Canadian dairy producers also used to hype the higher quality of their product, but that’s really only possible when Canadians are deprived of the ability to sample the competition. Canadian butter has taken a downwards turn this year with a weird change in consistency that’s make it sticky and no longer softens at room temperature. If you see New Zealand butter at Costco, grab some and try it: it’s like our butter used to be. Canadian cheese also tends to be insipid and dull. Again, contrast a New Zealand cheddar to the bricks you can get from a Canadian producer like Armstrong. The funny thing is that Armstrong used to be pretty good, until they were bought out by the Saputo conglomerate and trended towards the orange plastic it is today. This same conglomerate also deprives us of the pleasures of European cheeses with a restrictive import quota. Even when CETA increased those quotas, apparently large Canadian distributors were merely acquiring the quota and declining to actually import the product. This is an industry that’s been gaslighting the Canadian public about benefits that are easily dismissed if you look beyond Canada’s borders. Unfortunately, like so many Canadian programs and policies, Canadians simply take their word for it.
The NAFTA negotiations were a lost opportunity to end Canadian protection of the dairy, poultry, airline, media and telecom industries and blame it on Trump to deflect the political consequences.
This is a classic case of the lobbyists and the dairy-industrial complex capturing the market. It isn't even about the farmers anymore, it's about the whole dairy ecosystem getting their pound of flesh. This all started because Pierre Trudeau thought if he didn't give in to rural Quebec's entitled mercantilism that Quebec would seperate, and thus removing the whole purpose of the Laurentian Elite. (Plus there might have been some influence from certain NYC area families)
The gun to head seperarist threat has passed and this should pass as well. It's hurting Canadian families and industry much more than helping the entitled few. This is the kind of thing if left to fester that kills respect for government. Besides, it isn't as if Canadian dairy actually delivers a quality product or anything.
how about a phased approach to eliminating this evil. We could eliminate quotas first. That would get rid of the dumping of millions of gallons every year. (I'm sure cheese makers would be happy to get extra milk at a discount). Then of course, make sure there is no collusion. This way the industry will learn to compete in a protected market before that protection is removed. We soon have more supply that would lead to lower prices to consumers. We might also look at the silly rules that the dairy lobby has written into health codes to further protect their cartel.
Bernier (although he's since become a dangerous loose cannon) demonstrated integrity of his beliefs in standing up to a group in his own backyard. Scheer showed his lack of integrity when he undermined his stated values to capture the leadership. I'm glad you remembered this. I don't know if supply management is good in allowing us to maintain food supplies or bad in costing us so much more, however, I do see the self-interest of a "free enterprise" party supporting the supply management system.
I'm all for breaking up a supply management system that mainly benefits multi national corporations but with some caveats. It seems to be industry practice in the US to breed cows with such large udders that it's painful for them to move. I don't mind spending more if I know animals are being treated as humanely as possible.
It is un Canadian to criticize supply management. Supply management is one of the things that makes Canada a unique culture. Paying way too much for mediocre products shows that we are not just more polite Americans.
Free markets are so 2008. Managed markets are where its at. The other food items on that breakfast plate need to be managed and cartelized for the benefit of Canadian agriculture.
There may be an argument for supply management providing security of supply but during the pandemic we continued to get bread and beef and in short order toilet paper and KD. So, I wonder. And in my local store in the Victoria area there were no chickens after the flood.
Comment on the breakfast photo, O'Toole is clearly from the east. In the west we prefer potatoes to pancakes.
I’m in complete agreement that it’s appropriate to question the supply management system, whether in part or in whole, but I don’t find Jen’s response to the “necessary evil” defence persuasive. To my mind, Canadians having reliable access to certain essential food items independent of whatever’s going on in the rest of the world (in the sense of there always being some on the store shelves, even if it is more expensive to buy) is THE value proposition that justifies supply management’s existence, if it can be said to be justifiable at all. Now I don’t know if that justification is good enough in the end, but at face value it’s certainly a reasonable argument and “but look at those greedy fuckers…” isn’t a substantive rebuttal to it, despite being spot on with regard to the politics of the issue. Yeah it looks bad and is grossly unfair - it’s protectionism. But after what the last two years has revealed about global supply chains (i.e. the fact that they aren’t invulnerable), paying extra to always have chicken and eggs available in my grocery store doesn’t seem like a bad deal in principle (which is what arguments against supply management seem to be about - principle, rather than pros and cons).
I'm curious if The Line has any thoughts about the CPC leader selection mechanism. My understanding is that it gives relatively small numbers of people in certain ridings (especially in Quebec) an outsized sway in the leadership race.
But to me this doesn't make a ton of sense because the CPC isn't overly competitive in Quebec. So it seems like the party is letting a very small number of rural Quebec conservatives (including dairy farmers) pick a leader who then tanks in the general election. Maybe there's a defense for this system but I'm curious what it would be.
1. The heavy subsidization of dairy that occurs in other countries is significant. The article stated, “Who cares?” Well, doesn’t everyone paying those subsidies care (including non-dairy consumers)? There was no analysis of how these subsidies from every tax-payer compares to the “extra” paid by Canadian consumers by choice.
2. Dairy is the most perishable of the supply-managed foods (fluid milk and high-end cheeses, specifically). You have to be able to reliably predict the market share for these products.
3. Farmers can’t make big adjustments to supply week over week and they can’t afford big dips in income. Herds have to be planned and managed in a cyclical fashion (I.e., along the timing of a cow’s gestation, which is nearly the same as a human’s).
4. Nobody wants to just start a dairy farm. The article mentions how prohibitive the system is to that end, but it’s not like people are out there with a random passion to milk cows. Farmers are born to farming. The biggest obstacle to dairy farming is psychological.
5. It was not farmers who got rich during the pandemic, it was processors and retailers. The cost inputs for farmers rose just as in every other industry. Similarly, people like to cite the high net worth that farmers have, on average. Never is it mentioned what that worth is tied up in - it’s land (to grow feed crops, and in most cases, additional cash crops). It’s also many hundreds of thousands in the required machinery.
6. I dislike that the dairy lobby exists as much as anyone, and for the same reasons that I dislike what most union organizations have devolved into. It’s sad that as another commenter noted, we seem to need them to ensure that a nationally produced food supply is prioritized.
"The sector needs to be made more competitive, accountable, and transparent. Without a strategy, the compensation program provided by the federal government will make things worse for the dairy sector and the farmers themselves. It will overcapitalize the market, without fostering competitiveness. Understanding how food policy is being developed should therefore be of crucial concern to Canadians. While the issue may have become political, the fact remains, if supply management continues as it has, we will continue to see losses of Canada’s domestic market to Free Trade Agreements and a lack of innovation in dairy processing, thus we will continue to have regional amalgamation of farms in the form of economies of scale, in effect harming smaller farms, and further separating reality from the wants of Canadians."
We have raised beef, grains, oilseeds and forages - no marketing board commodities. So...just out of curiosity, who gets the quota payments? Are they basically a kickback to some government? Here in Alberta, dairy/chicken/egg producer are mostly Hutterite colonies (that do not vote) and Dutch, and I can not conceive of agriculture as large factory type farms having enough votes to provide incentive to perpetuate this system. So, who benefits?
I was raised by the children of Good Scots, who were raised in the Depression.
Anything more than twenty cents worth of oatmeal, and 15 cents of skim milk, plus as much again in berries and raisins if you're feeling rich ( but never more than a dollar total), is unbridled luxury spending.
Not so much because of the money, as the low calories, the high fibre, and of course the moral smugness I am filled with, by every bowl.
Talk about an industry in transition! What has to happen to oil and gas, has been happening, worse, with food production, for three generations, with 99% of the jobs destroyed. My wife (54) can remember being taught as a kid to slide her hand under the sitting chickens in the uncle's barn, take the eggs in a basket to the kitchen, like it was fifty years earlier than 1975. That's because the family farm was still around in 1975, and they could run the chicken barn at a bit of a "loss" in the sense of it not paying their work hours, but they got fresh eggs. The chickens had free run of the barn and a yard.
Now, the guy near Abbotsford that had a barn go under water lost 40,000 chickens. I doubt if daughters went out to the barn to gather eggs into baskets.
Frankly, its a miracle that the government was able to ameliorate the rough edges of how the Free Market traditionally handles such transitions (bankruptcies, broken families, suicides) as much as it did. Compare to India, where suicide is getting epidemic, and they were on the edge of violent revolt, when Modi backed down and softened the Free Market a little bit.
We can reassure the O&G workers that we believe in changing our society (from 40 chickens/barn to 40,000, or from O&G to Wind) with help and understanding for those on the sharp point of it.
Canadian dairy producers also used to hype the higher quality of their product, but that’s really only possible when Canadians are deprived of the ability to sample the competition. Canadian butter has taken a downwards turn this year with a weird change in consistency that’s make it sticky and no longer softens at room temperature. If you see New Zealand butter at Costco, grab some and try it: it’s like our butter used to be. Canadian cheese also tends to be insipid and dull. Again, contrast a New Zealand cheddar to the bricks you can get from a Canadian producer like Armstrong. The funny thing is that Armstrong used to be pretty good, until they were bought out by the Saputo conglomerate and trended towards the orange plastic it is today. This same conglomerate also deprives us of the pleasures of European cheeses with a restrictive import quota. Even when CETA increased those quotas, apparently large Canadian distributors were merely acquiring the quota and declining to actually import the product. This is an industry that’s been gaslighting the Canadian public about benefits that are easily dismissed if you look beyond Canada’s borders. Unfortunately, like so many Canadian programs and policies, Canadians simply take their word for it.
The NAFTA negotiations were a lost opportunity to end Canadian protection of the dairy, poultry, airline, media and telecom industries and blame it on Trump to deflect the political consequences.
This is a classic case of the lobbyists and the dairy-industrial complex capturing the market. It isn't even about the farmers anymore, it's about the whole dairy ecosystem getting their pound of flesh. This all started because Pierre Trudeau thought if he didn't give in to rural Quebec's entitled mercantilism that Quebec would seperate, and thus removing the whole purpose of the Laurentian Elite. (Plus there might have been some influence from certain NYC area families)
The gun to head seperarist threat has passed and this should pass as well. It's hurting Canadian families and industry much more than helping the entitled few. This is the kind of thing if left to fester that kills respect for government. Besides, it isn't as if Canadian dairy actually delivers a quality product or anything.
how about a phased approach to eliminating this evil. We could eliminate quotas first. That would get rid of the dumping of millions of gallons every year. (I'm sure cheese makers would be happy to get extra milk at a discount). Then of course, make sure there is no collusion. This way the industry will learn to compete in a protected market before that protection is removed. We soon have more supply that would lead to lower prices to consumers. We might also look at the silly rules that the dairy lobby has written into health codes to further protect their cartel.
Bernier (although he's since become a dangerous loose cannon) demonstrated integrity of his beliefs in standing up to a group in his own backyard. Scheer showed his lack of integrity when he undermined his stated values to capture the leadership. I'm glad you remembered this. I don't know if supply management is good in allowing us to maintain food supplies or bad in costing us so much more, however, I do see the self-interest of a "free enterprise" party supporting the supply management system.
I'm all for breaking up a supply management system that mainly benefits multi national corporations but with some caveats. It seems to be industry practice in the US to breed cows with such large udders that it's painful for them to move. I don't mind spending more if I know animals are being treated as humanely as possible.
It is un Canadian to criticize supply management. Supply management is one of the things that makes Canada a unique culture. Paying way too much for mediocre products shows that we are not just more polite Americans.
Free markets are so 2008. Managed markets are where its at. The other food items on that breakfast plate need to be managed and cartelized for the benefit of Canadian agriculture.
Get with the program, Jen.
There may be an argument for supply management providing security of supply but during the pandemic we continued to get bread and beef and in short order toilet paper and KD. So, I wonder. And in my local store in the Victoria area there were no chickens after the flood.
Comment on the breakfast photo, O'Toole is clearly from the east. In the west we prefer potatoes to pancakes.
I’m in complete agreement that it’s appropriate to question the supply management system, whether in part or in whole, but I don’t find Jen’s response to the “necessary evil” defence persuasive. To my mind, Canadians having reliable access to certain essential food items independent of whatever’s going on in the rest of the world (in the sense of there always being some on the store shelves, even if it is more expensive to buy) is THE value proposition that justifies supply management’s existence, if it can be said to be justifiable at all. Now I don’t know if that justification is good enough in the end, but at face value it’s certainly a reasonable argument and “but look at those greedy fuckers…” isn’t a substantive rebuttal to it, despite being spot on with regard to the politics of the issue. Yeah it looks bad and is grossly unfair - it’s protectionism. But after what the last two years has revealed about global supply chains (i.e. the fact that they aren’t invulnerable), paying extra to always have chicken and eggs available in my grocery store doesn’t seem like a bad deal in principle (which is what arguments against supply management seem to be about - principle, rather than pros and cons).
I'm curious if The Line has any thoughts about the CPC leader selection mechanism. My understanding is that it gives relatively small numbers of people in certain ridings (especially in Quebec) an outsized sway in the leadership race.
But to me this doesn't make a ton of sense because the CPC isn't overly competitive in Quebec. So it seems like the party is letting a very small number of rural Quebec conservatives (including dairy farmers) pick a leader who then tanks in the general election. Maybe there's a defense for this system but I'm curious what it would be.
1. The heavy subsidization of dairy that occurs in other countries is significant. The article stated, “Who cares?” Well, doesn’t everyone paying those subsidies care (including non-dairy consumers)? There was no analysis of how these subsidies from every tax-payer compares to the “extra” paid by Canadian consumers by choice.
2. Dairy is the most perishable of the supply-managed foods (fluid milk and high-end cheeses, specifically). You have to be able to reliably predict the market share for these products.
3. Farmers can’t make big adjustments to supply week over week and they can’t afford big dips in income. Herds have to be planned and managed in a cyclical fashion (I.e., along the timing of a cow’s gestation, which is nearly the same as a human’s).
4. Nobody wants to just start a dairy farm. The article mentions how prohibitive the system is to that end, but it’s not like people are out there with a random passion to milk cows. Farmers are born to farming. The biggest obstacle to dairy farming is psychological.
5. It was not farmers who got rich during the pandemic, it was processors and retailers. The cost inputs for farmers rose just as in every other industry. Similarly, people like to cite the high net worth that farmers have, on average. Never is it mentioned what that worth is tied up in - it’s land (to grow feed crops, and in most cases, additional cash crops). It’s also many hundreds of thousands in the required machinery.
6. I dislike that the dairy lobby exists as much as anyone, and for the same reasons that I dislike what most union organizations have devolved into. It’s sad that as another commenter noted, we seem to need them to ensure that a nationally produced food supply is prioritized.
Supply Management 2.0: A Policy Assessment and a Possible Roadmap for the Canadian Dairy Sector https://www.mdpi.com/2304-8158/10/5/964
"The sector needs to be made more competitive, accountable, and transparent. Without a strategy, the compensation program provided by the federal government will make things worse for the dairy sector and the farmers themselves. It will overcapitalize the market, without fostering competitiveness. Understanding how food policy is being developed should therefore be of crucial concern to Canadians. While the issue may have become political, the fact remains, if supply management continues as it has, we will continue to see losses of Canada’s domestic market to Free Trade Agreements and a lack of innovation in dairy processing, thus we will continue to have regional amalgamation of farms in the form of economies of scale, in effect harming smaller farms, and further separating reality from the wants of Canadians."
We have raised beef, grains, oilseeds and forages - no marketing board commodities. So...just out of curiosity, who gets the quota payments? Are they basically a kickback to some government? Here in Alberta, dairy/chicken/egg producer are mostly Hutterite colonies (that do not vote) and Dutch, and I can not conceive of agriculture as large factory type farms having enough votes to provide incentive to perpetuate this system. So, who benefits?
I was raised by the children of Good Scots, who were raised in the Depression.
Anything more than twenty cents worth of oatmeal, and 15 cents of skim milk, plus as much again in berries and raisins if you're feeling rich ( but never more than a dollar total), is unbridled luxury spending.
Not so much because of the money, as the low calories, the high fibre, and of course the moral smugness I am filled with, by every bowl.
Talk about an industry in transition! What has to happen to oil and gas, has been happening, worse, with food production, for three generations, with 99% of the jobs destroyed. My wife (54) can remember being taught as a kid to slide her hand under the sitting chickens in the uncle's barn, take the eggs in a basket to the kitchen, like it was fifty years earlier than 1975. That's because the family farm was still around in 1975, and they could run the chicken barn at a bit of a "loss" in the sense of it not paying their work hours, but they got fresh eggs. The chickens had free run of the barn and a yard.
Now, the guy near Abbotsford that had a barn go under water lost 40,000 chickens. I doubt if daughters went out to the barn to gather eggs into baskets.
Frankly, its a miracle that the government was able to ameliorate the rough edges of how the Free Market traditionally handles such transitions (bankruptcies, broken families, suicides) as much as it did. Compare to India, where suicide is getting epidemic, and they were on the edge of violent revolt, when Modi backed down and softened the Free Market a little bit.
We can reassure the O&G workers that we believe in changing our society (from 40 chickens/barn to 40,000, or from O&G to Wind) with help and understanding for those on the sharp point of it.