Farms.com Home   News

Some Wins for Farmers in Federal Budget, But Losses Too

There were some wins for Canadian farmers in Tuesday’s federal budget, but some losses too, according to national farm groups. 

In a statement Wednesday, the Canadian Federation of Agriculture (CFA) gave the thumbs down on Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland’s 2024-25 fiscal year budget, saying there was no significant relief for producers amid sustained high interest rates, the federal carbon tax, and increasingly extreme weather that is testing the limits of the government’s farm risk management programs. 

“While we understand there are competing priorities for government funds, with erratic weather and high prices tremendously increasing the risk profile of Canadian agriculture, the government can ill-afford to ignore food production and Canadian farmers,” said Keith Currie, CFA President. 

The CFA said there was no mention in the budget of pivotal issues for the ag sector such as investments in environmental programming, chronic labour issues in food production or improvements to transportation and trade infrastructure. 

The Grain Growers of Canada expressed disappointment in several policy areas missed in the budget, including an extension to the extended rail inter-switching pilot, investments in grain-related research and development, initiating a review of the Canada Grains Act, and revamping the Accelerated Investment Incentive. 

The Wheat Growers Association gave the budget a failing grade as well, calling out of the cumulative impact of the carbon tax on “everything that we do,” along with growing need for coordinated grain research, increased funding for the Pest Management Regulatory Agency and industry efficiency through an improved Canada Grains Act. 

The good news in the budget, the CFA said, was the government’s re-commitment to launch consultations on interoperability, carbon rebates for small businesses and previously announced funding for temporary improvements to the Advanced Payments Program. 

There was also support for biofuel production and an increase to the Lifetime Capital Gains Exemption, a critical tool in supporting intergenerational farm transfers.  

Click here to see more...

Trending Video

How to fix a leaking pond.

Video: How to fix a leaking pond.

Does the pond leak? Ummmm....possibly a tiny bit. Well, more than a bit...ok, the darn thing leaks like a sieve!

QUESTIONS ANSWERED: Damit is not plastic. Therefore, there are no microplastics. I wish I had not mentioned plastic, but that is a very common polymer and I mentioned it as an example of a polymer. A polymer is simply a chain of repeating molecules, or "monomers." Cellulose is a polymer of glucose molecules. Starches are also polymers of various molecules such as fructose, maltose, etc. We have many polymers inside our bodies. In other words, just knowing something is a polymer doesn't make it bad, toxic, harmful, etc. However, this also doesn't mean all polymers are safe.

The specific polymer used for Damit is a trade secret, however, it has been closely scrutinized by multiple health and safety authorities. This includes the governmental authorities of Australia, the USA, Europe, and Asia. Not only have they determined that is safe to use in earthen ponds, and not harmful to fish, but it is considered safe to use in human potable water systems in all of these areas. And of course, they know the exact makeup of the polymer when making this determination. I'm told that the same polymer is in use by many municipalities to keep potable water storage tanks leak free. I can't tell you exactly what the polymer is, because I don't know, but given the confidence with which the governmental authorities have authorized its use, I would bet it is made of a monomer that we are exposed to all the time, like fructose or something.

It also breaks down in a matter of years, and does not accumulate in the environment. The end products of breaking down are CO2, water, and base minerals like potassium. The SDS reports no need for concern with ingestion, inhalation, or contact. If in eyes, rinse with water.

End result, can I say for sure that it is 100% safe? No, I don't know exactly what it is. But given people who do know exactly what it is, and have scrutinized it, have approved it for use in human potable water systems, I'm pretty comfortable putting it in an earthen pond.