Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Keith Beardsley

GET UPDATES FROM Keith Beardsley
 

Time to Chop Food Price Inflation

Posted: 11/17/11 09:16 AM ET

On Oct. 26 and 31, I wrote a couple of blogs on price discrepancies between Canada and the U.S. In those blogs I focused on food products, especially those which the prices that Canadians pay are manipulated or controlled by supply management organizations. At that time there was little follow up by the mainstream media, but now we learn that Canada wants to join the Pacific Rim trade discussions and supply management might be a make-or-break issue for Canada in these negotiations. Now major media outlets are focusing much more heavily on exactly what supply management means to the average Canadian and what we are being forced to pay for these "controlled" products and why. It is time for the government to decide to stop supporting the present supply management management system. If we don't, it will be forced on us or we will lose access to a valuable market.

There is another aspect to this as well. Health Canada's food guide tells Canadians that we need two to four servings of dairy products a day, three servings for seniors. The same guide outlines how we need between one and three servings of meat or alternatives per day (if a senior this is two servings for a female, three for a male). According to Health Canada we need that many servings in order to:

"Meet your needs for vitamins, minerals and other nutrients. Reduce your risk of obesity, type 2 diabetes, heart disease, certain types of cancer and osteoporosis. Contribute to your overall health and vitality." (Health Canada Food Guide)

On the one hand the government tells us that these items are essential to our health, but the Conservatives still allow supply management organizations to inflate the prices we pay for these crucial items. Prices far above what our American neighbours pay for the same products.

We know none of the federal parties want to touch the supply management issue because it will cost votes, especially in parts of Quebec. Conservatives want those votes, although supporting supply management didn't help them in Quebec in the last few elections. Conservative MPs, especially free market Conservative ones, run for cover when this issue comes up. The Liberals can't be counted on as they are desperate for Quebec votes and they put the current system into place. That leaves the NDP, but they have decided to be the champion defenders of the supply management system which is interesting when you look at other aspects of their platform.

The NDP insists that they represent the average Canadian; they claim that they want seniors to retain more of their earnings and they would like them to have a better lifestyle once they retire. To this end they have pushed for higher pensions and a reduction of the HST on heating fuel as an example. All very laudable, but how do they then turn around and tell those same seniors, people on fixed incomes and low income Canadians that they should pay far more than their American neighbours for products that Health Canada claims are essential to their well-being? Would we not help out Canadians if we cut out this overpricing? Would we not help Canadians if we offered them greater choice by eliminating some of the outrageous tariffs we charge foreign products in these areas?

I would like to hear one of the NDP MPs, especially one from Quebec, explain to his/her parents why that Christmas turkey they just bought here costs up to two-thirds more than one in the United States and why it was fair for them to pay that extra high price.

Sooner or later the present government will have to deal with this issue. Supply management boards will come to an end. The difficulty is how to do that in a fair manner for the farmers who presently rely on that system. A phase-out or buyout are two of the most obvious solutions, but first that requires some intestinal fortitude on the part of the government to end a system that gouges everyday Canadians.

 

Follow Keith Beardsley on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Atory01

On Oct. 26 and 31, I wrote a couple of blogs on price discrepancies between Canada and the U.S. In those blogs I focused on food products, especially those which the prices that Canadians pay are mani...
On Oct. 26 and 31, I wrote a couple of blogs on price discrepancies between Canada and the U.S. In those blogs I focused on food products, especially those which the prices that Canadians pay are mani...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 5
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
05:50 PM on 11/17/2011
Maybe we pay a little more so that we don't fall prey to large agricultural companies becoming too big to fail and thus jeopardize our food supply at some time. Look what the banks that were "too big to fail" did with the money supply.
georgee2
My Canada Includes Everyone
11:40 AM on 11/17/2011
It costs a certain amount to produce food. In Canada we use supply management and the person who buys the food pays for the food. In many countries the food is sold below the cost to produce and the government pays subsidies to the farmers to stay in business. Either way we still have to pay the true cost of the food.
georgee2
My Canada Includes Everyone
11:02 AM on 11/17/2011
It costs a certain amount to supply food. In Canada we use supply management. Person who buys the food pays for the cost of the food. In other countries they pay lower prices at the store and big subsidies to the farmers to keep them afloat. But in the end we still have to pay for ther food we eat.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Irmanator
CARRIED INTEREST should be taxed as income
09:48 AM on 11/17/2011
Good. Free trade agreements are not good for the common man. Leave the farmers alone. Who funds "True North Public Affairs"? Large agribusinesses perhaps?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Irmanator
CARRIED INTEREST should be taxed as income
09:37 AM on 11/17/2011
Show me how "free trade agreements" have benefitted the average joe. Walmart selling cheaper offshore goods to people who suffer under 10% unemployment is an example of the slight gain (mostly to the wealthy who offshore their manufacturing processes) for huge pain (to the unemployed) that these agreements provide.
In the USA, agribusinesses are subsidized with billions by the taxpayer. So the citizens end up paying in hidden ways for their cheap turkeys.