Market Boards

In the next 12-18 months there will be a lot of talk about why Canada needs to get rid of the various marketing boards such as the Milk Marketing Board or the Egg Marketing Board. The conversation is already starting to pop up here and there on various news and current affair programs. It is being raised by “pundits” who argue that they are just neutral observers. They are in fact highly biased reporters, some of whom have an almost evangelical belief in the neo-liberal agenda.

Their argument is quite simple (and quite misleading). The market boards control the price of milk and therefore milk is costing the consumer more than it should. They compare the price of milk in the USA which is according to the Globe and Mail (Waldie Globe and Mail, Nov. 23, 2010) is sixty cents less for a litre than it is in Canada. Those same commentators don’t mention that milk is cheaper here than in New Zealand which has gotten rid of their managed marketing system. They don’t talk about what the other advantages of market boards are.

 

Marketing boards (or supply management boards) were set up approximately 40 years ago to ensure that farmers would have a consistent access to the markets, to ensure that the market was not flooded with too much product and to ensure that consumers had access to affordable product that would be consistent in price.

 

The argument for us to change the rules is that some other countries don’t like our rules. They (right now it is the Pacific Rim Countries) are saying that if we don’t get rid of these “unfair” rules, then we will “not be allowed” to join some of the trade negations that are presently underway. In other words if we don’t play by their rules, we don’t get to play in their sand box. And that is a fair point. The question that begs to be asked is why do we want to play in their sandbox or perhaps even more importantly, who wants to play it. The answer for those who are opposed to marketing boards is quite clear. The manufacturing sector wants access to larger markets. Because there are more people employed in this sector their needs should supersede those of the farmers.

 

I remain unconvinced that the needs of 20,000 people (who may get a manufacturing job) are more important than 4,000 people (approximate number of Dairy Farmers in Ontario). I don’t think that kind of math is useful. The job of the government to recognize conflicting needs and then to work on ways of both groups getting the maximum benefit out of any negotiations.  I fail to see how making it harder for dairy farmers to make a living helps them. Getting rid of supply management systems will only help those who want to produce milk on factory farms and those who want to import milk from the USA. It will hurt the small dairy farmers.

Of course the practical argument is powerful – we all want to save money. It is pretty hard to argue with the concept that international borders should be open to all who want to travel or trade. But that is not the way the world works. All countries have trade restrictions. We need to be careful that we don’t give up something important (family farms) for the possibility that some international company (and their Canadian workers, if they company decides to stay in Canada) may benefit at some point. Marketing boards will disappear unless we accept that there is a cost to living in Canada. Supporting small, perhaps slightly inefficient family farms is part of that price.