AGRI Committee Report

Supplementary Report

To the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Foods
Mental Health – A Priority for our Farmers
May 2019

Introduction:

The incidence of mental health problems in the Canadian agriculture sector is reaching crisis proportions. Farmers, ranchers, producers and their families are increasingly experiencing high levels of stress, depression and even suicidal thoughts.

The causes are many and varied. Farmers and producers face increased stress and hardship arising from recent government initiatives like the federal carbon tax and concessions made by the government in recent trade agreements. Market volatility, prices, the high costs associated with farming, and succession planning can also result in increased anxiety and stress levels.

More recently, social media attacks from environmental and “animal rights” activists are targeting farmers and their families, resulting in significant distress.

The Committee heard that Canada cannot have a sustainable food system without sustainable farmers. We heard from most witnesses that Canada needs a coordinated and a national approach to help farmers access the help they need.           

Many witnesses described the important role the federal government can play in educating the public about the truth of food production, while countering many of the falsehoods perpetrated by anti-farm groups.

The federal government can also play an important role in supporting farmers and producers by eliminating programs not supported by science or facts.

As well, the Committee heard that the federal government must better consider the needs of Canada’s agricultural sector in its legislative and regulatory initiatives and must stop using Canada’s agricultural sector as a “pawn” in free-trade negotiations. Action on this front would help to reduce government-generated stresses for farmers and producers.

The Members of the Committee who have produced this supplementary report agree with many elements and many recommendations of the main report, Mental Health – a Priority for our Farmers.  However, we believe that the report does not adequately reflect a lot of testimony with regard to the urgency of the problem as well as the need for action on several fronts such as education and social media attacks.

The Standing Committee heard evidence from many witnesses that “psychological distress is a real problem in the farming sector, indeed it is a huge problem.[1]” The Committee also heard from several witnesses that “a failure to address farmer mental health poses a serious threat to the sustainability and viability of Canadian agriculture.[2]”

Today, Canada’s agriculture and agri-food industry contributes over $110 billion annually to Canada's gross domestic product (GDP). That represents more than the national GDP of 2/3 of the world's countries. Canada is the 5th largest agricultural exporter in the world, and the agriculture and agri-food industry employs 2.3 million Canadians.[3] 

Threats to the viability of Canada’s agriculture sector represent threats to the viability of our economy and our future economic growth. Stakeholders and all levels of governments need to act quickly.

PART 1 – PUBLIC EDUCATION

Farmers, ranchers and producers have for generations endured market uncertainties, uncertainties related to the weather, price fluctuations and other factors beyond their control.  Dealing with uncertainties has always been part of the farming reality. Today there is an added complication which is causing a great deal of distress and anxiety and threating the viability of our food system. Many witnesses at committee referred to it as a public perception of farming.

Until recently, many Canadians may have had at least a distant connection to farming. This is no longer the case. The vast majority of Canadians have never even visited a farm. They know nothing about the system of food production. And what they think they know comes largely from misinformation supplied by individuals or organizations with a vested interest in promoting alternate lifestyles.

“Farmers feel scrutinized. They feel attacked by the public, anti-agriculture groups, people who don’t understand farming who are speaking out openly. You can make fun of me as a professor, and I can go home, and I have a whole bunch of other stuff to my sense of identity. Farmers don’t have that. Their occupation is their identity, it’s their culture.[4]”    

The Standing Committee heard from several witnesses that the Federal government should play a more proactive role in supporting farmers, ranchers and producers through public education.

Currently, Saskatchewan offers a program called Agriculture in the Classroom.  Alberta has a similar initiative. The Committee also heard about an initiative in the United Kingdom called “Facetime with a Farmer” which is offered in the classroom.

“As fewer and fewer people understand how extremely complex an agricultural business is, and as society is tending to consider the work of farmers less natural and less valuable, an enormous amount of education needs to be done, starting at the base, in the schools, to explain it and to re-establish its value. I think we have no choice. In order to counter the misinformation, we are going to have to inform the public at large, and educate young and old alike, so that they understand how much respect farmers have for the environment and for animals, and how excellent a job they do.[5]”

Committee members also heard that product labelling can play a big role in influencing public perceptions. Members associated with this supplemental report concur.

Recommendation 1: The Federal government should work with provincial and territorial governments, stakeholders and education professionals to develop programs that could be added to current education curriculums so that Canadians are better educated about the nature of food production and the care that farmers take in managing their animals or their crops.

Recommendation 2: To help educate Canadians, the Federal government should implement regulations to ban false and misleading product labelling, such as those which suggest that GMOs are a food ingredient.

PART 2 – GOVERNMENT REGULATION

Like many business owners in Canada, farmers and ranchers often find that engaging with the federal government can be time consuming and stressful. Witnesses at committee repeatedly suggested that the government is itself contributing to major stress levels within the farming community by implementing new policies or regulations without consulting or even in some cases notifying farmers or farm stakeholder organizations. This includes initiatives like the federal carbon tax, changes to the Canada food guide, the front of packing labelling proposal, PMRA regulations, and the unfair tax changes.

Many of these most recent initiatives have clearly been proposed or implemented with little thought to Canada’s agriculture and agri-food sector. The front of package labelling for instance would require food to be labelled with warning signs giving the impression the food grown by Canadian producers is unsafe.  The Canada food guide was also designed without input from producers. Changes like this are difficult for dairy and meat producers which already under attack by misinformation campaigns against their products.

The tax changes proposed by the government in 2017 were also responsible for uncertainty and distress for many farmers. The portrayal of family farmers as wealthy “tax-cheats” showed that decisions taken regarding Canada’s agriculture industry showed a lack of understanding of how family farms operate in Canada. Changes to the lifetime capital gains exemption, amongst others, would create unprecedented complexity for multigenerational farms looking to transfer to the next generation.

The Pest Management Regulatory Agency’s re-valuation process is also a cause for stress. As things currently are the PMRA does not have the capacity to perform all the mandated re-evaluations of pesticides in the coming decade.

Concessions made by the federal government within free trade agreements are also causing significant financial hardship and increasing the levels of uncertainty for farmers.

“We know that farming is a high-risk industry that requires an incredible capacity to deal with volatility and uncertainty. Over the course of this last year alone, Canadian farmers have endured drought, porcine epidemic diarrhea, and the financial impacts of the negotiation and subsequent signing of NAFTA 2.0, the U.S.-Mexico-Canada agreement.[6]”

On the latter note, however, some witnesses suggested that the Federal government must do a better job of protecting the interests of farmers.

“Our government of whatever political stripe that negotiates these trade deals has to stop using agriculture as a pawn when it comes to negotiating.[7]”

Members of the committee associated with this supplementary report concur that the Federal government should play its part in helping to reduce stress amongst farmers by putting in place mechanisms to better consult with farmers and stakeholders while also ensuring that the interests of farmers are taken into account as regulations and other initiatives are developed.

Recommendation 3: The Federal government should take into account the interests of farmers when proceeding with regulatory or legislative changes (ex. Crop input reassessments, fee increases, carbon tax, etc.) and better consult with farmers and stakeholder groups before proceeding with such changes or give full consideration to withdrawing said changes if the impact is found to be of great negative impact on the Canadian agriculture sector.

PART 3 – SOCIAL MEDIA ATTACKS

Today, farmers, ranchers and producers come under attack from many different sources. As one witness put it: “Our ancestors only had to worry about weather and prices. Today, we farmers have the added worry of being a target of an extreme activist, something that takes a serious toll on me mentally.[8]” Committee members heard extremely disturbing testimony from witnesses relating how they had been verbally assaulted, threatened and called murderers or rapists over social media channels by environmental terrorists and “animal rights” extremists. Such social media attacks are not tolerated in most urban settings, or among teenagers. Yet little has been done to curb these attacks targeted to farmers. 

“Whom do these animal rights activists target? Of course, the first ones in their sights are the producers. Today, as well as being called polluters, they are accused of being aggressors and rapists, because of artificial insemination, and child kidnappers and killers. You know, those words have extremely serious consequences. As one farmer told me, when he gets up in the morning and he sees that type of thing on Facebook, he's already wondering how he is going to cope. It adds a lot of stress and distress.[9]”

Such testimony is troubling and deeply disturbing. Sadly, it is quite common to see many instances of bullying or intimidation towards farmers go unpunished.

Recommendation 4:  That the Federal government should take any and all measures necessary to prevent these unprovoked attacks as well as to make sure individuals who perpetrate them face justice.    

PART 4 – GOVERNMENT ACTION

Most witnesses suggested that Canada needs a national strategy “that would focus on farmer and rancher mental health so that we could coordinate and share resources and know what’s happening across Canada.[10]”

 “We have to be more innovative. In a country the size of Canada, we can’t build mental health clinics on every street corner. We need to rethink the way in which we are delivering services, in order to get these important programs to people, particularly when they are feeling suicidal.[11]”

Tragically, the committee heard that rural youth under the age of 20 are four to six times more likely to commit suicide than those living in urban areas. One witness suggested that “youth across Canada have identified mental health as one of their greatest challenges and have indicated the need for more support and resources.[12]”

In order to be successful, any national service for Canada’s farming community must reflect the realities that most farmers face. “We need to recognize that, for farmers, their workplace and their business is also their home.[13]”  As one witness put it: “Mental health services have to be adapted to farmers’ realities. Farmers diagnosed with a mental illness should not be told to rest at their farm along with their hundred or so cows.”[14] 

Recommendation 5: Calls for additional federal government leadership should at a minimum be considered and explored with our partners and stakeholders.  

PART 5 – REPEALING THE CARBON TAX

The federal carbon tax which came into effect on April 1^st, 2019 and its implementation are responsible for much stress to Canadian producers. As discussed earlier, new regulatory burdens contribute to financial difficulty and uncertainty for producers across the country. The Carbon tax rollout has been no different.

In many cases the tax is being imposed on provinces where it is overwhelmingly unpopular, especially with Canadians living in rural areas. The imposition of the tax disproportionally effects rural Canadians, and especially farmers who rely on diesel and petroleum to fuel their farm equipment, transport livestock and grain, and heat their buildings.

Although there have been exemptions for agriculture the carbon tax rollout overlooked several important areas. Firstly, fuel purchased at cardlocks was would not have been exempt under the federal government’s previous plans. This was reversed only after public outcry. Still, producers must deal with the carbon tax on heating barns, transporting grain or livestock and drying grain.

One witness described it like this, “You see, I cannot raise the price I sell my crops for to help cover the rising expenses associated with growing my crops. When I need to move grain to pay bills, I try to find the best contract possible, but ultimately, I have very little control over the price. I'm usually forced to sell at a time when prices are low from harvest pressure to cover bills that have been accumulating over the year. If a carbon tax is forced upon me, I stand to add an additional $30,000 to my expense list as well.”[15]

Financial pressures contribute to the overall mental health picture. It is one of the primary threads that weaves through the testimony of all witnesses. The carbon tax is another stress factor that contributes to this financial pressure.

Recommendation 6: The federal government should recognise the economic damage and financial stress caused by the federal carbon tax and should immediately scrap it.

 

Respectfully submitted by

Luc Berthold, Conservative MP

Mégantic—L’Érable

Earl Dreeshen, Conservative MP

Red Deer—Mountain View

Bev Shipley, Conservative MP

Lambton—Kent—Middlesex