Ontario Agriculture

The network for agriculture in Ontario, Canada

This past week I was fortunate enough to be part of a "roundtable" discussion about the issue in agriculture in Huron and Bruce Counties. I say "roundtable" because the discussion was limited to stating out name, what group we are with and our issue.  No debate or other discussion.  So much for that.
My issues were biodigester regulations, unfavourable zoning on property tax assessment and the resolution put forward by the PC party a couple weeks ago.  Oh - we were meeting with the PC Caucus.
They showed no interest in lobbying the Federal government to pony up the 60% Federal portion.  All they were interested in was getting the Province to set up the 40% portion and wait for the Federal side.
Little did they know that we have already waited 3 years for the Federal portion on the Grains & Oilseeds RMP.  Relying on Transfer Payments is no good since they fluctuate from year to year.  We need commitment from the Feds to fund the other 60%.  Instead we get - No interest from the Feds.
Four MPP's come to the largest Agricultural County in Ontario telling the farmers what they do not want to hear?  One of them even claimed to be a part of the second largest Agricultural County in Ontario - not even close (his county ranks fourth in Western Ontario).  There was no MPP from Perth County in attendance.
Not only do we have to lobby the Federal Conservatives to come on board with the request from OASC, we have to educate the Provincial PC party about what exactly Agriculture in Ontario is about and what we want.
Quit the Political crap and get on board - lobby the Federal Government to step up to the plate, and if you think the Province is waiting for the Feds - call their bluff.
The PC Caucus obviously does not care about working for the farmers when they are more interested in "trying" to make the provincial Liberals look bad when it is not what the Farm Leaders have been asking for. Even the media picked it up easily:

Views: 289

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Part of the problem with the OASC 'ask' has been the Grains and Oilseeds Representation.

Membership of the Livestock sectors have been adament about 100% funding for BRMP - regardless of who does it - Feds or Prov or Feds AND Prov.

Grains and Oilseeds have consistently stuck to their request of 40% funding saying this what their membership wants - in hopes of the Feds coming on board. Like you said, the Feds have had 3 years to think that one over and didn't come on board - and with this economy the Grains Guys are living in la la land if they think the Feds are coming onboard now with their debt levels and everyone else at the door for $$$$. WAKE UP! So it seems that Grains Guys are ok with their 40% coverage - and their extra money last year going back into the Government vault. The silence from Grains membership endorsed their support for their leadership going forward with this ridiculous 40% ask.

We'll see what FPT Meetings in July gain us. My guess - is exactly what we have gotten in the past. Coalition or no coalition - all it has done is bought the Government more time and brough more heart ache to Rural Ontario.

My 2 cents worth......................
Thank you Joanne for articulating the sentiments of many. You are absolutely right.

The other problem I have with Wayne's message is centered on the operative word "ask". What makes people think the government would respond to farmers "asking" for things they "want"? The government does not have a fiduciary obligation to agricultural "wish lists". The public has become intolerant to the incessant pleading of public funds to prop up a "perceived lifestyle" of a minority class of people.. the farmer. Where is the validity of Wayne's statements?

Until farmers understand WHY government have a constitutional mandate to support agriculture... and when farmers have the ability to articulate such.... the government will continue to ignore farmers' "wish lists" and also continue to disrespect Crown obligations towards farmers.

Farmers need a full understanding of "agriculture" to ensure that the Minister of Finance makes FIPA work properly.

JoAnne Caughill said:
Part of the problem with the OASC 'ask' has been the Grains and Oilseeds Representation.
Membership of the Livestock sectors have been adament about 100% funding for BRMP - regardless of who does it - Feds or Prov or Feds AND Prov.
Grains and Oilseeds have consistently stuck to their request of 40% funding saying this what their membership wants - in hopes of the Feds coming on board. Like you said, the Feds have had 3 years to think that one over and didn't come on board - and with this economy the Grains Guys are living in la la land if they think the Feds are coming onboard now with their debt levels and everyone else at the door for $$$$. WAKE UP! So it seems that Grains Guys are ok with their 40% coverage - and their extra money last year going back into the Government vault. The silence from Grains membership endorsed their support for their leadership going forward with this ridiculous 40% ask.

We'll see what FPT Meetings in July gain us. My guess - is exactly what we have gotten in the past. Coalition or no coalition - all it has done is bought the Government more time and brough more heart ache to Rural Ontario.

My 2 cents worth......................
Hi Wayne:

Thanks for trying to get through to the Ontario PC politicians.........I guess they don't see their role as trying to influence the Federal PC party...this is unfortunate because it is really the only political power they have at present....

"A thousand strikes with the hammer crack the stone...."

While it might feel like a lost cause, we need more people like you to keep pushing the Ontario Agriculture agenda.

Thanks,

Joe
Joe - Thanks for your support.
With the Provincial Liberals pushing the Federal government to get "on-side" and with the Provincial PC's pushing the Provincial Liberals - my next question to the PC Caucus, if I was given the opportunity, was going to be - if you are not going to help Ontario Farmers push the Federal government now, why would we expect the Provincial PC's to push the Federal government when in opposition?
The Provincial PC's are barking up the wrong tree and they do not realize it. With the responses they gave to some other "facts" it showed they were not concerned about the Ontario Farmer and more concerned about their paycheque.

Joe Dales said:
Hi Wayne:
Thanks for trying to get through to the Ontario PC politicians.........I guess they don't see their role as trying to influence the Federal PC party...this is unfortunate because it is really the only political power they have at present....
"A thousand strikes with the hammer crack the stone...."

While it might feel like a lost cause, we need more people like you to keep pushing the Ontario Agriculture agenda.

Thanks,

Joe
Politicians and thier own self interest????

Wayne, have you met any that don't think about getting elected first?

I want names if you have....

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Agriculture Headlines from Farms.com Canada East News - click on title for full story

2025-2026 Year in Review Showcases Impacts of Beef Producer Investments

What have your investments in the Canadian Beef Cattle Check-Off accomplished for the industry lately? The Beef Cattle Research Council’s 2025–2026 Year in Review highlights how producer investments and input are advancing research, addressing industry priorities and delivering practical value back to Canada’s beef producers. “The BCRC continues to enhance coordination across the broader beef system, bringing researchers and industry groups together so we can make the best use of limited resources and move solutions and benefits to producers more quickly,” said BCRC Executive Director Tracy Herbert. “The BCRC’s collaborative approach is essential as we address complex challenges and position the Canadian beef industry for long-term success.”   The 2025-2026 BCRC Year in Review provides a broad funding overview by program area and source. In the past fiscal year, the BCRC received on average $0.66 (unaudited) of every $2.50 of the Canadian Beef Cattle Check-Off collected by provincial

Pre-harvest products and how to use them

Canola growers have three primary reasons for a pre-harvest spray application: Weed control ???????Desiccation Manage uneven crop ??????????????Use scenarios for pre-harvest spray Weed control Pre-harvest can be a good time to manage weeds, especially when straight combining. The act of swathing and curing can also provide weed control. Effective control is challenging on big weeds: apply product at the recommended rate with high water volumes to penetrate the crop canopy and achieve thorough coverage. Note: Set reasonable expectations on preventing seed set. Charles Geddes, weed management scientist with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada in Lethbridge, Alberta, says: “There is no easy way to tell if weeds will have mature seed, but in my experience, it happens earlier than one might think. I suggest that the latest a weed should be left is until it is flowering. Once it starts to flower, then some of the seed can mature on the plant after it is terminated. From a weed management p

Pre-harvest glyphosate staging tips help produce market-ready crops

As harvest approaches, Keep it Clean is reminding Canadian canola, cereal and pulse growers to follow proper staging practices for pre-harvest glyphosate application to help protect crop marketability and preserve access to domestic and export markets. Applying pre-harvest glyphosate for weed control too early can result in unacceptable product residues in harvested grain. Keep it Clean’s Pre-Harvest Glyphosate Staging Guide provides visual examples to help growers identify when grain moisture content in canola, cereals and pulses is less than 30 per cent – the only stage at which pre-harvest glyphosate may be applied. Where allowed, glyphosate is registered for pre-harvest weed control and is not to be used as a desiccant. Pre-harvest glyphosate may only be applied when grain moisture content is less than 30 per cent in the least mature part of the field, including any areas of regrowth that may produce seed. “Glyphosate is an important tool in the grower’s toolbox for crop manage

Safeguarding Cereals Against Allergens

Maintaining a reputation for clean, safe grain is essential for both domestic and international markets. Shipments contaminated with allergenic grains can lead to costly rejections, recalls and long-term damage to market confidence. Unintentional mingling of allergenic grains with cereals is a concern for export markets and must be actively managed.  Certain crop types can be allergen sources in our export markets. When these crops are unintentionally mixed with cereals, they can pose serious food safety and market access risks.   Common allergen sources in grain exports include:  Mustard   Soy   Buckwheat   Buckwheat is considered highly allergenic, and even very small amounts mixed into wheat, barley or oats can cause severe reactions in some markets. Because of these risks, many export markets apply strict limits for allergenic material in cereal shipments.  How allergens can contaminate grain  Allergen contamination most often occurs through shared equipment and handling system

Canada Launches First Private Forest Owner Survey in Over 20 Years, Farmers Invited to Participate

Canadian farmers who own woodlots or private forests are being asked to participate in the first national survey of private forest owners in more than 20 years.

© 2026   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service