Agriculture
How would you like it if someone came on to your land to build a pipeline?
How would you like it if someone came on to your land to build a pipeline?
This is one of the questions you’ve no doubt heard in the media lately. A common question from protestors and their supporters. It’s been posed to media reporters asking protestors why they’re trying to shut down Canada. It’s been used as a headline for editorials in big newspapers. If you live in a city or even a small community you’ve never had to deal with a company that wants to build a pipeline on your property. That seems to make this question a good one.
However I come from a farming community and it occurred to me that I might just know some people who’ve had experience with pipeline companies. So I decided to message a friend of mine. He used to be a pretty good hockey player when we were growing up. He played with a temper. Years may have passed but I know he’s definitely no push over. Devon is not the kind of guy who’d let anyone walk all over him. Even a big pipeline company.
Turns out Devon actually has lots of experience with pipelines. When he moved onto his acreage 20 years ago there were already 5 lines running under it. 2 more lines have been buried since. The last one came through just last year. If you look at the first map you can see a place called Herschel. Herschel is Devon’s territory. The map shows where Enbridge Line 3 Replacement cut through his property just last year. The second map shows just how many lines are following that same route.
When I discovered a new line had been put down in the last year I thought he’d have some fresh memories of how that affected his life. It was my chance to ask someone who actually knows “How would you like it if someone came on your land to build a pipeline?”
Me: “What happens during construction?”
Devon: “The only inconvenience during pipeline construction for us has been delays on the roads. They haven’t affected our home lives at all.”
Me: “What about animals? How long before things get back to normal in their world?”
Devon: “Wildlife doesn’t seem bothered at all.” Then he asked me “What’s normal?” – and he sent me a video taken right in his yard last summer.
Me: “OK. The animals appear not to mind. Does it affect the quality of your land?”
Devon: “We don’t farm the affected land, but Enbridge recovers the top soil and replants whatever vegetation you want. In our case, grass.”
Me: “What would happen to you if there was a spill on your property?”
Devon: “We have never had a spill, or know of anyone that has. They have given us contact information, and instruction if we ever encounter what we feel may be a spill. Several times a week they fly (over) the pipeline inspecting it.
Me: “Are you fairly compensated?”
Devon: “We have been treated very fairly by Enbridge.”
I have to admit I was hoping for even a tiny bit of drama in this back and forth conversation. Just like you would with any conversation. So I put my reporter skills to work and decided to finish by asking an “emotional” question. Certainly there has to be even a little bit of anxiety over having a pipeline carrying flammable material close to your home… right under your own property. Everyone knows there have been accidents. So the natural question is..
Me: “Wouldn’t you rather there were no pipelines under your land and close to your home?
Devon: “I was actually disappointed when they told us the line 6 replacement was being routed around our acreage because they felt it would be too close to the house. I actually have never thought about whether I would rather live where there’s no pipelines. They’ve never been an issue.”
If I had to conclude this and I do, I would say that it would seem my friend Devon is one of the vast majority of people who pay some type of price for the conveniences of modern society. In his case it’s doesn’t seem the price is very high. Maybe he thinks the compensation is actually worth it. No. He’s never experienced an accident. He doesn’t know of anyone who even knows anyone who has. Like the rest of us, he only knows they’ve happened because he pays attention to the news. The only real difference is Devon actually has a half dozen pipelines running across his property. As you can see from the second map above, the energy running through them keeps people in the Eastern United States and Eastern Canada, warm in their homes and mobile in their vehicles.
Here’s what pipelines look like for the vast majority of those who have to live with them. In Devon’s case, 20 years of living with pipelines and zero problems. He’s not going to claim nothing could ever happen. All he can say is that nothing has ever happened.
Read more on Todayville.com
Agriculture
Bill C-282, now in the Senate, risks holding back other economic sectors and further burdening consumers
From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
Bill C-282 currently sits in the Canadian Senate and stands on the precipice of becoming law in a matter of weeks. Essentially, this bill seeks to bestow immunity upon supply management from any potential future trade negotiations without offering increased market access to potential trade partners.
In simpler terms, it risks holding all other economic sectors hostage solely to safeguard the interests of a small, privileged group of farmers. This is far from an optimal scenario, and the implications of this bill spell bad news for Canadians.
Supply management, which governs poultry, egg, and dairy production in Canada, has traditionally enabled us to fulfill our domestic needs. Under this system, farmers are allocated government-sanctioned quotas to produce food for the nation. At the same time, high tariffs are imposed on imports of items such as chicken, butter, yogurt, cheese, milk, and eggs. This model has been in place for over five decades, ostensibly to shield family farms from economic volatility.
However, despite the implementation of supply management, Canada has witnessed a comparable decline in the number of farms as the United States, where a national supply management scheme does not exist. Supply management has failed to preserve much of anything beyond enriching select agricultural sectors.
For instance, dairy farmers now possess quotas valued at over $25 billion while concurrently burdening dairy processors with the highest-priced industrial milk in the Western world. Recent data indicates a significant surge in prices at the grocery store, with yogurt prices alone soaring by over 30 percent since December 2023. This escalation is increasingly straining the budgets of many consumers.
It’s evident to those knowledgeable about the situation that the emergence of Bill C-282 should come as no surprise. Proponents of supply management exert considerable influence over politicians across party lines, compelling them to support this bill to safeguard the interests of less than one percent of our economy, much to the ignorance of most Canadians. In the last federal budget, the dairy industry alone received over $300 million in research funds, funds that arguably exceed their actual needs.
While Canada’s agricultural sector accounts for approximately seven percent of our GDP, supply-managed industries represent only a small fraction of that figure. Supply-managed farms represent about five percent of all farms in Canada. Forging trade agreements with key partners such as India, China, and the United Kingdom is imperative not only for sectors like automotive, pharmaceuticals, and biotechnology but for the vast majority of farms in livestock and grains to thrive and contribute to global welfare and prosperity. It is essential to recognize that Canada has much more to offer than merely self-sufficiency in food production.
Over time, the marketing boards overseeing quotas for farmers have amassed significant power and have proven themselves politically aggressive. They vehemently oppose any challenges to the existing system, targeting politicians, academics, and groups advocating for reform or abolition. Despite occasional resistance from MPs and Senators, no major political party has dared to question the disproportionate protection afforded to one sector over others. Strengthening our supply-managed sectors necessitates embracing competition, which can only serve to enhance their resilience and competitiveness.
A recent example of the consequences of protectionism is the United Kingdom’s decision to walk away from trade negotiations with Canada due to disagreements over access to our dairy market. Not only do many Canadians appreciate the quality of British cheese, but increased competition in the dairy section would also help drive prices down, a welcome relief given current economic challenges.
In the past decade, Canada has ratified trade agreements such as CUSMA, CETA, and CPTPP, all of which entailed breaches in our supply management regime. Despite initial concerns from farmers, particularly regarding the impact on poultry, eggs, and dairy, these sectors have fared well. A dairy farm in Ontario recently sold for a staggering $21.5 million in Oxford County. Claims of losses resulting from increased market access are often unfounded, as farmer boards simply adjust quotas when producers exit the industry.
In essence, Bill C-282 represents a misguided initiative driven by farmer boards capitalizing on the ignorance of urban residents and politicians regarding rural realities. Embracing further protectionism will not only harm consumers yearning for more competition at the grocery store but also impede the growth opportunities of various agricultural sectors striving to compete globally and stifle the expansion prospects of non-agricultural sectors seeking increased market access.
Dr. Sylvain Charlebois is senior director of the agri-food analytics lab and a professor in food distribution and policy at Dalhousie University.
From StosselTV
Activists have a new goal: “DEgrowth.”
They say “growth is killing us.” They couldn’t be MORE wrong.
“Growth is not killing us. It’s saving us!” says author Johan Norberg. He explains why growth is essential to human progress, especially for poor people. “In poor countries, if you manage to grow by 4% annually over 20 years,” he points out, “that reduces poverty in that country on average by 80%.
But DEgrowth activists insist that growth means “climate chaos.” They say a smaller economy would be “sweeter.” They say “We must urgently dismantle capitalism!” It’s destructive nonsense. This video explains why.
————
To get our new weekly video from Stossel TV, sign up here: https://www.johnstossel.com/#subscribe
————
After 40+ years of reporting, I now understand the importance of limited government and personal freedom.
——————————————
Libertarian journalist John Stossel created Stossel TV to explain liberty and free markets to young people.
Prior to Stossel TV he hosted a show on Fox Business and co-anchored ABC’s primetime newsmagazine show, 20/20. Stossel’s economic programs have been adapted into teaching kits by a non-profit organization, “Stossel in the Classroom.” High school teachers in American public schools now use the videos to help educate their students on economics and economic freedom. They are seen by more than 12 million students every year.
Stossel has received 19 Emmy Awards and has been honored five times for excellence in consumer reporting by the National Press Club.
Other honors include the George Polk Award for Outstanding Local Reporting and the George Foster Peabody Award.
Deborah Birx Gets Her Close-Up
CDC Quietly Admits to Covid Policy Failures
Japanese study shows disturbing increase in cancer related deaths during the Covid pandemic
Biden’s Kill Switch: The Growing Threat of Government Control of Your Car
-
Brownstone Institute1 day ago
Deborah Birx Gets Her Close-Up
-
Alberta1 day agoCoutts Three verdict: A warning to protestors who act as liaison with police
-
Alberta1 day agoAlberta moves to protect Edmonton park from Trudeau government’s ‘diversity’ plan
-
Energy1 day agoCanada Has All the Elements to be a Winner in Global Energy — Now Let’s Do It
-
espionage1 day agoCanada’s intelligence chief says he personally warned Trudeau about China’s election meddling
-
Business1 day agoMaxime Bernier warns Canadians of Trudeau’s plan to implement WEF global tax regime
-
Frontier Centre for Public Policy2 days agoThe tale of two teachers
-
Freedom Convoy1 day agoOttawa spent “excessive” $2.2 million fighting Emergencies Act challenge