Liberals accuse them of fomenting division It's always interesting.
This week, back-venture liberal MP Lloyd from Guelph was chosen to be the face of a column on fertilizersthat denounced opponents ofTrudeau. It was a long field. A government plan to foment division for political gain.
He and the government he serves may want to look in the mirror.
For those of you who don't know, Trudeau liberals want Canadian farmers to reduce fertilizer emissions, especially nitrous oxide emissions, by 2030. We are calling for a 30% reduction from 2020 levels. Governments want absolute emissions reductions. But the agricultural industry would rather talk about reducing emissions on an intensity basis, such as using the same amount of fertilizer to produce more food. , says the Trudeau liberal. Hence, conflict and anger from farmers and industry groups arises. If this plan were imposed, farmers' yields would be reduced and their incomes would be reduced, but food prices for families would rise.
In his op-ed, Longfield argued that the federal plan did not include a "fertilizer ban," but that it was not a "fertilizer ban," I don't know anyone who claims it's prohibited. 30% reduction.
Governments say we don't need to cut fertilizer use by 30%, but individual farmers and industry groups I talk to say that a 30% reduction in emissions would require a substantial Most Canadian farmers already use what is called the 4R system, which stands for right source, right rate, right time and right place. doing.
Fertilizer is one of the most expensive inputs a farmer makes in his best years. For those following the industry, prices have skyrocketed in recent months. No one wants to use more fertilizer than absolutely necessary and employs reduction strategies.
"I only use what I need to grow my crops," a farmer in southwestern Ontario told me last month.
"We can only buy so much," said another Saskatchewan farmer.
On the other hand, industry groups wondered where this reduction target came from as it was not consulted before the target was announced. was
"There was no prior consultation. No modeling or analysis provided to explain this 30% target. It seems to have been pulled out of thin air," an industry source said in July.
The target is not the Ministry of Agriculture, but former Greenpeace activist and environment minister Stephen Guilbeau being pushed by his former colleague. It was from the Ministry of the Environment. Earlier this week,Greenpeace announced its news release, saying"Canadian emissions from synthetic nitrogen fertilizers are among the highest per capita in the world."
This is what drives the Trudeau government on the Greenpeace agenda. Canada has high per capita fertilizer emissions because it is a large country with a small population.
According to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization
, as measured by the amount of fertilizer used per hectare of farmland, Canada does very well with an average of 80 kg of fertilizer per hectare of land, compared with 109 kg in France, 120 kg in India, 160 kg in the UK and 160 kg in China. jumps to 190 kg in the Netherlands and 205 kg in the Netherlands.
Farmers and industry groups are always looking for improvement and are open to working with the federal government to improve the system. But for now, they feel like they're being preached by Ottawa bureaucrats rather than being listened to by a government they want to partner with.
The Trudeau administration should take the time to talk to farmers and try to understand their concerns, instead of fighting straw men like "fertilizer bans."
You'll get the latest headlines, stories, opinions and photos of Toronto His Sun from the newsroom to your inbox at noon.
Thank you for registering.
Welcome sending his email. If you don't see it, please check your spam folder.
The next issue of Your Midday Sun will arrive in your mailbox shortly.