YORKTON - Supply-management is about as divisive a set of words as there is in terms of Canadian agriculture.
Some see the supply management system used in Canadian dairy, egg and poultry production as a ‘poker chip’ they’d gladly toss into the pot sacrificing the system in hopes of freer trade access in general for Canadian ag production.
Supply management proponents say they’ve given up enough, and don’t want the system weakened further.
The debate is back on the front burner thanks to the Bloc Quebecois who have returned the contentious topic to the parliamentary agenda, having introduced a bill to protect supply management.
Party leader Yves-Francois Blanchet introduced Bill C-202 May 29, and on June 5 it was sent to the Senate without any debate. It follows Bill C-282 in the last Parliament and C-216 in the one before that. Neither of those bills made it fully through the parliamentary process.
So let’s not hold our breath that this effort will result in anything more than continued debate.
The bill would amend the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Act to protect supply managed industries in future trade negotiations.
Ah, but wait just a moment, the world is decidedly different in terms of trade for Canada in 2025, than it was the last time this was in front of the Senate.
The ‘Trump-effect’ – the disruptive influence on trade that is American president Donald Trump and his ever-changing decisions based on what appears little more than a combination of whim and temper tantrum – means Canada needs to look at every trade decision through a different lens today.
Supply management at its core is a system which tries to balance domestic supply of key foods with domestic demand, and in the process assure producers receive a return that makes them viable.
It seems like a very reasonable approach to ensuring domestic food security – at least to this writer.
But it is also a barrier to trade of a type.
When you have reasonable trade partners that is concerning – trade should flow as freely as possible in most circumstances – although quality issues and other things can temper that trade freedom.
But, at present Canada’s major trade partner – the United States – is about as far from reasonable as you can get. With Trump in the White House one has no idea what new trade disruptions he might enact.
It is a situation that will exist for at least four years – and there are indications Trump might find his way to prolong his tenure too – so trade south will be volatile at best.
Under that umbrella of doubt it doesn’t seem like a time Canada should be doing anything but protecting systems such as supply-management which have generally served us quite well.
