The disconnect between government and some levels of agriculture seems to be getting worse instead of better.
We could reference here the on-going controversy over neonicotinoids or green energy, or we could reference other factors.
[audio wav="http://blackburnnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/COMMENT-THURS-JAN-22-2015.wav"][/audio]
Neo-nics, if you believe they are a problem, then the government isn't doing enough to protect you and if you believe they are one of the best tools out there right now, well, the government isn't looking after your interests.
The same could be said of wind energy.
The latest issues come over red tape, and carbon.
To red tape first. A new survey, this one by the Canadian Federation of Independent businesses that shows 86 % of the federation's farmer members say excessive regulation add significant stress to their lives.
We are talking food production here, we realize there has to be regulation, but a lot of it can be overlapping and overly bureaucratic .
It's often worse when more than one level of government is involved.
We've hashed all of that around of course, and some political parties are better than others at admitting there is a problem although not many solutions are being put forward.
Now there may be another issue on the horizon. A carbon tax, or cap and trade or whatever it may turn out to be is something that Ontario will probably tentatively move toward sometime before the current majority government expires.
Farmers naturally enough are wondering how they will be affected, because, there is no doubt about it, the production, transportation, storage, delivery and preparation of food takes a lot of energy.
You can judge for yourself whether it is an environmental problem or not, but it is estimated that agriculture is responsible for about 10 % of the carbon going into the air.
So the food supply, and agriculture's portion of it will probably be targeted one way or another.
I must admit, I don't know much about how caps and trades and carbon taxes work, except that more carbon intensive forms of energy are somehow made more expensive.
If Ontario wants to tread down this path, and it seems likely we will, a couple of things should be foremost in the discussion.
Farm groups are lobbying to get more areas of rural Ontario serviced by natural gas lines. Perhaps before government taxes more carbon intensive energy it should ensure this alternative is available. And since carbon taxes are designed to wean us off high carbon fuels the cost of all that wind and solar energy should be coming down, right?
Something else that should be considered. Agriculture could be a big part of the solution . Operators who put more carbon back in their soil every year through cover cropping or directly adding organic matter should see that reflected in any balance of payments.
If it is done fairly those three issues, natural gas, electricity and credit for building carbon in the soil, would ease at least some farm concerns.
If it is done properly. For a gauge on how likely that is, refer back to previous comments on red tape.