated that they were “cautiously optimistic” to see recognition of the effectiveness of the livestock deferral tax in an April 16 news release.

“Beef producers are encouraged to see the Livestock Tax Deferral in Budget 2024 and we are hopeful that meaningful change will come quickly as we head into another extremely dry season in Western Canada,” CCA President Nathan Phinney was quoted as saying in the release.

He continued by saying that he felt the announcement was “an indication that the government will make a change and work with ranchers to find a solution that addresses extreme weather challenges for producers across the country.”

CCA also praised the budget’s efforts toward supporting the Copyright act.

Dairy Farmers of Canada (DFC) said in an April 16 release that they welcome the “capital gains exemption on the sale of small business shares and farming and fishing property to $1.25 million,” as most dairy farmers own land.

They also acknowledged the government’s announcement of a national school lunch program: “Dairy products are a source of fifteen essential nutrients and are a top contributor of protein and calcium in the diets of Canadian children.”

The DFC went on to note the government’s commitment to help protect farmers from the effects of climate change, but said they were “disappointed that the government has not taken this opportunity to specifically commit to revising Canada’s business risk management programs for agriculture.”

Other organizations’ reactions were more negative.

The Canadian Federation of Agriculture (CFA) said in their own April 17 release that they were “disappointed to see a lack of investment in Canadian agriculture in the 2024 budget.”

CFA President Keith Currie acknowledged the government’s “competing priorities” in the release, but also said that “the government can ill-afford to ignore food production and Canadian farmers.”

The CFA made note of what it called “positive investments,” such as the launch of interoperability consultations and carbon rebates for small businesses, but lamented that “there was no mention of pivotal issues for the sector such as investments in environmental programming, chronic labour issues in food production or improvements to transportation and trade infrastructure.”

“If Canadian agriculture is to seize its full economic and climate potential,” Currie was quoted as saying, “we cannot keep missing opportunities while our international competitors continue to invest in their agriculture industries.”

The Wheat Growers Association was particularly critical of the budget, calling it “woefully bloated” and saying it “falls short in addressing Canadian farmers’ real concerns.”

Their April 16 news release criticized the government for not understanding the impacts of the carbon tax on wheat growers.

“Once again, the federal government has missed the opportunity to support agriculture and those that work in the industry,” Chair Daryl Fransoo was quoted as saying.

“The real issues impacting us are the cumulative effect of the carbon tax on everything that we do, the growing need to have coordinated grain research, increased funding for the PMRA, and industry efficiency through an improved Canada Grains Act.”

They mentioned the failure to pass bill C-234, which they said would provide “immediate relief to grain farmers from the negative impact of the carbon tax on grain drying.”

The Grain Growers of Canada (GGC) made similar complaints. Their April 16 press release expressed disappointment in the lack of any update to the Canada Grains Act.

“The Canada Grains Act is the enabling legislation that supports grain farmers and needs to be modernized to reflect the realities of 2024,” GGC Executive Director Kyle Larkin said in the statement.

“Unfortunately, this budget has shortcomings in key policy priorities for farmers, such as infrastructure, innovation, tax incentives, and delays in other policy areas.”

The post Federal budget draws mixed reaction from Canadian ag groups appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

However, he did suggest farmers talk to the finance minister about it.

Speaking to delegates at the Canadian Federation of Agriculture annual meeting, the minister referenced the APP while talking about available programs. He said farmers had been through a lot in the last few years with pandemic supply chain issues, global unrest and extreme weather.

“We have programs that will assist, (like) the advance payment program,” he said, adding farmers can access up to $1 million.

He said the interest-free portion had risen from $100,000 to $250,000 to $350,000 last year.

“That helps. I used that when I was a farmer myself,” he said.

However, Ontario Federation of Agriculture delegate Ethan Wallace noted that the $350,000 no longer applied.

“It is currently back to $100,000. Can you or your government commit to putting that limit back to the $350,000?” he asked.

MacAulay replied: “Perhaps the government can. I can’t.”

He said he would push for that every chance he gets.

Bloc Quebecois agriculture critic Yves Perron said he didn’t know the $100,000 limit was back in place.

“It has to be $350,000,” he said during his speech. “It has to be kept at that level.

Conservative agriculture critic John Barlow said he also didn’t know until farm organizations began contacting him.

He said he wouldn’t bet the farm on the decision being reversed.

Meanwhile, delegates also raised Bill C-234 and asked speakers if they support the amended version of the bill, which leaves farm buildings and greenhouses out of any possible carbon tax exemption.

Perron said his party supports passing the amended version because at least grain drying will be covered.

The Conservatives and NDP prefer the original bill.

“We intend to reject the Senate amendments to it,” said NDP critic Alistair MacGregor to applause.

However, with the BQ support, the Liberal government can pass the amended bill whenever the matter comes to a vote.

—Karen Briere writes for the Western Producer from Saskatchewan.

The post CFA delegates want interest-free portion of APP back at higher limit appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

The PBO provides independent economic and financial analysis to Canada’s Parliament.

Initially, the bill proposed to exempt fuels used in grain drying, barn and greenhouse heating from the price of carbon for eight years. The PBO projected farmers would have saved $115 million in carbon taxes by 2026 if this version had passed.

The current, heavily amended version, will reduce those savings to $26 million.

This doesn’t include any carbon price rebates farmers might receive.

The Senate amended the bill to remove exemptions for heating buildings and to reduce the bill’s sunset clause to three years from eight.

The original bill passed 176 to 146 in the House of Commons in early 2023. It is again under debate in the House, where Conservative MP Ben Lobb put forward a motion that the bill be stripped of its amendments and returned to the Senate.

The post Carbon exemption amendments costly to farmers: PBO appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

“We are very hopeful that Members of Parliament will continue to show their support for farmers and that they won’t flip flop and change their vote,” said Dave Carey, co-chair of the Agriculture Carbon Alliance.

Bill C-234, which would amend the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Price Act, was once again the subject of debate as Parliament resumed today. Conservative MP Ben Lobb tabled a motion to essentially reject the Senate’s amendments to the bill.

In an email exchange, Carey explained that if this motion is carried, the amendments made in the Senate would be eliminated. However, the bill would return to the Senate for another reading.

Late last year, the Senate voted to amend Bill C-234 to remove greenhouse and barn heating from the proposed exemptions, and to reduce the bill’s sunset clause to three years from eight. This left only the proposed exemption for fuels used to dry grain.

If the motion passes, Carey said he doubted the Senate would try to amend the bill again.

“That would raise a legitimate question of constitutionality and the role of the Senate,” he said.

When the bill passed its third reading in the House of Commons in March 2023, it did so with support from the NDP, Bloc Quebecois, Conservatives and a few Liberal MPs. Today, alongside Conservative MPs, NDP MP Alistair MacGregor spoke in favour of the motion, as did Liberal MP Kody Blois. Liberal MP Kevin Lamoureux spoke against it.

Bloc Quebecois MP Yves Perron, speaking through French translation, said he is is in favour of Bill C-234 but said he was concerned that the bill would be embroiled in a ping-pong match between houses.

He suggested the bill should be passed as-is while it’s in the House’s grasp.

“We have a gain now on the grain drying. I think we should take it,” Perron said in an interview, adding that further work could be done afterward to get an exemption for building heating.

He cited the partisan environment exhibited in the Senate, which included accusations of intimidation during debate around the bill.

“If we send back the bill to the Senate, well, when will it come back?” he said.

Perron said he’s in favour of widespread carbon price exemptions for agriculture because of the need to compete with subsidized farmers in the U.S. and E.U.

The motion did not go to a vote today. Carey said he’s hopeful it could be voted on next Tuesday.

Proponents of Bill C-234 are concerned it will be endlessly delayed and die on the order paper.

“With the carbon price set up to increase this April again, we are urging the Liberals not to delay it and to let it go to a vote as soon as possible,” Carey said.

–Updated Jan. 30. A previous version referred to Yves Perron as leader of the Bloc Quebecois.

The post Motion to squash Bill C-234 amendments put to MPs  appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

Yesterday evening, senators read Bill C-234, An Act to amend the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, for the third time, and passed it.

The bill received two amendments in the Senate. On Monday, senators voted to reduce the bill’s sunset clause to three years from eight. Previously, senators amended the bill to remove barn and greenhouse heating from proposed carbon price exemptions in the bill.

Farm groups and government officials aligned with the bill have expressed concerns that, since the bill must now be returned to the House of Commons for further debate, it will be delayed until it dies on the order paper.

According to its online schedule, the House of Commons will rise for the year on Dec. 15.

—Geralyn Wichers is associate digital editor of AGCanada.com. She writes from southeastern Manitoba.

The post Twice-amended Bill C-234 clears Senate appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

Senator Yuen Pau Woo introduced the amendment on Dec. 7, saying it would align it with the deadline on the Liberal government’s heating oil carbon price exemption.

This is the second amendment to Bill C-234, An Act to amend the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act. The first amendment removed fuels for heating barns and greenhouses from exemptions proposed in the bill.

Farm groups and government officials aligned with the bill have expressed concerns that, since the bill must now be returned to the House of Commons for further debate, it will be delayed until it dies on the order paper. Senators aligned against the bill have been accused of using delay tactics to try to kill a bill the Liberal government doesn’t like.

Today, the National Farmers Union (NFU) released a statement calling on political parties to prioritize and pass the bill.

In the statement, former NFU vice-president Glenn Wright said that while the NFU supports a price on carbon in general, farmers don’t have viable alternatives for drying grain.

“Because farmers are so climate-dependent—so vulnerable—it is in farmers’ interests that Canada and all nations reduce emissions as quickly as possible. Canada’s pollution-pricing system is a crucial part of that effort,” he said. “In this one case, however, because there are no alternative grain drying options for farmers, a temporary exemption is the right policy.”

He also said an amendment to remove an exemption on fuels for building heating creates a “pressing need” for financing and incentives for farmers to adopt more efficient heating options.

“The NFU recognizes that farmers can improve building efficiency and switch heating sources to clean technologies like heat pumps, but these renovations are capital intensive and farmers will need extensive financial support to decarbonize the heating of barns and greenhouses,” he said.

–updated Dec. 12 to add by how many years the sunset clause is reduced. 

—Geralyn Wichers is associate digital editor of AGCanada.com. She writes from southeastern Manitoba.

–

The post Senate votes to shorten sunset clause on beleaguered Bill C-234 appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

This would align it with the deadline on the Liberal government’s heating oil carbon price exemption, said Senator Yuen Pau Woo, who tabled the amendment.

Bill C-234 proposes exempting fuels for grain drying from the price on carbon. It was recently amended to remove fuels for barn and greenhouse heating from the proposed exemptions.

Senator Woo’s amendment, if passed, would reduce the bill’s sunset clause to three years from eight.

“In my view, Bill C-234 is not good public policy,” said Woo. “This is why I oppose it as much as I oppose the Liberal government’s exemption for home heating oil.”

“Unfortunately, we have no ability to debate the home heating oil exemption,” he added.

Senator David Wells, who sponsored the bill in the Senate, spoke in opposition to the amendment. He said that while in committee debates in the House of Commons, MPs had agreed to reduce the sunset clause from 10 years to eight.

“There was no debate at committee on that in the other place, and they all agreed that eight years was fair,” Wells said. “Now we’re hearing from Senator Woo that not 10 years, not eight years, but three years is fair.”

Debate adjourned before the amendment could go to a vote.

Meanwhile, Senators agreed to send earlier complaints of bullying to the Senate’s ethics committee for further examination. This relates to a question of privilege raised in late November by Senator Raymonde Saint-Germain, which alleged some Conservative senators attempted to intimidate colleagues into giving way on the bill.

—Geralyn Wichers is associate digital editor of AGCanada.com. She writes from southeastern Manitoba.

The post Senate tables second amendment for Bill C-234 appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

“Senators have explained how they felt threatened and intimidated in the performance of their duties, here where we should model the best behaviour for our fellow citizens,” said speaker Raymonde Gagné in her decision yesterday.

The question of privilege, raised by Senator Raymond Saint-Germain on Nov. 21, relates to incidents on Nov. 9 when, after debate over an amendment to Bill C-234 was abruptly adjourned, Saint-Germain alleged that Conservative Senator Don Plett confronted her and Senator Bernadette Clement. Bill C-234 proposed to exempt farm fuels for grain drying, barn and greenhouse heating from the carbon price.

“After violently throwing his earpiece, (Plett) stood before Senator Clement and me as we sat at our desks, yelling and berating us for proposing this routine motion that would see debate resume the following week, when we returned,” Saint-Germain said.

Plett later acknowledged he had lost his temper and tearfully apologized before the Senate.

Saint-Germain also said, “at least two” Conservative senators retweeted a post on social media platform X “that not only spread misinformation about the proceedings but encouraged members of the public to call and harass” Clement and Senator Chantal Petitclerc, adding that it “elicited high volumes of threatening phone calls and emails to these independent senators.”

In her decision, which she read in the Senate, Gagné added that some Senators were threatened with other penalties if they did not “give way and concede to a particular outcome.” This included threats of blocking work in committee or the chamber.

“All these events can be understood as attempts to intimidate colleagues and to unduly constrain, or even extract retribution against them in the performance of their duties,” Gagné said.

Following the decision, Gagné read a motion, tabled by Senator Raymonde Saint-Germain, for the question of privilege to be referred to the Senate’s ethics committee. The motion went to debate, which adjourned before a vote.

On Nov. 21, following Saint-Germain’s question of privilege, Conservative Senator David Wells then put forward a separate question of privilege stemming from the same Nov. 9 sitting, saying Moncion had “walked over from her seat and accused me of bullying” after the session was suspended.

Moncion replied that she was not threatening in her approach but apologized to Wells and the chamber. Wells said he considered the issue closed.

Yesterday, the Senate voted by a narrow margin to amend Bill C-234 to remove barn and greenhouse heating from the bill. Fuels for grain drying remain exempted in the bill.

The bill was then put up for debate ahead of a third reading. Debate adjourned before it could go to a vote, and will likely resume today.

Farm groups and Senators aligned with the bill have said they fear an amendment, which will likely send the bill back to the House of Commons for further debate, will essentially kill the bill.

–Geralyn Wichers is associate digital editor of AGCanada.com. She writes from southeastern Manitoba.

The post Senate speaker rules members bullied other senators over Bill C-234 appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

The amendment, put forward by Senator Pierre Dalphond, passed by one vote–40 Senators voted yes, 39 voted no, and none abstained. It amends Bill C-234, a private members bill designed to exempt farm fuels for grain drying, barn and greenhouse heating from the price on carbon.

The bill, once it has been read for a third time in the Senate, will return to the House of Commons to be debated again.

In recent weeks the bill has proved a lightning rod for controversy.

Conservatives have accused the Liberal government of running interference on the bill. Conservative agriculture critic John Barlow suggested the Liberals had appointed five new senators to bolster votes against the bill. Conservative senators also said that amendments, which would send the bill back to the House of Commons, were a tactic to endlessly stall the bill until it died on the order paper. As per the House of Commons’ calendar, posted to its website, the final sitting day for the house is December 15.

Meanwhile, Senators who have aligned themselves against the bill accused Conservative senators of bullying and inciting harassment via social media.

The amendment may have expedited the inevitable. Earlier today, Dave Carey, the Canadian Canola Growers Association’s vice-president of government and industry relations, told AGCanada he’d been hearing that a Senator had another amendment lined up if this one failed.

In a post to social media platform X (formerly Twitter), Carey called the vote “Unbelievably disappointing.”

More to come.

—Geralyn Wichers is associate digital editor of AGCanada.com. She writes from southeastern Manitoba.

The post Senate votes to amend Bill C-234 appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

Bill C-234 proposes to exempt from the price on carbon propane and natural gas used on farm to dry grain or heat barns and greenhouses.

The Red Chamber defeated Senator Lucie Moncion’s amendment that would have seen it made more difficult to extend the bill’s eight-year sunset clause–a motion that had already been defeated during committee debates. Thirty-six senators voted in favour of the amendment, 42 voted no, and two abstained.

Hours later, Senator Pierre Dalphond introduced an amendment that would remove barn and greenhouse heating from exemption. This is essentially the same amendment rejected by the Senate on November 7.

Conservatives have accused the Liberal government of running interference on the bill. For instance, earlier this month, Conservative agriculture critic John Barlow suggested the Liberals had appointed five new senators to bolster votes against the bill. Conservative senators also said that amendments, which would send the bill back to the House of Commons, were a tactic to endlessly stall the bill until it died on the order paper.

Meanwhile, Senators who have aligned themselves against the bill accused Conservative senators of bullying and inciting harassment.

In the House of Commons, Tuesday, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre tabled a motion to urge “the unelected Senate” to immediately pass Bill C-234.

“The Prime Minister has deployed his carbon tax minister to pressure senators to block that bill, in an undemocratic attack on the prerogative of the commoners to decide who pays what,” Poilievre said. “The government cannot tax what the people do not approve and the people do not approve of this carbon tax.”

Tuesday evening, Senator Dalphond said the Conservatives see C-234 as a “vanguard” to removing entirely the price on carbon. He said senators should legislate logically, regardless of pressure from farmers.

Debate on the amendment was adjourned until today’s sitting.

—Geralyn Wichers writes for Glacier Farmmedia from Steinbach, Man.

The post Senate strikes down C-234 amendment, introduces another appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.